Rams seem serious about Case Keenum as starting quarterback

[Riverumbbq]

I agree. I kind of refuted this argument on a different thread, saying that a few receivers, more experience on the Oline and Gurley from day 1 probably doesn't add up to 6.25 more points per game. That is a touchdown a week. I don't think Keenum could consistently pull that off even with Megatron and Colston in their prime.

Really ?, … I don't get that. Pretty pessimistic thinking. What you have described is almost a complete transformation of the offense in a one year time span, and you feel that Keenum will be responsible for little to no improvement regardless of an improved OL, a top young RB, and say … two new receivers (WR, TE) for 2016 ? If this was 2015, an increase of 4 points per game would have given us a 10 - 6 record, and that's not considering that Foles started the season and Gurley did not, forget that we basically began with an all-rookie OL and a TE who dropped half his potential receptions. Oh yeah, all those OL & defensive injuries too.

I'll eat this thread if we can't do better than another 4 points per game for our offense this next season. And if our defense can't also shave 2.25 points per game by replacing an injured Chris Long, Gaines, Ogletree, Quinn, etc., plus replacing Laurinaitis this season, i'll buy you a case of beer. Together, that's a 6.25 average point spread increase for the Rams over the course of the regular season, and you don't even have to bet me. Now, if we draft a QB instead of the receivers, the deal is off. :baghead:

 

[Merlin]

Could we improve on Keenum? Of course. No question. I don't think he's the answer. I've only maintained that he's capable of leading this offense to wins with the help of the defense, a stout ground game, and at least ONE receiver who can consistently win one-on-one battles. I really only think we're a very good receiver away from giving our offense the boost it needs to let our defense pin its ears back and dominate. There's nothing wrong with winning with defense. Unless the Rams move up to Wentz AND Wentz is the next great QB of our era, then I'm okay with improving the offense around the QB and getting the QB later. That's all.

I have a similar take on Keenum, and what I call that is he's the "bridge" QB for the kid they're gonna bring in. Once the kid takes the job away, it's his plain and simple. If Case plays lights out, then he keeps the job and it's a good place to be.

Even Mannion isn't really forgotten about in my mind. I think the guy could be a solid starter IF he works his butt off. But just like with Keenum he's not a high talent guy so I'm not gonna look at him as an answer until he shows me something.

If the Rams take Lynch, then Case has at least a year as the guy if he beats out Mannion. If they move up and take Goff, Case is gonna have a battle on his hands from day one. What will really be crazy is if they wait and then get a guy like Doughty in round 3 or so. Most of those guys mean Case is probably still the starter next year, but there are a couple who have done enough in college where they might surprise and give him a run in camp.

Again, though, I'm with you on Case. I like some of the stuff he brings this team as a QB and nothing would make me happier than to see him hold onto the job through kickin @$$.

 

[fancents86]

I'm fine with Keenum, but I would try and get Glennon from Tampa. Like someone stated before this is a really weak draft class for qb's, next year is supposed to be a draft class of badass qb's. No need to break the bank (the draft bank) for someone who will more than likely sit on the bench this year and maybe a few. I say we collect weapons this draft.

 

[RAMSinLA]

I don't know why but I like him. Case is tough and the Rams need tough right now.

 

[Fatbot]

Look at how Steve Young did in Tampa

I think the big lesson of that was the effect of the west coast offense scheme on Young's career.

 

[Fatbot]

Together, that's a 6.25 average point spread increase for the Rams over the course of the regular season...

In all the fun analyzing the offense/defense points improvements don't forget that includes the huge x-factor known as turnovers. The Rams went from minus-23 net turnover points in 2014 to plus-34 last season --7th best -- an improvement of 57 points or 3.5 points per game right there. No way to know if that's going to get better again or regress.

 

[Riverumbbq]

In all the fun analyzing the offense/defense points improvements don't forget that includes the huge x-factor known as turnovers. The Rams went from minus-23 net turnover points in 2014 to plus-34 last season --7th best -- an improvement of 57 points or 3.5 points per game right there. No way to know if that's going to get better again or regress.

Well, … Cook lost 1 fumble, Foles lost two & Mason lost another. Cook is gone, Foles is now the back-up, and Mason is likely to be suspended, so maybe our odds just got better.

 

[jrry32]

I agree. I kind of refuted this argument on a different thread, saying that a few receivers, more experience on the Oline and Gurley from day 1 probably doesn't add up to 6.25 more points per game. That is a touchdown a week. I don't think Keenum could consistently pull that off even with Megatron and Colston in their prime.

You're a smart man.

 

[nighttrain]

I am a big advocate of doing so, but I can't say whether or not I expect it. I just hope that they think the same as me on the QB issue. On a side note the Rams were at Connor Cooks pro day at MSU. I think I even saw Fisher in the background. I am not a Cook guy but I could see Fisher picking him.

Edit: Just read that the Rams, Browns, and 49ers all interviewed him in East Lansing at the Pro day.

then all we have to do is make a trade with Dallas to get either Goff, Wentz or Cook
train

 

[maddogmrb]

I have to think that the Rams could have won 9+ games if Keenum started the entire season. Add some weapons, get the line some more cohesion and I could see them winning 11 games next season with CK at the helm. I am always an optimist this time of year though.....

Additionally, remember the extremely conservative play calling by the coaching staff. Keenum had to run the plays called by the staff ... he didn't have the option to just go out and gunsling it. Hopefully, this year Fisher will allow them to open up some more and Keenum will do much better with a more aggressive offensive scheme.

 

[Riverumbbq]

I don't mind another drinking buddy, even if he lives 2000 miles away. It will be kinda fun calling some store across the country explaining how I lost a bet and asking if they will take my credit card for a case of beer. But lets hold on here, I haven't lost yet.

 

[Ramhusker]

I get the feeling we are not trading up for a QB. The Rams will go BPA at 15. Cook will probably be there in the 2nd and he might end up being a steal there. Keenum is a stop gap that Fisher is happy to use this year, especially if he lands guys like Boyd and Hunter in the draft. I'm thinking we are going to be forced to be patient at the QB position. I'm not so sure Foles goes anywhere this year if we can't trade him. Of course, if a QB is drafted, something has to give. The Case Keenum project could work better than our wildest expectations though. It's happened before you know.

 

[TK42-RAM]

Keenum is the bridge QB for the rookie, plain and simple.

Who that rookie will be is what is important. Will they move up for Goff? I think Wentz requires 1 overall which will not happen, but the Rams could move to the 6 range much easier. Will they wait at 15 for Lynch and take him if he's there, or otherwise get a WR? Getting a WR includes, btw, a slight move down to ensure value, but they could also just take Doctson there I think and get reasonable value.

Or will they target QB at round 2. And if so who would that be? Prescott has to figure in there, he is a very good fit for the Rams but for him to get past that gauntlet of the Jets, Broncos, etc plus teams moving back into round 2 ahead of the Rams to take him is a threat. Cook is also in play in round 2 for the Rams, I think that is the spot the Rams see value with him, no way they take him at 15 unless they give in to desperation.

If it gets to round 3 with the Rams not having a QB there are only three guys I like there and beyond: Doughty, Hogan, and Allen. And at that point they are entering the range where they have no recourse but to reach for one. This is why I think they get 'er done in the first two rounds at a minimum.

I don't mind Prescott either from what I've seen -- mature good football IQ , blotted his playbook by being caught dui recently but if we decide to go a QB in round 2 I won't be disappointed with Prescott.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Really ?, … I don't get that. Pretty pessimistic thinking. What you have described is almost a complete transformation of the offense in a one year time span, and you feel that Keenum will be responsible for little to no improvement regardless of an improved OL, a top young RB, and say … two new receivers (WR, TE) for 2016 ? If this was 2015, an increase of 4 points per game would have given us a 10 - 6 record, and that's not considering that Foles started the season and Gurley did not, forget that we basically began with an all-rookie OL and a TE who dropped half his potential receptions. Oh yeah, all those OL & defensive injuries too.

I'll eat this thread if we can't do better than another 4 points per game for our offense this next season. And if our defense can't also shave 2.25 points per game by replacing an injured Chris Long, Gaines, Ogletree, Quinn, etc., plus replacing Laurinaitis this season, i'll buy you a case of beer. Together, that's a 6.25 average point spread increase for the Rams over the course of the regular season, and you don't even have to bet me. Now, if we draft a QB instead of the receivers, the deal is off. :baghead:

6.5 points sounds easy but they don't get any extra time to score them. At first I thought, no problem. But then I tried to figure how it happens. That would mean turning two of their usual field goals into touchdowns, or scoring an extra touchdown a week on top of those usual field goals. That is not easy to do with a ball control offense designed to eat clock, especially with Fishers aversion to throwing downfield later in games. How many three and out drives using all running play's in the second half, is he willing to give up?

Maybe I shouldn't have said Keenum can't do it. With Asshole Face as OC, or Mike Martz as Head Coach, sure he can. But with Fisher's offensive approach, adding a full touchdown every game is a tall order, especially with an career back-up, and rookie receivers.

 

[DR RAM]

God bless Case Keenum, and to him being the MIP in the 2016 season, or to Mannion, being the breakout player of the year. Cardale will be our future MVP QB in the 3rd round.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I'm fine with Keenum, but I would try and get Glennon from Tampa. Like someone stated before this is a really weak draft class for qb's, next year is supposed to be a draft class of badass qb's. No need to break the bank (the draft bank) for someone who will more than likely sit on the bench this year and maybe a few. I say we collect weapons this draft.

I see Keenum and Glennon as being the same level.

Additionally, remember the extremely conservative play calling by the coaching staff. Keenum had to run the plays called by the staff ... he didn't have the option to just go out and gunsling it. Hopefully, this year Fisher will allow them to open up some more and Keenum will do much better with a more aggressive offensive scheme.

I don't think Fisher changes his stripes. Maybe if Boras is the second coming of Heimerdinger, but that isn't likely for a first time OC who needs assistance in the passing game. It will be interesting if we see Fisher bend at all.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

In all the fun analyzing the offense/defense points improvements don't forget that includes the huge x-factor known as turnovers. The Rams went from minus-23 net turnover points in 2014 to plus-34 last season --7th best -- an improvement of 57 points or 3.5 points per game right there. No way to know if that's going to get better again or regress.

Good point. Turnovers are a big wildcard.