Rookie Wide Receivers

[Ramhusker]

Nice job jrry. I think if we go into 2014 with the WR's we have, I think we'd be fine. Sure we may draft one, but I'm thinking rounds 3-7 we can find a decent guy.

Austin can be special, Bailey got more involved and played better with each game, Givens had a bad year/hoping to rebound (he and bradford seem to be on the same page unlike with Clemens), Pettis is trustworthy, and Quick is a ? still, but it appears he's slowly getting better.

Agreed, and I think the ? by Quick's name is exactly why Britt was brought on. I think Fisher views Britt as a gamble and insurance at the same time but more of a tool to maybe bring Quick up. 3rd through 7th round WRs might net a Jordan Mathews/Jarvis Landry/Jared Abbredaris type talent.

 

[Ram Quixote]

just like I disagree with this whole "Keep Sam upright" and" he hasn't had time" excuse, blaming the o-line. Which is hogwash to me - Bradford has been middle of the pack, if not slightly better, in terms sacks, hits, and pressures over the past year or 2 (not including 2011).

one constant is the receiver position - guys running wrong routes, missing hot reads, drops, lack of separation, or a combination of those - for 2 consecutive years now. Rams haven't had a receiver go over 775 yards in a long while (only team in NFC West last season with that mind you).

Gotta improve the passing game if we wanna improve the points, especially if they still want to "spread 'em out" and "unleash sammy".

Wouldn't we rather have Bradford protected better than just "middling"? Going OT with the first pick (trade-down or otherwise) would be a way to ensure that, whether you're in the Matthews or Robinson camp. Just as getting a solid OG for backup--and a starter for 2015 when the Rams make a decision on who will play LT in 2015.

 

[ausmurp]

I assume you mean more talented than Watkins? If so I'd say Clowney, Robinson, Matthews, and Mack. I'd put him in the tier below with Dennard, Donald, Evans, and Mosley.

And you'll be proven wrong.

Also @ jrry, of the 1st rd WRs taken, how many went to teams with terrible QB? Calvin, Blackmon, and more. I think its safe to say that if they inherited a QB like Rivers as Keenan Allen did, they'd have hit the 1000 yd bench mark in their rookie season. Just sayin. But I don't believe in a #1 WR as others do - a big body guy who can go up and get it. To me a #1 WR is obvious - a player who can get open and rarely drops the ball. That is what we need. Tavon will probably become that for us this yr.

 

[ausmurp]

All I want is the most NFL ready WR. Don't care what rd we get them in. Wanted Jeffery in 2012, Allen in 2013, and want Watkins or Evans this yr.

 

[jrry32]

And you'll be proven wrong.

Also @ jrry, of the 1st rd WRs taken, how many went to teams with terrible QB? Calvin, Blackmon, and more. I think its safe to say that if they inherited a QB like Rivers as Keenan Allen did, they'd have hit the 1000 yd bench mark in their rookie season. Just sayin. But I don't believe in a #1 WR as others do - a big body guy who can go up and get it. To me a #1 WR is obvious - a player who can get open and rarely drops the ball. That is what we need. Tavon will probably become that for us this yr.

I don't agree. Calvin's team threw for 4200+ yards his rookie year. Shaun McDonald, yes, THAT Shaun McDonald had 943 yards and 6 TDs on that team. Roy Williams had 838 yards in only 12 games. Calvin was third on his team in receiving yards as a rookie and fourth on his team in receptions(behind McDonald, Williams, and Mike Furrey).

Jon Kitna was the QB there. And he was pretty solid. Not Rivers but solid. That team could throw the ball. Calvin wasn't shafted or anything.

 

[RamFan503]

Not sure why but I always liked Kitna. Atrocious record as a starter but just seemed to be a gamer. Stuck around for 16 years now. Guess there must be a reason.

 

[laramsoriginal]

Hey guys rams should draft Watkins, Evans, and K.Benjamin. Rams add some major size and speed to the wr corp. Obviously Pettis and Givens are cut to make room.

 

[iced]

Wouldn't we rather have Bradford protected better than just "middling"? Going OT with the first pick (trade-down or otherwise) would be a way to ensure that, whether you're in the Matthews or Robinson camp. Just as getting a solid OG for backup--and a starter for 2015 when the Rams make a decision on who will play LT in 2015.

except that bradford has been one of the better protected qb's in the NFL...although conversely, his receiving corps production/actual playing has been abysmal

 

[iced]

Adding Watkins will no doubt mean a 2014 with yet another young receiver missing reads, running the wrong routes, and dropping passes as the sound of real NFL footsteps close in. Long term he might pan out as a #1 receiver. But with his stature and production through his career, there is nothing that sets him up as a future star except for his former coaches gushing over him and a bunch of non-NFL salaried persons putting him at the top of this year's WR class.

you can't predict this more than I could make the outrageous claim that Evans/Watkins would be a dominant receiver day one..there are plenty of receivers who have gone in the first whom performed well, especially better than what we have..

that said, what we do know so far is confirmed - our actual receivers who aren't rookies (Pettis,Quick, Givens) , have consistently shown the above traits you discuss, especially with a lack of ability to get open and catch the ball. And most importantly - do you think any of them will actually develop into a great weapon, or a consistent receiver Sam can rely on? Cause I don't.

 

[iced]

It should be obvious to anyone the rams have no intention of unleashing or spreading out the offense. Snisher wants to have a balanced team. Improve the OL and you will see a much improved the passing game.

really? Says who? They went from spread, to running a bit more, to compensating for Kellen Clemens. They also said all season long their offense would change game to game, depending on the team they're playing...and what they've continually tried to do w/ Sam at QB against NFC west teams is spread them out...how many times did they go empty set in 2012 vs seattle, despite not having the personnel?

I'm not saying they will revert - but its fair to speculate..especially since fisher took this job because of bradford, and they without question want to put him in a position to succeed...they saw how he played at oklahoma, and givin its a passing league, i can easily see them wanting to try that again..especially if stacy has success.

This isn't some Power I-form team like the niners or seahawks - we don't even have a true fullback

 

[RamFan503]

except that bradford has been one of the better protected qb's in the NFL...although conversely, his receiving corps production/actual playing has been abysmal

Argh!!! Absolutely untrue. Watch the games again. Want my NFL rewind password? He was NOT protected. Seriously man. Rewatch the games. There is really no mystery as to why his passes tended to be so short or thrown away for the most part. It's so funny that some view Sam as the king of the checkdown while others think our receivers get no separation. You don't have a lot of choices in 2 seconds - dump it off, throw it up for grabs, run away, take the sack, or throw it away. In any case, if Sam is the king of the checkdown, then another receiver won't matter one iota. If he is throwing such short passes, either his line isn't giving the play time to develop or the offense is being called that way. In either of those cases, I don't see where another receiver - even if he is a very good rookie - really helps us that much.

 

[RamFan503]

really? Says who? They went from spread, to running a bit more, to compensating for Kellen Clemens. They also said all season long their offense would change game to game, depending on the team they're playing...and what they've continually tried to do w/ Sam at QB against NFC west teams is spread them out...how many times did they go empty set in 2012 vs seattle, despite not having the personnel?

I'm not saying they will revert - but its fair to speculate..especially since fisher took this job because of bradford, and they without question want to put him in a position to succeed...they saw how he played at oklahoma, and givin its a passing league, i can easily see them wanting to try that again..especially if stacy has success.

This isn't some Power I-form team like the niners or seahawks - we don't even have a true fullback

I'm cool with that. You still need to be able to dictate what happens along the line. That takes the right O-linemen.

Also, by its nature, a spread does NOT mean pass heavy. Oregon was probably the best spread offense in college football under Kelly and I believe around 70% of their yards were rushing yards.

 

[jjab360]

except that bradford has been one of the better protected qb's in the NFL...although conversely, his receiving corps production/actual playing has been abysmal

Well now you're just making shit up lol.

 

[iced]

Argh!!! Absolutely untrue. Watch the games again. Want my NFL rewind password? He was NOT protected. Seriously man. Rewatch the games. There is really no mystery as to why his passes tended to be so short or thrown away for the most part. It's so funny that some view Sam as the king of the checkdown while others think our receivers get no separation. You don't have a lot of choices in 2 seconds - dump it off, throw it up for grabs, run away, take the sack, or throw it away. In any case, if Sam is the king of the checkdown, then another receiver won't matter one iota. If he is throwing such short passes, either his line isn't giving the play time to develop or the offense is being called that way. In either of those cases, I don't see where another receiver - even if he is a very good rookie - really helps us that much.

As far as the o-line went, sam was well protected. A lot of the breakdowns in protection that often go unnoticed were the backs and tight ends (Especially JARED COOK and Daryl Richardson) - but to act like our receivers were consistently performing would be wrong either.

Fact is Bradford had been one of the better QB's in terms of those stats - Rams only allowed 35 sacks despite a patchwork o-line and back up QB. They did pretty well at protecting bradford the year before they signed Stud LT Jake Long. So no, this whole "sam doesn't have good protection" is bull shit to me. The weakest links too on the o-line would be the interior; which makes NO SENSE if your argument is to draft an LT with the first pick to "better protect sam" when he already has a Top 5 LT at his blindside

 

[iced]

Well now you're just making crap up lol.

actually i'm not. Believe he was 12th in pressures? I know we were the 7th best at protecting the QB last season - attribute that to the "run game" excuse all you want, there were other teams with less pass attempts and more sacks

 

[jrry32]

As far as the o-line went, sam was well protected.

So no, this whole "sam doesn't have good protection" is bull crap to me.

So are we just pretending the first four games didn't happen? Hell, Bradford wasn't even that well protected against Carolina.

And no, I don't particularly care about whatever stat is being thrown out nor do I particularly care that Bradford wasn't sacked against Arizona or Atlanta. I reviewed every single one of those games on coach's film...and if that's being well protected then our standards for our protection are shyte.

 

[shaunpinney]

I don't think the Rams are going to have a +1000 receiver this year, instead we'll probably get two or three on 700-950 and Stacy on 1250+ rushing yards all of which I'm happy with...

 

[iced]

So are we just pretending the first four games didn't happen? Hell, Bradford wasn't even that well protected against Carolina.

He wasn't sacked until the Dallas and SF Debacle...

not surprisingly they stopped asking jared cook to block as well as richardson, and changed the protection schemes - love how that goes unnoticed yet people praise the running game as the reason.

gettin jared cook and d.rich out of the pass pro scheme was monumental

 

[jrry32]

He wasn't sacked until the Dallas and SF Debacle...

not surprisingly they stopped asking jared cook to block as well as richardson, and changed the protection schemes - love how that goes unnoticed yet people praise the running game as the reason

I don't care that he wasn't sacked. Bradford being able to avoid sacks doesn't make the protection good or effective.

 

[iced]

I don't care that he wasn't sacked. Bradford being able to avoid sacks doesn't make the protection good or effective.

yep - and i'm sure you don't care that getting our worst blockers out of the scheme was a factor either (cook, d.rich)