Draft Order

  • 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.

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,213
Name
Tim
Which leads me back to the Cutler conversation. Unless some unforeseen QB drops in the draft, I think the best way to go is BPA at 10 or trade down to get some picks back and go after a legitimate veteran starter. FA, trade, whatever. I'd much rather spend resources on a guy that you know what we're going to get. Sure, Cutler isn't Peyton but if we know we can get a guy who will deliver an 85-90 rating and continue to build up the rest of the team, I'd much rather do that than overspend to get a crapshoot.
What has Cutler ever won to make him look like a viable candidate? No way in hell I would take on that contract. I don't think I would want him if they paid him to play for us.
 

Athos

Legend
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
5,933
I don't think I would want him if they paid him to play for us.

That's just ignorant. Cutler at worst is average, which is significantly better than the slop we've had at QB besides Sam. And any deal we have with Cutler would be a 2 year bridge point because there aren't any QBs that will fall to us that should start right away barring a miracle with Winston both in draft and off the field checks.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,213
Name
Tim
That's just ignorant. Cutler at worst is average, which is significantly better than the slop we've had at QB besides Sam. And any deal we have with Cutler would be a 2 year bridge point because there aren't any QBs that will fall to us that should start right away barring a miracle with Winston both in draft and off the field checks.
Well let's start by it is no more ignorant than your response. You can take that shit to some other site.

Cutler has been a coach killer and no better than Hill was this year. He arguably had better weapons in Chicago that we have in StL and would be in a new offense so probably his 3rd in 4 years. Could he have a decent year, possibly he could also be the nail in Fisher's coffin. No thanks
 

Athos

Legend
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
5,933
In Denver he ushered out McDaniels

McDaniels is a scummy POS who wanted off the Rams at the close of the season so he could ride the coattails of Billicheat to a Super Bowl. I don't blame anyone for wanting that sissified prick out of town, not that I believe he ushered McDaniels out.

Bears were 5-11 this year

With statistically, one of, if not THE worst defense in the NFL.
 

Prime Time

PT
Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
20,922
Name
Peter
That's just ignorant.

Well let's start by it is no more ignorant than your response. You can take that crap to some other site.

The word "ignorant" just means that someone doesn't know something. There's lots of things in this world I'm ignorant about(which is something many here would attest to). :sneaky: That being said, the word "ignorant" used against someone can be taken as an insult so let's ease off on using that word here. Thanks.
 

moklerman

Warner-phile
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
2,185
What has Cutler ever won to make him look like a viable candidate? No way in hell I would take on that contract. I don't think I would want him if they paid him to play for us.
Cutler hasn't won anything significant but that doesn't mean he isn't an improvement over what the Rams have had at QB the last couple of years.

I don't think he's been in the right system either. As QB friendly as I assume Trestman's system is, it hasn't been a perfect match for Cutler. Not sure what the problem is but Cutler just hasn't looked comfortable.

That being said, Cutler did account for 30 TD's this year and completed 66% of his passes. No way does Hill's production compare to that.

I agree that Cutler would have to work on reducing his turnovers but I think that's a far more attainable goal than Hill's arm getting better. Which I think this offense really needs. The simple threat of throwing the ball deep would open things up. With Cutler, at least defenses would have to consider Austin/Britt/Givens getting over the top.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,213
Name
Tim
Cutler hasn't won anything significant but that doesn't mean he isn't an improvement over what the Rams have had at QB the last couple of years.

I don't think he's been in the right system either. As QB friendly as I assume Trestman's system is, it hasn't been a perfect match for Cutler. Not sure what the problem is but Cutler just hasn't looked comfortable.

That being said, Cutler did account for 30 TD's this year and completed 66% of his passes. No way does Hill's production compare to that.

I agree that Cutler would have to work on reducing his turnovers but I think that's a far more attainable goal than Hill's arm getting better. Which I think this offense really needs. The simple threat of throwing the ball deep would open things up. With Cutler, at least defenses would have to consider Austin/Britt/Givens getting over the top.
The other thing I don't know about is how well he would take to the possibility of sitting behind Sam. I don't know if Bradford will be able to be ready by the time the season starts but can they have $20M tied up in QB money? I'm presuming Bradford would be ok with re-working his deal with an eye toward extending for a couple of years. So Bradford and Cutler fight it out for starter and they pick Hundley as the guy to groom? I just don't see it. I can't believe Fisher and Snead are interested in pinning their hopes on Cutler over Bradford even if Sam misses the first 3 or 4 games to start the year.
 

FRO

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
5,308
I would take Cutler if that contract wasn't attached to him. That being said I see the Bears bringing him back next year and pairing him with Shanahan again. There are no viable QB options out there for them that would be an upgrade.
 

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,047
We don't need to trade to 2. The likelihood of Mariota and Winston going 1 and 2 at this point are small. There's a ton of prospects that could slot in above either one.

Agreed on Winston, I think he will slide.

But not Mariota. He will grade out as an elite prospect and go 1 overall IMO.
 

Buckwheat

UDFA
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
10
Name
JP
I'm all for fixing the OLine, but what if Beasley is sitting there. He's been compared to Von Miller.
 

moklerman

Warner-phile
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
2,185
The other thing I don't know about is how well he would take to the possibility of sitting behind Sam. I don't know if Bradford will be able to be ready by the time the season starts but can they have $20M tied up in QB money? I'm presuming Bradford would be ok with re-working his deal with an eye toward extending for a couple of years. So Bradford and Cutler fight it out for starter and they pick Hundley as the guy to groom? I just don't see it. I can't believe Fisher and Snead are interested in pinning their hopes on Cutler over Bradford even if Sam misses the first 3 or 4 games to start the year.
No, I think in this hypothetical they have to cut ties with Bradford. That would be the whole point. Cutler isn't coming in to prove himself or fight for a job, he's coming in to start 16 games and give the Rams a certain level of production. His contract is big but the Rams would be paying for stability at the QB spot.

It's more than most would want to pay for Cutler I'm guessing but I'd rather pay a little too much and have a QB than save some money and have to watch Scott Covington again.