1. 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.

Once-in-a-lifetime prospect? Scouts break down Clowney

Discussion in 'RAMS - NFL TALK' started by Ramifications, Feb 5, 2014.

  1. Ramifications

    Ramifications Guest

    Interesting article. It noted that the ability to draw extra attention and double teams is an advantage to defenses. No doubt. To me, the definition of a great player like Reggie White (if we are talking about generational, once in a lifetime talensts) is to beat double teams and still make plays. Are there any players in the Hall of Fame that made it on the basis of - drew a lot of double teams? But maybe he was playing hurt and that impacted his game more than some are accounting for.


    I trust Fisher and Snead, so if he is the pick at 1.2 (or 1.4 after a trade down), than I am completely on board. The Giants rode the NASCAR four DE nickel scheme to two Super Bowls, so there are worse things than having three great DEs. Long may no longer be great, he had a drop off in 2013 (though he may have been hurt also and could rebound, he is only 28-29, he did get a lot of pressures). It would be expensive to keep all three, but Quinn techinically doesn't need to be extended until 2016, and by the time Clowney would need to be extended (2019?), Long would be like 33-34?

    Quinn and Clowney, IF he is cracked up to what he is supposed to be, would have a chance to be a historically good DE tandem, maybe the best ever. They could be duelling starting All Pros for half a decade or more. We almost beat SEA at home with a blue print of pressure/containment from the DEs, and this would be effective against Wilson and Kaep, the starting QBs for our main two divisional rivals. While we do need a starting caliber safety next to McDonald and an upgraded starter or nickel CB, the best DL in the league would make a lot of problems go away in the secondary.

    Like a lot of people, I questioned the logic of taking a DE when it is our strongest position, but maybe the sword that cuts through that tangled Gordian knot of a problem is taking the long perspective. Some arguing the merits for an OL or a WR (I can see the rationale for both) want one NOW NOW NOW!!! :^) But roster building and draft picks have repercussions beyond this year, so taking the long perspective seems best. If we take Clowney, Robinson/Matthews or Watkins, we will have them for more than a year. If we take Clowney, there may not be an OL as good as Robinson or WR as good as Watkins NEXT year, this is true. But there also won't be a DE like Clowney (prospects like Peppers and Mario Williams historically go very high). In 2013, we could have gotten a very good WR in Patterson at the end of the first, and Warford (guard, not a LT, but Robinson might play there a few years) in the second (or third with a trade up?). Calvin Johnson went 1.2, A.J Green 1.4 and Julio Jones 1.6, but Watkins probably isn't at their level as a prospect. Demaryius Thomas and Dez Bryant went in the twenties in their draft, and they are Pro Bowl caliber. Same with Percy Harvin, signed to a top 5 contract by SEA. Josh Gordon cost a second round pick (supplemental). Kennan Allen went in the third.

    It is true, that if Bradford has a torn ACL in game one, he may not get another chance. If the Rams go 1-16, Fisher and Snead may be done. But I don't think either is going to happen, and I don't think Fisher and Snead seem like the kind of personalities to mak conservative decisions made out of fear in the short term, they are gamblers (the good kind) that balance talent with calculated risk (Ogletree).

    Of course, if they trade down to 1.4-1.6-1.8, than it is probably a moot point, and that could mean an OL or WR?

    Some argue that we are a few players away on defense from being elite, which may be true, Clowney could be one of them (also safety, CB, OLB, DT - starters or depth). But the same could go for offense. We would like to think we have our franchise QB (made the RGIII trade possible), Stacy was a top 5 RB in the second half of the season, Cook could have upside at TE, Austin and Bailey have a ton of upside at WR, Quick and Givens could be effective as WR3/WR4 if the other pieces of the puzzle fall into place and they aren't the focal point. Yes, the OL has holes, but Long had a strong season before the late injury (if Clowney becomes a super star for a decade, we may regret getting an OL because Long needed to be covered for a few games - OOF!), Barksdale looks like a keeper, we have a few candidates for center and guard even if Saffold moves on like Jim Thomas expects, and the draft can plug in a few more OL.

    While there may happenstance elements to Fisher's history (did he control the draft or Reese? inheriting Matthews and Munchak, etc.), it has been his MO to not take OL in the first. And as pointed out earlier (here or another board?), Fisher has reportedly never taken a guard before the fifth round (unless you count fourth rounder Jones, who played center his last year and some think was drafted to play there?).
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 5, 2014
  2. Thread Status: You only have permission to view the first post in this thread.