rams vs redskins (20 xtal pot)

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Moose2, Sep 19, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 21-7 rams
    They're pretty ok
     
  2. 21-3 rams
    Narwhal thought I hated the rams
     
  3. 17-6 Rams win

    Reason: Because Stone Cold said so 
     
  4. Rams-27. Redskins-17

    The Rams played a good game against Seattle but they are far from a super bowl team. That Being said the Redskins lack any threats offensively and defensively and thats why I think the Rams will win without too much contest.
     
  5. 28-27 rams
    Edited for a reason
    Reason being: Redskins had a bad week and the Rams played very well
     
  6. 35-17 rams
    Also edited for a reason
    Reason being: the Rams played great defense while the Redskins offense struggled.
     
  7. 31-0 rams. The Washington skins didn't stand a chance before this game. They lost their Hail Mary option with desean out. It's gonna be easy for the rams- stop the run, pass rush the qb- I see two defensive tds, 6 sacks.
     
  8. Rams 31 Redskins 17 rams defense is good especially their front 7
     
  9. 25-21 Rams looking good, but believe game will still be fairly close
     
  10. 30-20 rams the redskins are just bad
     
  11. Rams :20 Redskins:9

    Nick Foles will dominate and the Ram's front four will keep the Redskins in check
     
  12. 21-9 rams because I haven't chosen that score yet
     
  13. 21-9 redskins because it could happen.
     
  14. Rams: 24 Redskins: 17

    Rams will holdout due to their defensive front7 being top 5 in the league.
     
  15. Redskins 27 rams 21 I like rooting for the underdog plus I don't think rams are as good as they seem ....but its still to early to tell
     
  16. 18-9 rams because I haven't guessed that
     
  17. 34-10 rams because I haven't guessed that
     
  18. 21-14 rams

    My gut tells me so
     
  19. 21-14 Redskins

    My gut tells me so
     
  20. 21-10 Rams
    It is an answer not already picked
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.