Snead on NFL AM

[ramsince62]

Gotta laugh, I guess that this late draft has finally infected the masses with Manziel-itis. This guy is a sandlot player with "some" football skills. Anyone who actually believes that this guy is anywhere near starting ready has been standing much too close to a cactus plant.

Smoke or no smoke, Manziel is not and will not be a part of this team....bank it!! Oh and for those believing other wise, I have a ton of ROD bucks to wager.....name your poison.

Smoke, smoke and more smoke...

 

[Thordaddy]

Gotta laugh, I guess that this late draft has finally infected the masses with Manziel-itis. This guy is a sandlot player with "some" football skills. Anyone who actually believes that this guy is anywhere near starting ready has been standing much too close to a cactus plant.

Smoke or no smoke, Manziel is not and will not be a part of this team....bank it!! Oh and for those believing other wise, I have a ton of ROD bucks to wager.....name your poison.

Smoke, smoke and more smoke...

Nah he's got mad skills but the rest of your post is spot on he ain't gonna be a Ram ,this is Sams team

 

[A55VA6]

When they said set it straight with Bradford, Les never said "Bradford is our QB". Uh oh.

Haha just kidding. Good to hear he's rolling out and throwing. Sounds like the knee is healing up well.

 

[Dodgersrf]

Peter King on Dan Patrick this morning said there is a team out there , intentionally putting out rumors. He wouldn't say the team, he just said it's not Houston.

 

[A55VA6]

Peter King on Dan Patrick this morning said there is a team out there , intentionally putting out rumors. He wouldn't say the team, he just said it's not Houston.

I'm sure there's multiple teams out there putting out rumors, including the Rams. It's very common.

 

[Dodgersrf]

I'm sure there's multiple teams out there putting out rumors, including the Rams. It's very common.

Agreed.
However he was very clear on stating there is ONE team starting rumors right now.
What rumor is bigger than Manziel to the Rams. What other rumors are even worth talking about.

I thought it was interesting that he even put it out there. He wouldn't elaborate for obvious reasons.

 

[dieterbrock]

So, you want a rookie to come into Schotty's system and start the first year?

I'm sorry, but no....it would be so vanilla we might as well just throw this year away.

Shotty's "system" did have a rookie QB starter in an AFC championship game, so I wouldnt call that a kiss of death fer sure

 

[ChrisW]

Shotty's "system" did have a rookie QB starter in an AFC championship game, so I wouldnt call that a kiss of death fer sure

Are we talking about Sanchez? The story came out that Sanchez had a world of trouble trying to learn his system. It was more the defense and running game that had them in the AFC championship, not Sanchez.

 

[dieterbrock]

Are we talking about Sanchez? The story came out that Sanchez had a world of trouble trying to learn his system. It was more the defense and running game that had them in the AFC championship, not Sanchez.

And what kind of team you think you're going to see out of the Rams in 2014? Or on topic, what do you think the team would look like with a rookie QB?

FWIW- Sanchez rookie post season #'s were pretty good. 60% comp %, 2/1 td to int ratio, 93 passer rating

 

[jrry32]

Shotty's "system" did have a rookie QB starter in an AFC championship game, so I wouldnt call that a kiss of death fer sure

They also had the #1 rushing offense in the NFL and the #1 defense in the NFL that year. Do you think we have either one? And despite all that, they only went 9-7 in the regular season.

From everything I know about Schottenheimer's system, it's a very intricate and complicated system. Which makes it difficult to learn. Thrusting a young QB...especially one from an Air Read or Spread offense into that sort of system sounds like a lot of growing pains to me.

The only rookie QB I'd trust to start in 2014 for the Rams is Teddy Bridgewater. And even then, a healthy Sam Bradford likely would do much more for this team's chances of winning. But then again, you don't draft for one year. You draft for the foreseeable future.

 

[MrMotes]

Are we talking about Sanchez? The story came out that Sanchez had a world of trouble trying to learn his system. It was more the defense and running game that had them in the AFC championship, not Sanchez.

That's pretty much the recipe regardless of who the QB is. Maybe i've grown too cynical but under this regime i really don't think it matters much (if at all) who the QB is. We're going to be about defense...

 

[dieterbrock]

They also had the #1 rushing offense in the NFL and the #1 defense in the NFL that year. Do you think we have either one? And despite all that, they only went 9-7 in the regular season.

From everything I know about Schottenheimer's system, it's a very intricate and complicated system. Which makes it difficult to learn. Thrusting a young QB...especially one from an Air Read or Spread offense into that sort of system sounds like a lot of growing pains to me.

The only rookie QB I'd trust to start in 2014 for the Rams is Teddy Bridgewater. And even then, a healthy Sam Bradford likely would do much more for this team's chances of winning. But then again, you don't draft for one year. You draft for the foreseeable future.

I'm not advocating Manziel here, but the team that's being described is exactly what the Rams are being designed to be.
And the idea that a rookie QB wouldnt succeed is false, its already been proven that a rookie QB can be successful with Shotty
And I think any of the QB talked about in the first 3 rounds of this draft are superior to Sanchez

 

[diehard99]

THE VIKINGS WONT GIVE UP #8 FOR BRADFORD. MAYBEE TRADE #8 FOR OUR #13 PLUS A LATER ROUND PICK

 

[jrry32]

I'm not advocating Manziel here, but the team that's being described is exactly what the Rams are being designed to be.
And the idea that a rookie QB wouldnt succeed is false, its already been proven that a rookie QB can be successful with Shotty
And I think any of the QB talked about in the first 3 rounds of this draft are superior to Sanchez

Except Sanchez wasn't successful, the team was. A team with the #1 running game and defense in the NFL. And even with ALL OF THAT, they only won 9 games.

Sanchez was bad as a rookie until the playoffs.

It's just not a good example to use. You'd be better off using a non-Schottenheimer QB and sticking with the Sanchez sucks argument(which he does) as a means of excluding him as an example...if you believe Manziel or whoever they might draft will be successful. At least, that's my opinion.

Because if 2550 total yards, 13 total TDs, and 23 turnovers is what we're going to get from a rookie QB then we might as well just start Shaun Hill.(if we trade Sam)

Again, I recognize that is what Sanchez did and a rookie QB could very well best that...which is more my point of why using Sanchez as a "success" story isn't exactly a good argument. Better off just pointing out how he sucks and using Clemens's play last year as an example of the team's ability to win despite limited QB play.

But it's up to you, just my advice on what makes more sense to me.

 

[ChrisW]

I'm not advocating Manziel here, but the team that's being described is exactly what the Rams are being designed to be.
And the idea that a rookie QB wouldnt succeed is false, its already been proven that a rookie QB can be successful with Shotty
And I think any of the QB talked about in the first 3 rounds of this draft are superior to Sanchez

Different division. Look at Jrry's numbers....they went 9-7 in the regular season. That record is probably the ABSOLUTE bare minimum that it takes us to get into the playoffs, with the W-L total needing to be closer to 10-6. Sanchez was carried by his run game and defense. When those 2 started to go down, Sanchez looked terrible, and is not out of New York. You could start Clemens for all our games if we had that rushing attack and defense.

 

[jrry32]

THE VIKINGS WONT GIVE UP #8 FOR BRADFORD. MAYBEE TRADE #8 FOR OUR #13 PLUS A LATER ROUND PICK

Well, that's a deal that wouldn't be worth entertaining.

 

[LesBaker]

They also had the #1 rushing offense in the NFL and the #1 defense in the NFL that year. Do you think we have either one? And despite all that, they only went 9-7 in the regular season.

From everything I know about Schottenheimer's system, it's a very intricate and complicated system. Which makes it difficult to learn. Thrusting a young QB...especially one from an Air Read or Spread offense into that sort of system sounds like a lot of growing pains to me.

The only rookie QB I'd trust to start in 2014 for the Rams is Teddy Bridgewater. And even then, a healthy Sam Bradford likely would do much more for this team's chances of winning. But then again, you don't draft for one year. You draft for the foreseeable future.

Sounds like a lot of growing pains? LOL.......we watched that happen right in front of our noses didn't we! Not to mention there have always been little things here and there about why some WR's weren't on the field as much as others and it was because of knowing the O.

If you know any secrets to his O share away. I think someone on another board said the problem was sight adjustments, whatever that means.

 

[dieterbrock]

Except Sanchez wasn't successful, the team was. A team with the #1 running game and defense in the NFL. And even with ALL OF THAT, they only won 9 games.

Sanchez was bad as a rookie until the playoffs.

It's just not a good example to use. You'd be better off using a non-Schottenheimer QB and sticking with the Sanchez sucks argument(which he does) as a means of excluding him as an example...if you believe Manziel or whoever they might draft will be successful. At least, that's my opinion.

Because if 2550 total yards, 13 total TDs, and 23 turnovers is what we're going to get from a rookie QB then we might as well just start Shaun Hill.(if we trade Sam)

Again, I recognize that is what Sanchez did and a rookie QB could very well best that...which is more my point of why using Sanchez as a "success" story isn't exactly a good argument. Better off just pointing out how he sucks and using Clemens's play last year as an example of the team's ability to win despite limited QB play.

But it's up to you, just my advice on what makes more sense to me.

Lol. All of which supports my stance.

The Rams are being built to win with defense and running the ball. If they do that well, they'll win games. And the above illustration that poor rookie QB play didnt affect the Jets, holds true that poor rookie QB play wouldnt be the death toll here either.

 

[jrry32]

Sounds like a lot of growing pains? LOL.......we watched that happen right in front of our noses didn't we! Not to mention there have always been little things here and there about why some WR's weren't on the field as much as others and it was because of knowing the O.

If you know any secrets to his O share away. I think someone on another board said the problem was sight adjustments, whatever that means.

It's just a dense offense. Like Martz's. Gigantic playbook. I'd argue that it's much too complex. He uses a lot of similar plays and personnel packages with minor adjustments that make things overly complex. IMO, it's a lot like micromanaging.

And all the motion only makes things more dense and complex.

I totally agree with them that players like Tavon and Stedman likely struggled to learn the offense last year which is why Stedman didn't play until late and Tavon was more or less benched for a few weeks during the middle of the season. Tavon seemed to be thinking rather than reacting which is a tell-tale sign of him not being up to speed...plus there were a couple very obvious moments where he didn't know what call Sam had made at the LOS.

The sight adjustments were likely a minor part of a more major problem...the very complicated verbage, routes, understanding of coverage(option routes), and understanding of the playbook necessary to play WR in the NFL. A sight adjustment is a call the QB makes at the LOS. It's more or less letting the WR know that he's the hot read so he needs to adjust when he sights in on the QB during his route.

So on a typical slant or curl, the WR doesn't get his head around to the QB until after he makes his break. If Sam reads a blitz coming off that WR's side, he'd call a sight adjustment to let the WR know that he needs to sight in on him almost immediately after his release because the ball will be coming out hot if there's a blitz.(which is why it's called the hot read) It's different from a hot route because a hot route is a route adjustment(changing a post to a hitch for example) when the blitz is read. A sight adjustment is keeping the WR on the same route but telling him to get his head around sooner than he normally would and expect the ball to come out more quickly.

 

[jrry32]

Lol. All of which supports my stance.

The Rams are being built to win with defense and running the ball. If they do that well, they'll win games. And the above illustration that poor rookie QB play didnt affect the Jets, holds true that poor rookie QB play wouldnt be the death toll here either.

Very possibly true. Depends on how good our defense and running game are.