Fisher Doesn't Take First Round Ol

[Ramifications]

Sorry if this post is redundant, I haven't read all the threads.

With a lot of mocks showing the Rams taking LT Greg Robinson, it is time to dust off the old canard in the thread title.

1) Did he have final decision on personnel over Floyd Reese in HOU/TEN? If not, this tendency commonly attributed to Fisher may actually be a misattributed artifact of Reese's drafting tendencies?

2) He inherited future Hall of Famers Bruce Matthews and Mike Munchak, who played for nearly two decades and over a decade, respectively (EACH with ten All Pro seasons), a situation likely not only unprecedented in league history, but never to be repeated.

3) While Fisher never won a Super Bowl, and had a lot of average seasons, he had very few terrible seasons with the Oilers/Titans, where they might have been in position to take a blue chip LT. In the only three times in 16 seasons he had a top 10 pick, he (and/or Reese?) opted to fill other, more pressing needs. Twice for a QB at 1.3 (Steve McNair and Vince Young) and once for a CB a 1.6 (Adam "Pacman" Jones).

4) Most teams don't spend first round picks on interior OL (elite prospects like Cooper and Warmack are the exception that proves the rule).

5) Reportedly the Rams were prepared to take Larry Warford in the past draft if Alec Ogletree had been taken before the 1.30 pick, which would have blown up the theory right there.

 

[PhxRam]

Sorry if this post is redundant, I haven't read all the threads.

With a lot of mocks showing the Rams taking LT Greg Robinson, it is time to dust off the old canard in the thread title.

1) Did he have final decision on personnel over Floyd Reese in HOU/TEN? If not, this tendency commonly attributed to Fisher may actually be a misattributed artifact of Reese's drafting tendencies?

2) He inherited future Hall of Famers Bruce Matthews and Mike Munchak, who played for nearly two decades and over a decade, respectively (EACH with ten All Pro seasons), a situation likely not only unprecedented in league history, but never to be repeated.

3) While Fisher never won a Super Bowl, and had a lot of average seasons, he had very few terrible seasons with the Oilers/Titans, where they might have been in position to take a blue chip LT. In the only three times in 16 seasons he had a top 10 pick, he (and/or Reese?) opted to fill other, more pressing needs. Twice for a QB at 1.3 (Steve McNair and Vince Young) and once for a CB a 1.6 (Adam "Pacman" Jones).

4) Most teams don't spend first round picks on interior OL (elite prospects like Cooper and Warmack are the exception that proves the rule).

5) Reportedly the Rams were prepared to take Larry Warford in the past draft if Alec Ogletree had been taken before the 1.30 pick, which would have blown up the theory right there.

Good questions man..

Someone with alot more knowledge then myself will have to come along and answer this one.

 

[Alan]

I can't speak for everybody Ramifications but I think it's fairly evenly divided between both the will and the won't camps. Maybe the wills are winning by a little.

I myself think that prior history isn't worth that much because every season is its own story and because of the changing nature of the NFL itself. Passing is more important which means QBs are more important which means LT are more important.

 

[Ramifications]

Who do you like with the first round picks (factor in trade down/s if you think they happen)?

BTW, that is a good and interesting theory, don't think I have heard that before. Not sure I agree, but appreciate the response. For one thing, if they view Robinson as a future Pro Bowler who could play RT or guard, and be the heir apparent for Jake Long (who has missed more time in the past few years than when he came up in MIA), I don't see them not taking him because they don't have a great LG at the moment. Maybe they draft one this year or next? Maybe what happens with Saffold will partly dictate the direction they take with OL in the draft? Maybe Barret Jones (who could play anywhere in the interior) turns out to be an outstanding guard?

I do like Watkins a lot, but sometimes WRs only touch the ball 3-4 times a game (though certainly Watkins is a different animal than any WR currently on the roster, a true #1 WR, and could be targeted a lot more often, and could also influence coverages in a way that indirectly helps other WRs and even the RB on every play) , and Robinson (or Matthews) would more directly impact every offensive play. This is why on most teams, the hierarchy of positions according to importance. is probably something like QB, LT, DE (not RB, RT or guard on offense, or safety, LB and generally DT on defense - which kind of narrows it down positionally... elite WR and CB prospects maybe somewhere in between these groups?).

I think either Robinson or Watkins could help Bradford a lot. Fisher in an interview the day after the season ended talked about how the offense needs to score more (they probably would have if their starting QB hadn't missed more than half the season), which is why I think it will be a priority and point of emphasis inthis draft. The defense is clearly further along than the offense, and Fisher and Snead have spent two of the three first rounders on defense since 2012 (though admittedly moving up and trading away a second to secure Tavon Austin).

As has been pointed out a lot, to be more competitive in the NFC West, we need more Pro Bowlers like SEA and SF, and even ARI for that matter. Whether it is Robinson or Watkins (or some other player/position - though Clowney seems like a luxury we can't afford with already probably the best DE tandem in the league and far more pressing issues elsewhere that could be filled with blue chip, potentially elite talents at more needed positions that WON'T represent poitional reaches), if the scouts, coaches and front office thinks one is more likely to be a future serial Pro Bowler, that is who I hope they get, I'm not wedded or chained to any particular positions. But there do seem to be some historical positional value constraints in play through process of elimination, Sherlock Holmes-like (won't take a FB or TE at 1.2, etc.).

 

[RamFan503]

I agree with Alan that all bets are off. Not only does the NFL morph but teams have different needs at different times and if there are not any blue chip OLmen when your first pick comes up, you are not likely to take one. This season, we definitely need to address the Oline. Do they view any of the top prospects as difference makers? I don't know. But if they do, I find it hard to believe they wouldn't take one just because Fisher's history says he hasn't before.

 

[Ramifications]

I can't speak for everybody Ramifications but I think it's fairly evenly divided between both the will and the won't camps. Maybe the wills are winning by a little.

I myself think that prior history isn't worth that much because every season is its own story and because of the changing nature of the NFL itself. Passing is more important which means QBs are more important which means LT are more important.

I agree, and good points.

Another example is TEN LT Michael Roos who got taken around #40 overall, and has worked out very well. That just happened to be where they had a pick that year where he was presumably a good BPA/team need intersection. What if they didn't have that pick, but happened to have one at 1.30. If they determined Roos was the best pick there, I have to think they would have drafted him THERE instead, I don't think Fisher has a rigid, internally hardwired heuristic to never take OL in the first round (as is commonly attributed to him). In other words, I just think there was a lot of previous happenstance (lack of opportunity with so few high picks and need with OL like Matthews and Munchak).

A quick word about BPA, without devoting a thread to it for such an obvious point. Absolutely teams have gotten into trouble with positional reaches (Jason Smith, for instance). But there are limits. If by coincidence QB is the BPA at your first round pick 10 years in a row, you don't get a first round QB for a decade straight.

 

[Alan]

We'll have to have a talk about Jason Smith sometime because I disagree that he was a reach. I remember that draft very well too. But that's for another time.

 

[RamFan503]

We'll have to have a talk about Jason Smith sometime because I disagree that he was a reach. I remember that draft very well too. But that's for another time.

Though I think comparing him to current O-linemen doesn't really hold water in that I'm not aware of any of them that so recently made the switch from TE to tackle.

 

[brokeu91]

Ramifications is right, Fisher hasn't take first round OL in the past, but this year might be different. First, we could have 2-3 holes to fill on the OL; depending on Jake Long coming back and Saffold resigning. Plus one of his favorite players son is in prime position to be taken with our first first round pick. Fisher has shown that he likes to take children of players he knew (either played with or coached). This could be one of those instances.

Plus this is the first time he partnered with Snead. Snead may have a much different idea about drafting OL.

 

[Thordaddy]

Sounds like someone is weary of hearing dogma from another board where we know the alpha poster insists Fisher just doesn't draft o-line in the first,welcome, well reasoned post

 

[Ramifications]

Sounds like someone is weary of hearing dogma from another board where we know the alpha poster insists Fisher just doesn't draft o-line in the first,welcome, well reasoned post

Thanks, yeah, I get this a lot at another site, too. I spent my first day here looking forward to alternative insights on a few of my "favorite" Rams-related conceptual pet peeves. I already like the diversity of opinions here. Some of the other sites are so BINARY and non-multivalent, and locked in and entrenched to the point of rigor mortis.

 

[Thordaddy]

Ah the BINARY word ,that's another indication where you are a refugee from

 

[Alan]

RamFan503 noting the lack of commonality:
Though I think comparing him to current O-linemen doesn't really hold water in that I'm not aware of any of them that so recently made the switch from TE to tackle.

We should have drafted Aaron Curry instead. :lol:

 

[Rams and Gators]

Our current O line:
Hooey/Jones/Barnes/Dahl/Barksdale

I don't mind if we don't spend a first round pick on the OL but if we walk into next season with that as our O line I know what we'll be using a first round pick on next year.

 

[tonyl711]

I don't think they will go Oline in the first, but it wouldn't shock me if they did. I really doubt that Fisher has it in his mind that he will never go Oline in the first, im sure it depends on the team he has, is Oline a big enough need to take one that high? is there an Olineman he thinks is worth that pick? does he see an Olineman that he believes will go a little later that he sees promise in?

 

[F. Mulder]

My gut is that they don't go WR early. I hope they go top CB/OL somewhere early and look at Safety/LB in the middle and/or my favorite player BPA.:cheese:

 

[Yamahopper]

Our current O line:
Hooey/Jones/Barnes/Dahl/Barksdale

I don't mind if we don't spend a first round pick on the OL but if we walk into next season with that as our O line I know what we'll be using a first round pick on next year.

That's a sobering thought first thing in the morning. Geez.

 

[BonifayRam]

4) Most teams don't spend first round picks on interior OL (elite prospects like Cooper and Warmack are the exception that proves the rule).

Went back to 2005 on Most Teams....here's a list of the interior OL'ers selected in the first rounds.
Jon Cooper
Chance Warmack
Kyle Long
Travis Frederick
Mike Pouncey
DeCastro
Kevin Zeitler
Alex Mack
Watkins
James Carpenter
Mike Iupati
Eric wood
Albert Brandon
Ben Grubbs
Nick Mangold
Daven Joesph
Chris Spencer
Logan Manikins

About 1/4 of these guys were playing after the regular season was over. These interior OL'ers were selected by some of these teams...New England, Seattle, San Francisco, KC Chiefs & Philadelphia.