Sep 23, 2012; Chicago, IL, USA; St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford (8) is stacked by Chicago Bears defensive tackle Stephen Paea (92) and defensive end Shea McClellin (99) during the first half at Soldier Field. Mandatory Credit: Rob Grabowski-US PRESSWIRE
Well, we all knew that sooner or later the Rams would get thrust back to the lower tier of teams in the NFL. Analyst and the media don’t like change, so, for the most part, they have a hard time coping with the fact that the New Orleans Saints aren’t going to be in the playoffs, or that the Arizona Cardinal likely have the best defense in the NFL. The same is true of the other low-market teams in the league. If the Cowboys win a game they instantly turn into Super Bowl contenders, but if the Rams win… eh, lets see how the next 3-4 weeks pan out before giving any credit. ‘Tis the nature of the NFL! So how did the Rams stack up in the rankings after the heavily inflated 23-6 loss to the Chicago Bears.
SBNation, who is one of those media outlets that has no faith in the organization, has pressed St. Louis to the true depths of the rankings at 28th, below the New Orleans Saints, Carolina Panthers, and Indianapolis Colts,
"(Last Week: 27, 1-2): I keep saying the Rams will be good. They will. Soon, right Turf Show Times?"
ESPN’s Mike Sando was a little less harsh on the St. Louis Rams, especially in the wake of the Seahawks upset win (?) over the Green Bay Packers on Monday Night Football. ESPN has three from the NFC West in the Top 10 in the NFL, with only the St. Louis Rams trailing back at 25th,
"Shortcomings on the offensive line stood out during tough defeat at Chicago. (Sando)"
Pete Prisco at CBSSports.com has the Rams dropping a couple of spots to the 24th slot, with similar reasoning to the rest of the rankers,
"The offensive line was mauled against the Bears. Sam Bradford can’t succeed on his back."
Bleacher Report has St. Louis anchoring the league, much like everyone else, but, once again, have wildly misplaced a number of teams in the rankings. The Green Bay Packers, who are sitting at the same 1-2 mark, are still ranked 4th in the NFL. Say what you want about that last second call, Seattle deserved to win that game against the Packers through their play in the other 59:59 minutes of the game. Also, there are two teams above the St. Louis Rams that definitely should not be, the Carolina Panthers and Washington Redskins. Both teams have are 1-2, with that one game coming against the New Orleans Saints. The Panthers have been embarrassed twice now, and Washington lost to the Rams… doesn’t make sense,
"1-2. The problem with the Rams is that they just don’t have many weapons on offense. Sam Bradford needs some help if he is going to succeed in St. Louis. (Next game: at Seattle)"
Same ‘ol, same ‘ol from Yahoo! Sports, coming out with the exact same perplexing take on the NFL. St. Louis swings in at 27th, sandwiched between the Jacksonville Jaguars and Carolina Panthers,
"I expected St. Louis to put up more of a fight at Chicago. Sam Bradford was hung out to dry by his offensive line this past Sunday."
If you were curious how the often, delusional and, sometimes, overly critical Chicago Bears would handle their win this week, you will not be disappointed. The boys over at Comcast Sports Network Chicago have pumped the Bears back into a borderline Top 10 team after a deceptive 21 point win over the Rams. I do not know how a win over the supposed 21st ranked Rams would bounce you so high after getting dominated by the Packers, but, then again, I don’t live in the fantasy land of the NFC North or NFC East,
"JF: Poor performance in Chicago. Offense has to show up every week.SK: Changes may be in order for their offensive line after Sunday’s debacle."