-X-
Medium-sized Lebowski
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 35,576
- Name
- The Dude
![Mood: A1 LA1](/data/addonflare/moods/uploads/122.png?1586521391)
I'm rounding up.We drafted Mannion in 2015..what you talkin, about WILLIS!:boxing:
I'm rounding up.We drafted Mannion in 2015..what you talkin, about WILLIS!:boxing:
Thanks for the RODcast idea.I wish I knew.
He's an X factor, because nobody, other than the coaching staff, really knows.
He has an NFL arm. I think we all know that.
Does he have the NFL acumen? Anticipation, accuracy? I don't know.
However, I disagree with your assessment of Keenum's ability to flourish in a system like that (with receivers who can exploit man coverage)
Fair enough. I disagree, but there's no point in rehashing where we differ on those things.He throws late on deep throws far too often for my liking. And Mannion was not a good scrambler in college. There is no reason to think he developed the instinct, skill, and agility to do it in the pros where the pass rush will be much harder to deal with.
Because everybody looks good in college, m'man. Everybody.
Fair enough. I disagree, but there's no point in rehashing where we differ on those things.
So you're sold on the QBs in this class being able to do all the things you want on the big stage?
Because everybody looks good in college, m'man. Everybody.
I'd prefer not to get into semantics about that QB class, so I'll just yield to your judgement of how it panned out.
But I subtly highlighted the part that worries me the most.
Yes, I realize we have Gurley and Austin and a developing line.
K. I can accept that.I'm not worried about that. I think there's an argument that we ruined Bradford. But this is a different team. OL appears to be a much better unit, we have a really good running game, and a strong defense (likely). This is a good situation for a young QB. It's a far cry from the 2009 Rams or Expansion Browns.
I believe we need to address both this year. Early and often.K. I can accept that.
But I don't think we're set up for a new QB until we get better targets.
K. I can accept that.
But I don't think we're set up for a new QB until we get better targets.
If they can do that, I'll be stoked. But I honestly believe they'll have to sacrifice quality in one area or the other.I believe we need to address both this year. Early and often.
Yes. But it's gonna take much more than that (IMO) to move up 12 spots in the draft.Would you be happy if we parted with our first and one second, and maybe a first next year, to move up for Goff? And then used our other second for Hunter Henry. And then scooped Anquan Boldin short term? Then suddenly we have Goff with Gurley. And Britt, Boldin, Tavon, and Henry catching Goffs passes. Id be happy with that for now.
Would you be happy if we parted with our first and one second, and maybe a first next year, to move up for Goff? And then used our other second for Hunter Henry. And then scooped Anquan Boldin short term? Then suddenly we have Goff with Gurley. And Britt, Boldin, Tavon, and Henry catching Goffs passes. Id be happy with that for now.
Snead was summing up a lengthy diatribe on points scored and quarterbacks' records when their teams score points, saying the Rams have “done a lot of studies ... about quarterbacks and what makes quarterbacks successful.”
“There's been 21 QBs since 2012 that have started 45 or more games. So if their team gives up 25 or more points, there's only one of those QBs who has actually got a winning record, and it's just over .500,” Snead said. “I'll let you guys do the research to figure that out. If your team gives up 17 or less than 17 points, all 21 of those guys have winning records. Now you get into a couple categories, 21 to 24 points, that you give up, 11 of those quarterbacks have winning records and 10 have losing records. If you give up 17 to 20 points, all but three of the QBs have winning records. So to win in this league, it's a direct correlation to how many points you're giving up.”
Is this accurate? Well, yes, technically it is accurate! With nothing else to do on a Saturday but compile QB WINZ I found Snead is pretty spot on.
Here's an issue I have with Snead's remarks above ; There are 12 teams that made the playoffs last season. Combined, they averaged scoring 25.18 points per game regardless of what we know about their defensive efficiency. It can't just be about how many points your defense gives up; there has to be a balance. Your offense has to be highly efficient at scoring and logic tells me a "great" QB is going to get your there better than an "average" QB. To close, if the Rams were to play the Steelers, and Greg Williams was going to have to prepare to face Ben Rothlisberger or his back-up , what do you think his preference would be?
Totally agree. There will be some offenses that will make it very hard for your defense to hold them to 17 points. Conversely there will be some defenses that will make a mediocre QB struggle to reach 17 points. That is what you get in the playoffs and the Rams need to be prepared for a team with a great defense, or offense, or both.
Denver did it this year with an average offense because their defense was dominant, but after. 1 season they lose Trevathan, Jackson, another good player and their elite DE wants QB money. I totally dominant unit is difficult to keep in tact for too many years. If the Rams defense reaches elite status how long will it last? And, if they do, they better have a good enough QB to get the job done because these Windows can close fast.