Crickets from Houston so far...

  • 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.

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
Curious that all the talk in this draft so far involves more of Manziel and where he is going, while it's been so quiet about who is going first overall.

I just wonder why the media is not all over Houston trying to figure out what they are doing. You'd think the Texans know what they are doing by now, and somehow that would get out soon.

Clowney is the de facto #1 player in this draft. He is significantly better prospect than any QB for sure. The next best players are either at positions that are not needs for Houston, OT and WR, or there's Mack, a small school guy. And when was the last time a small school guy went #1 overall? Oh yeah, last year. Eric Fisher. How'd he do? Not so good.

It's weird. The Texans are showing no enthusiasm about adding him to their team. You gotta believe they really don't want him. And how many times does a team take a player that they really don't want?

I expect that they really want Mack, but are hoping not to have to take him at #1 overall because they think they can get him lower. And that may not happen for them. They just may get stuck at #1 taking Mack.

It's the quiet before the storm. But it's coming very soon.
 

Isiah58

UDFA
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
38
It is certainly plausible that the Texans really want Mack, who seems to be a better fit for their scheme. But I don't think that the Texans can count on Mack dropping past the Jags, so the only way they could drop down and still be assured of getting Mack is to trade with the Rams. And nobody believes that will happen. In the end, I believe someone will come up to #1 and make Houston's decision easier, but I don't think they will get Mack in the process.

I hope you enjoy yourself Thursday night and bring the Rams some good luck!
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
It is certainly plausible that the Texans really want Mack, who seems to be a better fit for their scheme. But I don't think that the Texans can count on Mack dropping past the Jags, so the only way they could drop down and still be assured of getting Mack is to trade with the Rams. And nobody believes that will happen. In the end, I believe someone will come up to #1 and make Houston's decision easier, but I don't think they will get Mack in the process.

I hope you enjoy yourself Thursday night and bring the Rams some good luck!

Thx. I58. Hope to get a wristband tomorrow.

BTW, what are your thoughts on the way the Rams should/will go in the first round?
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
It is certainly plausible that the Texans really want Mack, who seems to be a better fit for their scheme. But I don't think that the Texans can count on Mack dropping past the Jags, so the only way they could drop down and still be assured of getting Mack is to trade with the Rams. And nobody believes that will happen. In the end, I believe someone will come up to #1 and make Houston's decision easier, but I don't think they will get Mack in the process.

I hope you enjoy yourself Thursday night and bring the Rams some good luck!

So now I'm a nobody?!

I think it very well COULD happen.

Here's how:

Rams want Clowney. Houston wants player X. They call Rams and say to throw in a 5 and 7 and you can have Clowney. Rams get Clowney on the cheap, Texans get who they want guaranteed, costs Rams next to nothing, Texans have something to show for it.

If I'm right, I will be intolerable for months. Maybe years. I'm still considering my options.

By the way, welcome aboard! (y)
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
So now I'm a nobody?!

I think it very well COULD happen.

Here's how:

Rams want Clowney. Houston wants player X. They call Rams and say to throw in a 5 and 7 and you can have Clowney. Rams get Clowney on the cheap, Texans get who they want guaranteed, costs Rams next to nothing, Texans have something to show for it.

If I'm right, I will be intolerable for months. Maybe years. I'm still considering my options.

By the way, welcome aboard! (y)

From what I'm hearing there are some teams that are very afraid of Clowney's character/work ethic stuff. And apparently the Texans are one of them. So why do the Rams need to give Houston anything if Houston really wants Mack but can't trade down below the Rams and still get him? The Rams can just sit and put the pressure on Houston to either pick a guy they don't want (Clowney) or force them to take the guy they want (Mack).
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
From what I'm hearing there are some teams that are very afraid of Clowney's character/work ethic stuff. And apparently the Texans are one of them. So why do the Rams need to give Houston anything if Houston really wants Mack but can't trade down below the Rams and still get him? The Rams can just sit and put the pressure on Houston to either pick a guy they don't want (Clowney) or force them to take the guy they want (Mack).

Because someone will make them an offer they can't refuse, but WOULD refuse, IF the Rams sweeten the pot.

If they move down and get their second or third rated player and a bounty of picks, they may do it. But if they trade with Rams, get their top pick, and still more picks, they could find that more advantageous.

Why would Rams do it? So they don't get screwed over a surplus 5 and 7.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
Because someone will make them an offer they can't refuse, but WOULD refuse, IF the Rams sweeten the pot.

If they move down and get their second or third rated player and a bounty of picks, they may do it. But if they trade with Rams, get their top pick, and still more picks, they could find that more advantageous.

Why would Rams do it? So they don't get screwed over a surplus 5 and 7.

The big assumption here is that the Rams really want Clowney for themselves. They may just want him to trade the pick.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
The big assumption here is that the Rams really want Clowney for themselves. They may just want him to trade the pick.

Oh, they do. If they didn't they would be talking him up. They are laying low.

But, yes, it's an assumption they want him.
 

Ken

Starter
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
591
Name
Ken Morris
The big assumption here is that the Rams really want Clowney for themselves. They may just want him to trade the pick.

Something like RamzFanz deal could occur even if Rams don't intend on keeping Clowney. If they are willing to drop down lower than Houston is in exchange for a better haul of draft picks, then it could happen. Though I doubt it will. But it makes logical sense.
 

Isiah58

UDFA
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
38
@max

I have felt since we learned of the final order of the draft that the draft did not mesh very well with the Rams as far as value and need. So I don't have a good feel for what the Rams will do. I do think that the Rams vigorously pursued Jake Long last year because they really valued him, and I think that the Rams felt when they signed him to a four year deal that they had their left tackle for the next four years. To me, I think that Fisher values loyalty and commitment, and I also think that Jake Long played very well last year (an opinion that is not shared by everyone, but I think he gave the Rams exactly what they bargained for). Thus, it is hard for me to predict that the Rams would draft his replacement one year later after displacing Jake Long from his home in Miami and making unwritten promises to him that he would be their guy for the next 3 - 4 years. It just doesn't seem like a Fisher move to stick it to Jake Long like that. I think that signing Saffold means that the Rams can return 4 of their starting offensive linemen, and they can find another interior offensive lineman much later. Although I wouldn't be upset with Robinson, Mathews, Lewan, or Martin (at #13), I don't think it is the best marriage of value and need.

I also don't see the Rams drafting Mack under any circumstances. Not after drafting Ogletree in the first round last year and extending JLau's contract until 2017. I just don't think that a third linebacker, no matter how talented, can be justified as a top 5 pick. Heck, they were in LOVE with Ogletree and they wouldn't take him at #23 last year, so I think Mack is out of the question at #2. No judgment on how great a player Mack will be, but I just can't see the fit.

I don't think they will take Clowney at #2 unless they think he can be an all pro from the left side, which he hasn't played in college to my knowledge. I think Robert Quinn is going to be manning the right end position for a good while, so Clowney would have to be able to take over the left end for Chris Long. But I think the Rams see Chris Long as a leader and a very productive player still in his prime, so I just don't see the Rams taking Clowney either. Of course, his availability at #2 would most likely open the door for the Rams to secure that 2015 first round pick Snead covets so much.

I would probably take Watkins if I were the Rams and I was stuck at #2, but I don't have nearly the optimism that most people have that Watkins would be a transformative player in this system. I don't see him having the effect on this offense that people expect to happen. Like Austin last year, I can see him making some highlight plays but I worry about how productive he will actually be. Still, I think if forced to pick at #2 he makes the most sense. He would certainly be crowd favorite.

I hope they do not select a QB until the 4th round, and preferably the 5th unless they acquire more picks in a trade down. Any QB they pick is going to sit behind Bradford AND Shaun Hill holding a clip board, getting very few reps in practice, and will likely be seen as Hill's, not Bradford's, replacement in 2015. There is no way I can justify a top 100 pick for a player the Rams hope never takes a snap in a game outside of the preseason.

I also don't subscribe to a couple of theories that I have seen some profess as imperatives for the Rams. For one, I don't see anything magical about staying in the top 6 picks. For me, it is more important to find a player where value and need intersect perfectly than forcing a pick in the top 6 just because certain analysts (who don't all agree btw) say there are only 6 impact players in the draft. We all know that that is, statistically speaking, extremely unlikely. Second, I don't agree that the Rams need acquire only 2014 picks as part of a "win now" philosophy. The funny thing about the future is that it always shows up sooner than you think, and when the 2015 draft arrives people would look at the moves made in 2014 and assess what could have been done if they had the patience to make the best deal. An example of this is the RGIII trade, where many fans wanted the Cleveland deal so that the Rams could have 2 first round picks in 2012 instead of one in 2014. But the Rams eschewed the instant gratification path, and because of it the future arrived and the Rams are sitting on the #2 overall pick.

So what I hope the Rams do is play the draft smart, don't think short term, don't draft players just to fill holes, but rather take the best football players they can. My guess is that they go one offense and one defense in the first round.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Something like RamzFanz deal could occur even if Rams don't intend on keeping Clowney. If they are willing to drop down lower than Houston is in exchange for a better haul of draft picks, then it could happen. Though I doubt it will. But it makes logical sense.

I guess that's possible. Rams trade up from 1.2 to 1.1, then trade down from 1.1 to 1.6. Only fly in that ointment is that Rams are in control of the clock before Houston can pick Mack at 1.2. What if someone offers the Rams a deal for 1.1 so they can get Mack. Then what does Houston do?

Here's the thing. This is all fun stuff, but the media would rather talk about the same old Manziel hogwash over and over.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,011
I think if Houston truly wants Mack, they ought to swap picks with the rams for cheap. Like a 4th rounder. Why? Would the rams give up a 4th if clowney is a must have? Of course they would.
And if they aren't sold on clowney themselves, they can trade down to whoever (see Atlanta) and pick up way more than the 4th rounder they lost
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
@max
So what I hope the Rams do is play the draft smart, don't think short term, don't draft players just to fill holes, but rather take the best football players they can. My guess is that they go one offense and one defense in the first round.

Everything you said makes perfect sense, but allow me to add one thing. And that one thing is that while Fisher is loyal to his guys, if they are breaking down you'd think that would factor into his decision making. He has got to be concerned with Long having another major surgery. There has got to be an updated assessment of the longevity of Long that is different than when they signed him. Drafting Robinson is a long term investment that works in concert with Long playing LOT for a year or two if he can hold up. I refer back to Snead saying the Rams staff is looking for 2 HOFers with their 2 first rounders. And if Robinson is that good, I think it's a better fit than most anything else.
 

Isiah58

UDFA
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
38
Of course you are right, and if they feel that he is breaking down then they are not going to keep him around or pay him the big bucks on loyalty alone. But like Bradford, Long's knee injury is a first I believe (i.e., not a chronic thing), and there is no reason to expect that he won't recover fully from this injury. Still, I agree that Robinson makes more sense in the NFC West than almost any other player. Yet, when I watch the few highlights of him, he still doesn't scream superstar to me. He always comes off a little clumsy and off balance. But I am no scout, and if he is a Ram come Thursday I will be very happy that they addressed the offensive line with a young, powerful kid with a lot of tools.
 

max

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,010
Name
max
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
Still, I agree that Robinson makes more sense in the NFC West than almost any other player. Yet, when I watch the few highlights of him, he still doesn't scream superstar to me. He always comes off a little clumsy and off balance. But I am no scout, and if he is a Ram come Thursday I will be very happy that they addressed the offensive line with a young, powerful kid with a lot of tools.

I can add this. Yesterday, Daniel Jeremiah was asked by Rich Eisen to name the one player in this draft that in 20 years from now was the most likely to be in the HOF. Jeremiah said Greg Robinson. He said Robinson had the special abilities that HOF players have. I'm certainly the furthest person from a scout that you will find, but I've heard many of them say Robinson is a great prospect, including guys who said Jason Smith was a 3rd round talent. And I agree with you, if Boudreau signs off on Robinson, then I'm excited we've got him.
 

BeerOClock

Rookie
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
139
I've watched actual game tape on Robinson on four of his games.

What I saw was the best run blocking LT I've seen in 10 years--period. But, I saw some major red flags on his pass protection. We all know Auburn doesn't pass much, so I ran the tape over and over again on passing plays--here's what I saw:
1) Kony Ealy gave Robinson fits. Though Ealy lined up in several places, he did line up opposite Robinson a few times where he and Robinson were on an island on a passing play. One time it was a quick out, so Robinson shielded Ealy effectively. On another, Ealy blew past him effortlessly. Robinson's footwork was horrible. Ironically enough, on that play Auburn's QB was able to dodge Ealy, scramble and throw a TD on the play.
2) Auburn rarely left Robinson on an island on passing plays when they were playing against speed rushers. Several times, they had another lineman pull and pass protect the DE leaving Robinson with a slower DT or LB. This concerned me even more that #1.

There's no doubt that Robinson is a force on running plays. He will definitely need to be coached up on his pass protection. Is he a top #7 prospect?--absolutely. Is he a good value at #2?--not at all. No LT that has to be significantly coached up on pass protection is a good value at #2. If I were Seattle or other run-first teams, I'd grab Robinson in a heartbeat. Otherwise, Matthews and Lewan may be better values at #6 and #8 respectively.

If you're interested in keeping Bradford upright and healthy AND you have concerns about Jake Long's health, Robinson is not your guy. If you think Zac Stacy and company could dominate the NFC on the ground, Robinson is your guy.

If the Rams pass on Watkins or Mack (or Clowney if he makes it past the #1 spot), they would be better served trading down to #5-8 and grabbing the best available LT between Robinson, Matthews and Lewan and picking up another 2nd rounder.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,144
Name
Burger man
@max

I have felt since we learned of the final order of the draft that the draft did not mesh very well with the Rams as far as value and need. So I don't have a good feel for what the Rams will do. I do think that the Rams vigorously pursued Jake Long last year because they really valued him, and I think that the Rams felt when they signed him to a four year deal that they had their left tackle for the next four years. To me, I think that Fisher values loyalty and commitment, and I also think that Jake Long played very well last year (an opinion that is not shared by everyone, but I think he gave the Rams exactly what they bargained for). Thus, it is hard for me to predict that the Rams would draft his replacement one year later after displacing Jake Long from his home in Miami and making unwritten promises to him that he would be their guy for the next 3 - 4 years. It just doesn't seem like a Fisher move to stick it to Jake Long like that. I think that signing Saffold means that the Rams can return 4 of their starting offensive linemen, and they can find another interior offensive lineman much later. Although I wouldn't be upset with Robinson, Mathews, Lewan, or Martin (at #13), I don't think it is the best marriage of value and need.

I also don't see the Rams drafting Mack under any circumstances. Not after drafting Ogletree in the first round last year and extending JLau's contract until 2017. I just don't think that a third linebacker, no matter how talented, can be justified as a top 5 pick. Heck, they were in LOVE with Ogletree and they wouldn't take him at #23 last year, so I think Mack is out of the question at #2. No judgment on how great a player Mack will be, but I just can't see the fit.

I don't think they will take Clowney at #2 unless they think he can be an all pro from the left side, which he hasn't played in college to my knowledge. I think Robert Quinn is going to be manning the right end position for a good while, so Clowney would have to be able to take over the left end for Chris Long. But I think the Rams see Chris Long as a leader and a very productive player still in his prime, so I just don't see the Rams taking Clowney either. Of course, his availability at #2 would most likely open the door for the Rams to secure that 2015 first round pick Snead covets so much.

I would probably take Watkins if I were the Rams and I was stuck at #2, but I don't have nearly the optimism that most people have that Watkins would be a transformative player in this system. I don't see him having the effect on this offense that people expect to happen. Like Austin last year, I can see him making some highlight plays but I worry about how productive he will actually be. Still, I think if forced to pick at #2 he makes the most sense. He would certainly be crowd favorite.

I hope they do not select a QB until the 4th round, and preferably the 5th unless they acquire more picks in a trade down. Any QB they pick is going to sit behind Bradford AND Shaun Hill holding a clip board, getting very few reps in practice, and will likely be seen as Hill's, not Bradford's, replacement in 2015. There is no way I can justify a top 100 pick for a player the Rams hope never takes a snap in a game outside of the preseason.

I also don't subscribe to a couple of theories that I have seen some profess as imperatives for the Rams. For one, I don't see anything magical about staying in the top 6 picks. For me, it is more important to find a player where value and need intersect perfectly than forcing a pick in the top 6 just because certain analysts (who don't all agree btw) say there are only 6 impact players in the draft. We all know that that is, statistically speaking, extremely unlikely. Second, I don't agree that the Rams need acquire only 2014 picks as part of a "win now" philosophy. The funny thing about the future is that it always shows up sooner than you think, and when the 2015 draft arrives people would look at the moves made in 2014 and assess what could have been done if they had the patience to make the best deal. An example of this is the RGIII trade, where many fans wanted the Cleveland deal so that the Rams could have 2 first round picks in 2012 instead of one in 2014. But the Rams eschewed the instant gratification path, and because of it the future arrived and the Rams are sitting on the #2 overall pick.

So what I hope the Rams do is play the draft smart, don't think short term, don't draft players just to fill holes, but rather take the best football players they can. My guess is that they go one offense and one defense in the first round.

Nice post Isiah and sick avatar!
 

scifiman

Guest
I really am not sold on Clowney either and think the Texans asking price for the #1 pick is too high. They are wanting to get what the rams got for rg3 and it is not going to happen with so many red flags on Clowney. I think The texans are going to wait until the last minute and either trade that #1 and not get as much as they want or just take a qb and pass on Clowney. Then the rams can trade that pick and get an extra 2nd and 3rd and move down a few spots and still get the guys they want. I just do not see the rams taking Clowney even if he were available. And Mack? No way. Does not fit and am dubious as to his skill level also at the nfl level. I would love to draft a guy like Bortles but he will need a year or 2 sitting behind a starter and learn the game I think. Could be wrong and he could light it up from the start. Bortles reminds me of Rothliesberger but faster. I would love to trade Bradford take Bortles and Watkins Rd 1 and BPA after that and I think the rams would be moving forward.
 

scifiman

Guest
I've watched actual game tape on Robinson on four of his games.

What I saw was the best run blocking LT I've seen in 10 years--period. But, I saw some major red flags on his pass protection. We all know Auburn doesn't pass much, so I ran the tape over and over again on passing plays--here's what I saw:
1) Kony Ealy gave Robinson fits. Though Ealy lined up in several places, he did line up opposite Robinson a few times where he and Robinson were on an island on a passing play. One time it was a quick out, so Robinson shielded Ealy effectively. On another, Ealy blew past him effortlessly. Robinson's footwork was horrible. Ironically enough, on that play Auburn's QB was able to dodge Ealy, scramble and throw a TD on the play.
2) Auburn rarely left Robinson on an island on passing plays when they were playing against speed rushers. Several times, they had another lineman pull and pass protect the DE leaving Robinson with a slower DT or LB. This concerned me even more that #1.

There's no doubt that Robinson is a force on running plays. He will definitely need to be coached up on his pass protection. Is he a top #7 prospect?--absolutely. Is he a good value at #2?--not at all. No LT that has to be significantly coached up on pass protection is a good value at #2. If I were Seattle or other run-first teams, I'd grab Robinson in a heartbeat. Otherwise, Matthews and Lewan may be better values at #6 and #8 respectively.

If you're interested in keeping Bradford upright and healthy AND you have concerns about Jake Long's health, Robinson is not your guy. If you think Zac Stacy and company could dominate the NFC on the ground, Robinson is your guy.

If the Rams pass on Watkins or Mack (or Clowney if he makes it past the #1 spot), they would be better served trading down to #5-8 and grabbing the best available LT between Robinson, Matthews and Lewan and picking up another 2nd rounder.
I prefer Mathews also over Robinson just because of the bloodlines and his superior pass blocking skills. He also run blocks well just not on par with Robinson. Mathews is football smart and the run game would be just fine with him. You can also just plug him right in at RT and be good to go until Jake Long is gone or injured. Mathews also can play guard. If we could haul in Mathews and then Evans in this draft I would be happy happy with that.
 

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
6,822
I don't believe that the Texans really want to select Clowney and are probably even praying that someone offers them something so that they can move down.