Observations from Rams' sixth OTA/Wagoner

  • 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.

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
A team mate was expecting him to be productive from day 1, to suggest that it was wrong for fans to also expect that is questionable.

Whether Fisher and Snead expected that is a different matter.

Jackson just wanted some pressure taken off him. To expect him to come in after being at app state and just being productive from day imo was just not going to happen. Didnt have a lot of experience in football, as much as they screamed project i hope no one thoght he was going to be real productive out the gate. i expected what i seen. Put him in certain situations
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,243
Name
Tim
Exactly, who else did they have? That's why I don't buy the 3 year project story line. If we had Andre Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald or someone else who's very good but in the twilight of their careers who you could afford to bring a Quick along slowly then it makes sense. Instead we have a QB who's best WR was Danny Amendola and who believes that throwing a contested pass is one of the worst things you can do because 90% of the time you'll lose out.
So you think he should have been starting and producing his rookie year? I was certainly hopeful but after seeing what I did in 2012 I was certain it would take at least until 2014 for him to be playing without thinking too much. He was just too raw
 

ZigZagRam

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
1,846
Wouldn't it be a major disappointment if the 33 overall pick doesn't see the field enough in year 3 to put up 40 catches and 600 yards?

Yes. But that's the risk they took.

Barring a major surprise, I find it hard to believe that he's not going to be seen as somewhat of a disappointment after this season. I don't think they bring in Kenny Britt if they think Quick can contribute as a full-time starter.
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
Yes. But that's the risk they took.

Barring a major surprise, I find it hard to believe that he's not going to be seen as somewhat of a disappointment after this season. I don't think they bring in Kenny Britt if they think Quick can contribute as a full-time starter.
imo Britt was just a cheap flier. its not like they brought in a proven reciver. The plan was to have kenny push Quick and hopefuly help him in the process
 

ZigZagRam

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
1,846
I agree, but as long as Britt makes the team, he's taking reps away from Brian Quick. Can't imagine those are going to be your two outside receivers very often.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
5,808
So you think he should have been starting and producing his rookie year? I was certainly hopeful but after seeing what I did in 2012 I was certain it would take at least until 2014 for him to be playing without thinking too much. He was just too raw

I think they should have provided Sam with a pro ready WR and if they genuinely believed that Quick wasn't that guy then it was a poor decision which has hurt his development.
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
I agree, but as long as Britt makes the team, he's taking reps away from Brian Quick. Can't imagine those are going to be your two outside receivers very often.

Maybe at least the first 4 weeks i could see it. you havent heard much about givens. i could see Britt and Quick on outside and Austin in slot. Also take into account that Britt has a history of drops so i could see Quick getting more chances as the year progresses and it will be on Quick to take advantage. The more Quick proves hes reliable the more he will play imo
 

ZigZagRam

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
1,846
Could be, but he's certainly had drop issues of his own.

I just see them playing the same role in this offense, sharing reps, especially when Bailey gets back.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
5,808
At a spot where they drafted him OK I guess for those who feel that is a starting point to judge a guy I will concede that he was the 1st pick of the second round. Do you have a list or would you like to research how many WRs that came from div 2 and were taken that high and played 9 games with their second round QB were highly productive in their second year?

I'm going to go out on a limb as say that Quick is the only one ever in that situation so he is the baseline.

And for what it is worth I felt like it was a stretch going for him at 33 so I don't buy in to that he was the number X pick he should be doing more line.

How many times was quick open in the deep dig and Clemens never threw the ball? Most of what Bailey got was short or intermediate passes and do you consider playing at West Virginia on the same level as playing at Appalachian State? Bailey is obviously more polished coming out than Quick was, but apparently no more mature based on his upcoming suspension.

As for a time limit on Quick I will go with it will be the length of his rookie contract

I'd of loved to have seen Sam play with Quick again, the last time he threw to him he had a very similar look to the playbook gif, the "you have to be shitting me" look, would be interesting how much it effected his trust in him.
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
Could be, but he's certainly had drop issues of his own.

I just see them playing the same role in this offense, sharing reps, especially when Bailey gets back.

a little he only had 2 drops last year. after the carolina game he caught all the catchable balls. i know it was limited . But if he shows he reliable in those 4 weeks and everything is going well i would think Bailey would get limited reps. Also im not totaly sold on Britt either we havent even put pads on yet
 

FRO

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
5,308
If Britt outplays Quick, I could see Quick being the healthy scratch come game days once Bailey comes back. I know people aren't Pettis fans, and I don't think he is a starting caliber WR, but I see more value in him than Quick at this point.
 

FRO

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
5,308
a little he only had 2 drops last year. after the carolina game he caught all the catchable balls. i know it was limited . But if he shows he reliable in those 4 weeks and everything is going well i would think Bailey would get limited reps. Also im not totaly sold on Britt either we havent even put pads on yet
Just curious why you are sold on Quick and not Britt? I'm not being a butthole I just want to know what you see that I'm missing. Personally I'm not sold on either. I'm hopeful one if not both make it big, but I'm going to have to see it to believe it.
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
But would those same people express concerns about the team scoring points? I have my doubts.
They'd certainly have their doubts about the offense if they thought Robinson was the best talent.

And there might be some who then leap to the assumption that these doubts are just sour grapes that the team didn't do it their way. I just don't see Wagoner as the type to do that. He's calling it as he sees it.
 

FRO

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
5,308
They'd certainly have their doubts about the offense if they thought Robinson was the best talent.

And there might be some who then leap to the assumption that these doubts are just sour grapes that the team didn't do it their way. I just don't see Wagoner as the type to do that. He's calling it as he sees it.
It's clear the offensive line needed a LG to solidify them. Robinson was third on my list of wants at 2, but I'm not at all complaining we got him. I understand fully the pick. It's just been so long since we have had a quality starting WR and we had a very good once sitting there for us. But that's life and hopefully one of these WRs emerge. We have some that are capable of doing nice things.
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
Just curious why you are sold on Quick and not Britt? I'm not being a butthole I just want to know what you see that I'm missing. Personally I'm not sold on either. I'm hopeful one if not both make it big, but I'm going to have to see it to believe it.

im not sold on Quick either but i have faith that he puts it together. as farr as Britt the knees scare me. as farr as Quick i think h would have had better stats if Bradford got hurt. He was open a lot more then he was targeted. imo he was getting open the easiest the second half of the season. people say that they dont buy it because Bailey did fine. But i think that was part of the the plan to get him involved and see what they had in him. im starting to really belive it because i just read a article about pettis and he said that they wanted to get the youngsters involved at the end of season. Quick got his chance vs carolina and had mixed results.After that they played him sparingly and he produced when called on. im not saying hes going to become all pro over night but i feel hes close to bing the receicer they thought ne would be.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
5,808
im not sold on Quick either but i have faith that he puts it together. as farr as Britt the knees scare me. as farr as Quick i think h would have had better stats if Bradford got hurt. He was open a lot more then he was targeted. imo he was getting open the easiest the second half of the season. people say that they dont buy it because Bailey did fine. But i think that was part of the the plan to get him involved and see what they had in him. im starting to really belive it because i just read a article about pettis and he said that they wanted to get the youngsters involved at the end of season. Quick got his chance vs carolina and had mixed results.After that they played him sparingly and he produced when called on. im not saying hes going to become all pro over night but i feel hes close to bing the receicer they thought ne would be.

Something I'm curious about, Quick was apparently getting open a lot but wasn't thrown to because Clemens can't throw deep or whatever, surely DCs knew this? Wasn't there a case of "right if Quick gets open deep fair enough they aren't going to throw to him, let's put our best guys on taking away the short stuff" thus making it easier for Quick to get open?
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,243
Name
Tim
I'd of loved to have seen Sam play with Quick again, the last time he threw to him he had a very similar look to the playbook gif, the "you have to be crapping me" look, would be interesting how much it effected his trust in him.
Are you talking about the throw to the end zone against Carolina? I don't recall if that was the last throw it would have been a real nice play and could have been completed. I thought they were having a nice year and making progress from week to week. Sam hit Quick on that deep dig a couple of times right in stride and they looked great. I'm interested to see how the addition of Britt and the loss of Bailey for the first 4 weeks will change things. I think they will be a much better run team and also be better at protecting Sam IF Long is back to form.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,243
Name
Tim
I think they should have provided Sam with a pro ready WR and if they genuinely believed that Quick wasn't that guy then it was a poor decision which has hurt his development.
They gave the impression they were trying that with scrubs like Mike Sims and Smith but I thought they missed the boat or could not convince Boldin to come into a rebuild situation. He has been the only quality WR on the market that was in range. VJ was just too expensive
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
Something I'm curious about, Quick was apparently getting open a lot but wasn't thrown to because Clemens can't throw deep or whatever, surely DCs knew this? Wasn't there a case of "right if Quick gets open deep fair enough they aren't going to throw to him, let's put our best guys on taking away the short stuff" thus making it easier for Quick to get open?

it wasnt just deep im talking period. imo it seemed Clemens always went to his first read or dumped it off.
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
Something I'm curious about, Quick was apparently getting open a lot but wasn't thrown to because Clemens can't throw deep or whatever, surely DCs knew this? Wasn't there a case of "right if Quick gets open deep fair enough they aren't going to throw to him, let's put our best guys on taking away the short stuff" thus making it easier for Quick to get open?

also i think thats bull to say clemens cant throw the deep ballhe did throw it deep vs colts to Austin