Devaney drafts as bad as 2000-2007?

[Angry Ram]

Here's what remains:

2008: Long
2009: Laurinaitis, Fletcher (I think he's gone in 2013)
2010: Bradford, Saffold, Hull
2011: Quinn, Kendricks, Pettis (won't be surprised if Pettis is gone too)

Hate to be a downer, but this is just sad. Could have as low as 7 players from this "era" in 2013.

 

[Lesson]

Considering that no one remains from the 2001 draft and that all 3 of the 1st round picks that season were gone by 2006, I'd have to say Devaney's tenure isn't as bad as that.

 

[Warner4Prez]

You think Pettis is gone? I think he's earned his spot for sure. I honestly think he could take Gibson's spot next year. Not sure if the staff sees it that way, but I think Bradford looks for him more often than anyone not named Amendola.

 

[Faceplant]

Considering that no one remains from the 2001 draft and that all 3 of the 1st round picks that season were gone by 2006, I'd have to say Devaney's tenure isn't as bad as that.

Fair enough, but that draft was almost 12 years ago. Devaney's only go back 4 years. Pretty bad in any case. We may have more players stick from this ONE draft than all of what is left from that regime. It really is amazing how much turn over we have had in the past couple of years. Makes this years success even more impressive.

 

[libertadrocks]

As bad as 00-07? I dont think so. Certainly not good though. He did get some plus players(Long, JL, Quinn, Bradford, Saffold, and Kendricks).

Fletcher is a good CB. He is just a luxury we probably cant afford. He will be a starting CB somewhere else.

 

[Lesson]

Considering that no one remains from the 2001 draft and that all 3 of the 1st round picks that season were gone by 2006, I'd have to say Devaney's tenure isn't as bad as that.

Fair enough, but that draft was almost 12 years ago. Devaney's only go back 4 years. Pretty bad in any case. We may have more players stick from this ONE draft than all of what is left from that regime. It really is amazing how much turn over we have had in the past couple of years. Makes this years success even more impressive.

I'm not crediting Devaney with the 2008 draft, as it has been said many times that Devaney didn't have the final say with the picks. For instance, Softli said Avery was Linehan's choice, not Devaney's.

2009-2011 was definitely Devaney. He should have had better success with those picks, yes, but at least players still remain from those drafts. Only Jackson remains from any drafts prior to 2008. That's pretty bad.

 

[Warner4Prez]

Considering that no one remains from the 2001 draft and that all 3 of the 1st round picks that season were gone by 2006, I'd have to say Devaney's tenure isn't as bad as that.

Fair enough, but that draft was almost 12 years ago. Devaney's only go back 4 years. Pretty bad in any case. We may have more players stick from this ONE draft than all of what is left from that regime. It really is amazing how much turn over we have had in the past couple of years. Makes this years success even more impressive.

The success of this team is amazing considering all that, but I'm really happy to see some of those cast offs making names for themselves. Avery is getting good play in Indy, Toston had a decent game in J-Ville yesterday, Thad looked like a passable NFL QB against Pittsburgh, DX had hella success, Sims still contributes for this squad.

I'm still partly convinced DeSpags had a good thing going and if their asses weren't held to the flame after just two seasons they could have made something happen. McD was a desperation move and it derailed everything.

 

[Angry Ram]

You think Pettis is gone? I think he's earned his spot for sure. I honestly think he could take Gibson's spot next year. Not sure if the staff sees it that way, but I think Bradford looks for him more often than anyone not named Amendola.

There's a chance, and won't be surprised if he is gone. I actually think Gibby had done better. Pettis is just a weird player.

 

[Lesson]

I'm still partly convinced DeSpags had a good thing going and if their asses weren't held to the flame after just two seasons they could have made something happen. McD was a desperation move and it derailed everything.

I disagree with that. I don't think Spags and Billy felt pressure until either during the lockout or shortly after.

In hindsight, it makes sense as to why all those FAs who were older signed 1 year deals. They wanted to win ASAP and risked losing if they didn't sign vets who were semi-familiar with the schemes that Spags and McDaniels ran.

I think the Lloyd trade also hinted that they knew their jobs were on the line.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Here's what remains:

2008: Long
2009: Laurinaitis, Fletcher (I think he's gone in 2013)
2010: Bradford, Saffold, Hull
2011: Quinn, Kendricks, Pettis (won't be surprised if Pettis is gone too)

Hate to be a downer, but this is just sad. Could have as low as 7 players from this "era" in 2013.

Pettis signed a 4yr deal. He's good through the 2014 season, unless the Rams want to move on. But... I don't see any way Pettis is gone. He's definitely top 6 on any roster.

Gibson is not going to get a big contract anywhere. So, it depends on if the Rams want him back and vice versa.

Personally here is what I see;

(1) FA WR
(2) Amendola
(3) Givens
(4) Quick
(5) Pettis
(6) Draft pick or FA WR

Gone: Smith, Gibson

 

[Warner4Prez]

I'm still partly convinced DeSpags had a good thing going and if their asses weren't held to the flame after just two seasons they could have made something happen. McD was a desperation move and it derailed everything.

I disagree with that. I don't think Spags and Billy felt pressure until either during the lockout or shortly after.

In hindsight, it makes sense as to why all those FAs who were older signed 1 year deals. They wanted to win ASAP and risked losing if they didn't sign vets who were semi-familiar with the schemes that Spags and McDaniels ran.

I think the Lloyd trade also hinted that they knew their jobs were on the line.

Good observation there, but I heard an interview with Ben Leber here on our local sports radio station (he's come back to Minnesota as a sideline analyst) and in an interview he talked about the cloud that hung around the team from day one and said that it seemed the staff knew their jobs were at risk.

It just struck me as odd that the annoyingly conservative tendencies of Spags would lead them to hiring McD. It stank of do or die. How did you feel about the previous regime overall? I thought they had a good thing going. Not everyone dug them and I get that. I think this team is definitely better off now, but for what they were running I thought DeSpags had the right people mostly in place.

 

[Lesson]

I'm still partly convinced DeSpags had a good thing going and if their asses weren't held to the flame after just two seasons they could have made something happen. McD was a desperation move and it derailed everything.

I disagree with that. I don't think Spags and Billy felt pressure until either during the lockout or shortly after.

In hindsight, it makes sense as to why all those FAs who were older signed 1 year deals. They wanted to win ASAP and risked losing if they didn't sign vets who were semi-familiar with the schemes that Spags and McDaniels ran.

I think the Lloyd trade also hinted that they knew their jobs were on the line.

Good observation there, but I heard an interview with Ben Leber here on our local sports radio station (he's come back to Minnesota as a sideline analyst) and in an interview he talked about the cloud that hung around the team from day one and said that it seemed the staff knew their jobs were at risk.

It just struck me as odd that the annoyingly conservative tendencies of Spags would lead them to hiring McD. It stank of do or die. How did you feel about the previous regime overall? I thought they had a good thing going. Not everyone dug them and I get that. I think this team is definitely better off now, but for what they were running I thought DeSpags had the right people mostly in place.

I felt that the previous regime was off to a rough start to begin with. Spags and Devaney had to dismantle the roster from top to bottom in 2009 to get rid of the bad contracts, aging players, etc. So essentially that was a lost year and I don't think it is necessarily fair to grade Spags and Devaney off of the 2009 team's performance, but if someone wants to do that, who I am to say they are wrong as both of them were involved with the 2009 team.

2010, I thought, showed that Billy and Spags were sticking to their word of building through the draft with adding some talent here and there. I thought that the performance on the field showed that the talent had been improved, but at the same time I do not think the 2010 was as good as the record showed in retrospect. The Rams played an easier schedule than they did in 2011 and 2012, and had 7 wins.

2011 showed to me that things were not going as well as I thought they were in 2010. Against fairly tough competition, the Rams performance suffered. Part of that was due to issues with personnel as well as change in scheme on offense, to name a few problems. I don't think that the offense McDaniels was trying to run did not suit the personnel that the Rams had at the time nor do I think that the Rams were nearly as bad as their record was. The roster grew a bit older due to additional free agents being brought in for stop gaps(like Leber and Poppinga) while a few free agents were brought in here for what I believe to be the long haul(Mikell, Harvey Dahl).

So in summary, I think Spags and Devaney going away from their idea of building through the draft-something that I believe Kroenke is fully behind-cost them their jobs as well as the change in scheme from the West Coast Offense to what McDaniels ran last season. I do think that the roster has more talent right now thanks to Devaney and Spags and should get credit for helping set the foundation of what I think will be a successful future for the Rams.

 

[Lesson]

I also feel that this team faced a tough schedule, as I believe it was either top 5 or top 3 in terms of strength of schedule, and performed fairly well with said schedule. I feel confident that the team will continue to improve.

 

[CGI_Ram]

I think Devaney was onto something. But he didn't have the scouts (see draft results) and I think Spags let him down.

Spags... as much as I like the character of the man...

(1) Played "not to lose". Dude only knows missionary position

(2) Stuck with Loney and it failed miserably

(3) Questionable roster choices; keeping aged vets over youth

(4) Chose to NOT HAVE a QB coach with offensive system change and McDaniels. What was that? Just a horrible-horrible decision.

(5) His defense was over-rated. It failed here. It failed in New Orleans. His only success was with elite talent on that Giants team.

 

[Angry Ram]

Here's what remains:

2008: Long
2009: Laurinaitis, Fletcher (I think he's gone in 2013)
2010: Bradford, Saffold, Hull
2011: Quinn, Kendricks, Pettis (won't be surprised if Pettis is gone too)

Hate to be a downer, but this is just sad. Could have as low as 7 players from this "era" in 2013.

Pettis signed a 4yr deal. He's good through the 2014 season, unless the Rams want to move on. But... I don't see any way Pettis is gone. He's definitely top 6 on any roster.

Gibson is not going to get a big contract anywhere. So, it depends on if the Rams want him back and vice versa.

Personally here is what I see;

(1) FA WR
(2) Amendola
(3) Givens
(4) Quick
(5) Pettis
(6) Draft pick or FA WR

Gone: Smith, Gibson

Again, I'd take Gibby over Pettis. Shows how we still talking about WR since Holt left. Although there's even a more remote chance that both could be gone, and get a couple studs instead.

This isn't an indictment on Pettis, I have nothing against him, I just feel if they upgrade somewhere else (and everything else remains the same) he might be the odd man out. His contract, being a 3rd round pick during the rookie wage scale isn't something that could stop it. Smith...he doesn't even count.

I'm still partly convinced DeSpags had a good thing going and if their asses weren't held to the flame after just two seasons they could have made something happen. McD was a desperation move and it derailed everything.

I disagree with that. I don't think Spags and Billy felt pressure until either during the lockout or shortly after.

In hindsight, it makes sense as to why all those FAs who were older signed 1 year deals. They wanted to win ASAP and risked losing if they didn't sign vets who were semi-familiar with the schemes that Spags and McDaniels ran.

I think the Lloyd trade also hinted that they knew their jobs were on the line.

Good observation there, but I heard an interview with Ben Leber here on our local sports radio station (he's come back to Minnesota as a sideline analyst) and in an interview he talked about the cloud that hung around the team from day one and said that it seemed the staff knew their jobs were at risk.

It just struck me as odd that the annoyingly conservative tendencies of Spags would lead them to hiring McD. It stank of do or die. How did you feel about the previous regime overall? I thought they had a good thing going. Not everyone dug them and I get that. I think this team is definitely better off now, but for what they were running I thought DeSpags had the right people mostly in place.

I felt that the previous regime was off to a rough start to begin with. Spags and Devaney had to dismantle the roster from top to bottom in 2009 to get rid of the bad contracts, aging players, etc. So essentially that was a lost year and I don't think it is necessarily fair to grade Spags and Devaney off of the 2009 team's performance, but if someone wants to do that, who I am to say they are wrong as both of them were involved with the 2009 team.

2010, I thought, showed that Billy and Spags were sticking to their word of building through the draft with adding some talent here and there. I thought that the performance on the field showed that the talent had been improved, but at the same time I do not think the 2010 was as good as the record showed in retrospect. The Rams played an easier schedule than they did in 2011 and 2012, and had 7 wins.

2011 showed to me that things were not going as well as I thought they were in 2010. Against fairly tough competition, the Rams performance suffered. Part of that was due to issues with personnel as well as change in scheme on offense, to name a few problems. I don't think that the offense McDaniels was trying to run did not suit the personnel that the Rams had at the time nor do I think that the Rams were nearly as bad as their record was. The roster grew a bit older due to additional free agents being brought in for stop gaps(like Leber and Poppinga) while a few free agents were brought in here for what I believe to be the long haul(Mikell, Harvey Dahl).

So in summary, I think Spags and Devaney going away from their idea of building through the draft-something that I believe Kroenke is fully behind-cost them their jobs as well as the change in scheme from the West Coast Offense to what McDaniels ran last season. I do think that the roster has more talent right now thanks to Devaney and Spags and should get credit for helping set the foundation of what I think will be a successful future for the Rams.

This is soley focused on the draft, not on the FAs.

As much as I liked Devaney and Spags, they didn't get it done. Some of it's not their fault, some is. I just can't believe it's been almost a full decade since there's been a decent draft.

Like in 2009, the top guys were Stafford (not an option), Smith, Curry, Tyson Jackson, Andre Smith, and maybe Sanchez (not an option either). So either way, they were screwed.

Or in 2008, the guy they took before current starting DT Kendall Langford, John Greco in round 3. Didn't even play.

In 1 draft, this Fisher/Snead combo got 2 starters (potentially 3 more in 2013) and 4 contributors. IDK, seems kinda odd.

 

[Sum1]

You think Pettis is gone? I think he's earned his spot for sure. I honestly think he could take Gibson's spot next year. Not sure if the staff sees it that way, but I think Bradford looks for him more often than anyone not named Amendola.

There's a chance, and won't be surprised if he is gone. I actually think Gibby had done better. Pettis is just a weird player.

Pettis is under contract and Gibson isn't. If one is gone and the other isn't, Pettis will be the one to stick.

 

[Faceplant]

I think Devaney was onto something. But he didn't have the scouts (see draft results) and I think Spags let him down.

Spags... as much as I like the character of the man...

(1) Played "not to lose". Dude only knows missionary position

(2) Stuck with Loney and it failed miserably

(3) Questionable roster choices; keeping aged vets over youth

(4) Chose to NOT HAVE a QB coach with offensive system change and McDaniels. What was that? Just a horrible-horrible decision.

(5) His defense was over-rated. It failed here. It failed in New Orleans. His only success was with elite talent on that Giants team.

Pretty much exactly how I feel. Well said.

 

[Speeps]

You think Pettis is gone? I think he's earned his spot for sure. I honestly think he could take Gibson's spot next year. Not sure if the staff sees it that way, but I think Bradford looks for him more often than anyone not named Amendola.

There's a chance, and won't be surprised if he is gone. I actually think Gibby had done better. Pettis is just a weird player.

I thought I was the only one who thought Pettis was weird. Glad to see someone shares that belief. With that said, Pettis is a great redzone threat. And he did improve this year.

 

[Lesson]

I think Devaney was onto something. But he didn't have the scouts (see draft results) and I think Spags let him down.

I think you have to place blame on both. Spags was responsible for the coaching staff in place as well as the personnel due to him having final say.

Devaney was responsible for helping to supply Spags with said players.

If the draft picks are getting cut at a rapid rate, then something isn't right. Wouldn't it make sense for Spags and Devaney to be in agreement with taking a specific player instead of taking a player who would be cut sooner rather than later?

I wonder if there was any disconnect between the two of them.

 

[CGI_Ram]

I think Devaney was onto something. But he didn't have the scouts (see draft results) and I think Spags let him down.

I think you have to place blame on both. Spags was responsible for the coaching staff in place as well as the personnel due to him having final say.

Devaney was responsible for helping to supply Spags with said players.

If the draft picks are getting cut at a rapid rate, then something isn't right. Wouldn't it make sense for Spags and Devaney to be in agreement with taking a specific player instead of taking a player who would be cut sooner rather than later?

I wonder if there was any disconnect between the two of them.

Definitely both were responsible. Billy's coach. Billy's scouts.

I wonder too if there was much disagreement on players. I think we'll never know.