Columnist Sal Defilippo: St. Louis offense not ‘Ram-tough’ in fourth quarter

Sal Defilippo

Friday, Sept. 27, 2002 | 11:09 a.m.

Sal DeFilippo's pro football picks column appears Friday. Reach him at sal@lasvegassun.com or (702) 259-4076.

There was as astonishing, yet definitive statistic that flashed on the screen during Tampa Bay's victory over the former powerhouse Rams on Monday night.

No, not the one about Kurt Warner completing his 1,000th pass in fewer attempts than any quarterback in league history. That was impressive, but it was the only impressive thing Warner did Monday, unless you consider the nice tackle he made following one of his four interceptions.

The statistic said the Rams had lost 19 consecutive games when trailing entering the fourth quarter, the longest such streak in the NFL.

Kind of surprising, for two reasons: First, the Rams are known for their quick-strike offense, so scoring points late to win a game wouldn't seem to be a huge obstacle. Second, this means some team must have actually allowed the Bengals to rally and win a game in the past couple of seasons.

For all their offensive hype, if you have St. Louis down after three quarters, they're beaten. It's getting the lead that is the problem -- despite this year's 0-3 stumble out of the gate, the Rams are still 37-14 since Warner took the reins before the 1999 season.

They are capable of winning late, as long as they blow a lead first. In Warner's three-plus seasons, he has rallied St. Louis to win four times in the fourth quarter or overtime. In all of those games, the Rams either led or were tied after three quarters, but fell behind in the fourth period before rallying.

But Captain Comeback he is clearly not -- Warner's four game-winning drives pale in comparison to John Elway's NFL-record 46. And unless the key cog of the alleged "Greatest Show on Turf" gets his act together in a hurry, the Rams season will turn into a real circus.

It's not bad enough that Rita Rudner, comedian and headliner at New York-New York, got off to a rough start in my celebrity picks contest. I made it worse.

"All I can say is that I was in the other room and I heard my husband scream so loud I thought he was just attacked by Jackie Chan," Rudner said. "I asked, 'Did someone die in there?' and he said, 'No. It's worse than that. Sal added wrong and gave us one less win than we deserve.' He made me call to get it fixed."

Rita and her husband, Martin, who she says is in charge of picking the games, were shortchanged a victory in last week's standings by yours truly. They should have been 2-4. Instead, I whiffed and listed them at 1-5.

Honest, Rita, I was just practicing for my next career as a divorce lawyer -- I just took away half of everything you had. But no need for a court settlement here. I'll simply restore the 'W' in this week's updated standings.

Unfortunately for Martin and Rita, however, there was little chance for another case of mathematical malpractice against me this week, since there were no more wins to add.

At 2-7, Rudner remains composed, although she says her husband stresses a little.

"He said he wouldn't have allowed us to pick a high-rise apartment if he knew we would start 2-7. I'm a little worried about him," Rudner said. "So is it OK if we just erase what happened in those other weeks, like it was just a rehearsal?"

I'll bet the Rams are saying the same thing.

For the latest celebrity football picks, see http://www.vegas.com/gaming/picks/ index.html