1. To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Brian Quick on the Vincent jackson plan

Discussion in 'RAMS - NFL TALK' started by lockdnram21, Mar 7, 2014.

  1. Yamahopper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    2,363
    Likes Received:
    897
    I might have not worded that right. It could get to a number game at WR if a player like Watkins is drafted and which Wr's that can play special teams would be of more value.
    Bailey did a great job on St but if he's getting starter snaps a guy needs to step up.
    I agree that Quick shouldn't have the burden of learning something else but he might not have no choice.
     
    #41
  2. laramsoriginal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2014
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    219
    Pass on Watkins.

    It's been stated a million times but here it is one more time:

    Improve the OL and the WR corp will dramatically improve.
     
    #42
    Faceplant and rhinobean like this.
  3. Rams and Gators Well-Known Member Pit Boss

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    4,843
    Likes Received:
    3,105
    Quick's numbers:
    18 rec, 302 yds, 2 TDs,
    Quick's number with an average QB:
    21 rec, 348 yds, 2.3 TDs

    I don't see why he'd be targeted more with Sam as QB, it's not like Clemens thought "there goes Brian Quick running wide open again, I wish I could throw to him but I'm not Sam Bradford so I'll look elsewhere."

    When did he say this? Right after the draft or after Quick had played in the NFL, it carries more weight if it was after the draft otherwise he may have been covering for an awful pick.

    Quick's snap count (offence only) last 6 games: 131 Bailey's 168, last 3 games: 61 to 106.

    What is a number 1 receiver?

    Tavon Austin vs Keenan Allen/Cordarrelle Patterson/DeAndre Hopkins and Larry Warford/Kyle Long, I like Austin but that's an easy decision for me.
     
    #43
  4. flv 

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,219
    Likes Received:
    927
    Vincent Jackson was selected under a different CBA agreement. If he had been selected under the current agreement he would likely have left the Chargers, (as a big disappointment), as a FA after 4 years. Quick hasn't shown he should be a starter up to this point and I think any sudden change is unlikely. If he's a top 2 WR for us by the end of pre-season he should start. If he's #6 or lower he should be cut. I don't blame Quick for his situation with the Rams. I blame Fisher and Snead. After he was selected they both kept saying that Quick was someone who could 'turn on a dime' - the implication being he was so dynamic he could create DB separation simply by sharp changes of speed and direction. I see potential in him but I don't see 'that'. If Fisher and Snead had been honest with fans and said Quick was a project things would have been smoother.
     
    #44
  5. Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Messages:
    5,851
    Likes Received:
    2,573
    Could be Yamahopper but I think it's more likely that they just decide to bite the bullet on the ST thing and either keep him or just cut/trade him. Not much point in trying to teach me to fly. :goodluck:
    Thanks for giving me the opportunity to use that new smiley BTW.
     
    #45
  6. Memphis Ram Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,813
    Likes Received:
    1,070
    While they had Gates & Tomlinson, the starting WRs were only a mere solid Eric Parker and Keenan McCardell, who was clearly near the end of his career. The guy was a raw prospect coming out that simply wasn't ready until he was ready.
     
    #46
    rhinobean and Alan like this.
  7. laramsoriginal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2014
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    219
    Maybe we're expecting too much from Quick because he was an early 2nd round pick. With the emergence of Bailey, Austin, and Givens, I hope Quick is the big play guy. If the rams or fans expect Quick to be a route tree running WR than we'll be disappointed. Quick is 6'3 210+. Rams should put him in situations to run deep posts and fade routes.

    I agree that 2014 is a make it or break it year for Quick.
     
    #47
  8. lockdnram21 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2013
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    385

    where you been at they said he was a project a million times
     
    #48
  9. Ramsey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2013
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    99
    I want Watkins. We need one more offensive weapon, if we intend on keeping defensive coordinators up past midnight. After the first game against the Cardinals, defenses concentrated on stopping Cook up the seam, and swarming Tavon Austin as soon he caught the ball.

    About the time Zak Stacy emerges as a threat, Bradford goes down to injury. We won both games, we had Stacy and Bradford on the field the entire game. The Rams averaged 36 points a game in those contests.

    Which players will a defensive coordinator focus on when you have Sammy Watkins, Tavon Austin, Cook, Quick, Zak Stacy, and a healthy Sam Bradford all on the field at the same time?

    Zak Stacy's running threat will open up Sam Bradford's play action pass potential. It won't be easy for defenses to crowd the box, like Seattle did the last game. And visa versa. Add Watkins to the mix, and suddenly Zak Stacy has even more room to run.

    Throw occasional uptempo, no huddle in to the mix. Suppose we line up with 4 wide outs Watkins, Austin, Cook, and Quick, with Stacy in the backfield. A defense would have to commit 5 players, including a deep free safety on those 4 WR's. Somebody is going to be wide open. Also there's a lot of room for Zak Stacy to rumble, if he breaks past the front six.

    Watkins would allow the Rams to further explore multiple mismatches. Mismatches are what it's all about. Meanwhile Givens, Bailey and Quick have the 3rd or 4th best DB covering them, instead of one of the top two corners.

    Try to resign Saffold and draft 3 or 4 offensive linemen, after all it's possible we may have 13 draft picks.
    Of course, I defer to Les Snead and Jeff Fisher. If they take Robinson or Mathews with our first pick, I'll assume they know what they're doing.
     
    #49
  10. nighttrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    268
    nailed it, Watkins would be a luxury. an OL to keep SB in the pocket, GOLD
    train
     
    #50
    The Rammer likes this.
  11. The Rammer ESPN Draft Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    981
    Amen...It doesn't seem like rocket science but alot of people want the flashy stuff. Kinda like worrying about making sure your car has a flawless body but don't care about the actual thing that makes your car go and gives it realibility, your engine. (or OL) No point having all rest when your engine (OL) needs worked on....
     
    #51
  12. iced Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    967
    A Go-to receiver that consistently separates, wins 1 on 1 coverage, and catches the ball.. When the games on the line and everyone knows the ball is going to him, he can still make the play.

    This team does not have a receiver in that mold. Size, measurables are irrelevant when talking about the niches of the wide receiver position - you don't have to be a world track star or a giant to get open and catch the ball
     
    #52
    The Rammer and Ramsey like this.
  13. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,180
    Likes Received:
    2,764
    Yeah but look at that guy's stats. He was a bust.
     
    #53
  14. Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Messages:
    5,851
    Likes Received:
    2,573
    If you ignore the first few learning games I think the stats he didn't get were pretty impressive. :lifting:
     
    #54
  15. blackbart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,480
    Likes Received:
    729
    Instead of just talking I went to the box scores and got the stats you know as much as I do about what Clemens thought. Quick did not get enough targets for anyone to evaluate his progress 14 targets in 9 games with Clemens at QB.

    Game REC YDS AVG TD LG TGTS
    ARZ 1 16 16 0 16 2 Bradford 27/38 299 2TD 1INT
    ATL 1 15 15 0 15 1 Bradford 32/55 352 3TD 1INT
    DAL 1 7 7 0 7 4 Bradford 29/48 240 1TD 0INT
    SF 1 12 12 0 12 3 Bradford 19/41 202 1TD 1INT
    JAX 2 45 22.5 0 28 2 Bradford 19/34 222 3TD 0INT
    TEX 1 4 4 1 4 2 Bradford 12/16 117 3TD 0INT
    CAR 2 97 48.5 0 73 6 Bradford 21/30 255 1TD 1INT Clemens 2/4 19 0TD 0INT
    SEA 0 0 0 0 0 2 Clemens 15/31 158 0TD 2 INT
    TEN 2 30 15 0 20 2 Clemens 25/30 210 1TD 0INT
    IND NO STATS 0 Clemens 9/16 247 2TD 0INT
    CHI 2 19 9.5 0 16 2 Clemens 10/22 167 1TD 0INT
    SF 3 41 13.7 1 29 4 Clemens 19/37 218 1TD 1 INT
    ARZ NO STATS 0 Clemens 16/27 181 0TD 2INT
    NO 0 0 0 0 0 1 Clemens 14/20 158 2TD 0INT
    TB 2 16 8 0 9 2 Clemens 16/20 158 0TD 0INT
    SEA 0 0 0 0 0 1 Clemens 21/30 157 1TD 2INT
     
    #55
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2014
  16. blackbart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,480
    Likes Received:
    729
    The formatting stinks but you can figure it out
     
    #56
  17. Rams and Gators Well-Known Member Pit Boss

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    4,843
    Likes Received:
    3,105
    So you're saying that his targets per game followed a poisson distribution, and that the difference between his number of targets with Bradford and Clemens isn't statistically significant at the conventional 5% level? So you think it's conceivable that he wouldn't of been targeted more with Bradford as his QB? I don't necessarily disagree with your argument, but I think it's logical that he would have been targeted slightly more.

    You also make an interesting point on how Quick's receptions per targets is higher with Clemens than Bradford (but again as you say it's not statistically significant), are you contending that Sam is less accurate or that Clemens was only willing to throw him passes on shorter routes while Sam took more deep shots and Quick is better suited to that?
     
    #57
  18. StevenG-BR New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    86
    For the life of me, I cannot understand why some people are down on Austin. I've heard people complain because he didn't outproduce every rookie receiver despite being the top receiver drafted.

    As if we should assess Austin based on petty jealousy rather than judging him as an individual.

    He did exactly what we drafted him to do. End of discussion. What Keenan Allen did shouldn't make any difference.

    Austin didn't just flash production. He flashed an ability to completely take over a football game. Not since Marshall Faulk have we had a skill-position player who can completely turn a game around in seconds.

    And some people are down on him... Give me a break. He's the most exciting thing to happen to the offensive side of the football since 99-01.
     
    #58
  19. blackbart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,480
    Likes Received:
    729
    There are several things the numbers bear out that I think are over looked when trying to assess Quick progress.

    Targets per game were on the rise with Bradford (small sample size) but it was there.
    Throws per game in general went down with the change at QB. Clemens just could not be expected to have the same game plan as Bradford
    2 of the last 9 games Quick did not get 1 target. There is no way he was not open the entire game and he was getting PT so it has to be considered that Clemens was not confident enough to make the throws and instead chose safer throws to protect the ball.
    This offense is not going to be one where 1 guy gets targeted 10 times a game every week. They want to distribute the ball to multiple players and keep the D guessing. If they throw 30 times a game and run 30 times a game Quick will probably see no more than 5 targets on average. Cook, Austin, Bailey if all four of these guys get 5 a game that is 20. Add in the other TEs and RBs and you are running out of targets quickly.

    Quick had a couple of jacked up plays everyone remembers where he did not make adjustments to be on the same page as Sam, he was never expected to be a polished WR in 2013. He is not going to be what everyone thinks is the definition of a true #1, neither is anyone else on this team in this offense. The thing is the Rams do not need that kind of WR in this offense to be a winning team.
     
    #59
  20. blackbart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,480
    Likes Received:
    729
    As for the Bradford vs Clemens targets for Quick, it was pretty obvious that Clemens did not ever want to throw the ball more than ten yards down field. For any WR to get those explosive plays they need those opportunities outside the numbers down field. Clemens did better over all than I expected but he certainly does not have the tools Bradford has.

    Since Quick only had 2 drops it makes you think Bradford was less accurate but you still have to factor the lack of PT together and not reading the defense the same attributing to some of the plays that make people say what the heck was he thinking????
     
    #60