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.

What is a "true #1 WR"??

Discussion in 'RAMS - NFL TALK' started by blackbart, Mar 8, 2014.

  1. PhxRam The Estimated Prophet

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    5,357
    Likes Received:
    2,362
    Multi quote is really not intended for single quotes. To single quote just reply to the person.
     
    #181
  2. PhxRam The Estimated Prophet

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    5,357
    Likes Received:
    2,362
    Which one?
     
    #182
  3. Tron Fights for the User

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2013
    Messages:
    3,101
    Likes Received:
    1,567
    I just learned how to use multi quote a few days ago, before that i used to right click reply and open it in a new tab for each quote I wanted, then copied and pasted them all into on comment box lol. I am an idiot.
     
    #183
  4. PhxRam The Estimated Prophet

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    5,357
    Likes Received:
    2,362
    Little kmown fact.. you can carry quotes across posts as well. You can multi quote and then use that quote in another thread. In the pop up box that shows the quotes you can rearrange the order of quotes as well by dragging and dropping them in the pop up
     
    #184
  5. Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Messages:
    5,917
    Likes Received:
    2,435
    Flatulence?

    As for me, thanks, I didn't even know that button was there. :( :LOL:
     
    #185
  6. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,225
    Likes Received:
    2,488
    :D
    Issues? Many. :D

    But the adding emos when editing. Also, if I try to add more than one emo, the cursor goes to the beginning of the post. I have to then re-click the spot where I want the cursor and emo to go and do that every time I want another emo in that location. Like this - :D

    I clicked the emo twice. It put one of them where I wanted it and the other at the top. If I continue to click the emo, it just makes the cursor change sides of the emo at the top.

    Also, when I used the site on my mobile the other day, it kept sending me to the top of the thread if I try to reply to another post. Kinda frustrating there. It's an HTC DNA android.
     
    #186
  7. PhxRam The Estimated Prophet

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    5,357
    Likes Received:
    2,362
    Will look into the issue when I get home from work.. might have to disable the additional smilies until then. Seems that is when the problems started
     
    #187
  8. Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Messages:
    5,917
    Likes Received:
    2,435
    [​IMG] AARRGH!
     
    #188
  9. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,574
    Likes Received:
    1,362
    What crap? This crap:
    Let's stay focused on the actual argument and not perceived flaws in those who disagree with us? Okay? I'm not the issue. You're not the issue. Stay on the issue.

    As to why I point out that we have a #1 overall QB? Because if we keep the kind of run-centric offense being advocated, that's a huge waste of draft capital. In that kind of circumstance, a journeyman QB will do just as well. Also, I think in that kind of situation, we'll be perennial also-rans.

    Stacy isn't Dickerson, and even when we had Dickerson, that one dimensionality took us nowhere.

    Nothing's "wrong" with it per se. It just makes less sense of a plan in my opinion than actually taking something we don't have.

    And do I need to illustrate the difference between Jake Long and Wayne Gandy?

    Realistically, drafting Robinson/Matthews with a Top 10 pick means Long is a dead man walking, regardless of performance. Just like the Drew Bennett signing was writing on the wall for Isaac Bruce or San Diego's pick of Phillip Rivers made Drew Brees a lame duck (bet they wish they had a takeback on that one, even though Rivers is okay.)

    And you miss the point of the hole in the boat analogy. LT is currently not a hole in the boat. #1 WR is. Guard is as well, but great guards can be had later.

    I want a guy that we can use from day 1 at his intended position. Matthews/Robinson are not those guys. They would have been had we not signed Long.

    He made a change because we were limited by our personnel. It'd be stupid in my opinion to never want to grow out of those limitations and remain run focused in the long term.

    But please remember, both of us are just guys with an opinion. You're not going to sway the Rams by shouting opposition down or pretending that both arguments don't have merit.
     
    #189
  10. tbux Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    369
    Likes Received:
    122
    Yeah I agree Boffo- people assume because of the 2nd half of the year- dictated mostly by circumstance, we became run heavy- we had to- no choice. I don't anticipate that same offense this year- I see a much more balanced approach, with more lean to the pass actually. We will end with more throws than runs imo.
     
    #190
  11. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,372
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    A number one receiver is something that Watkins will be for some other team because STL has significant OL issues. Time for Quick to man up.
     
    #191
  12. Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Messages:
    5,917
    Likes Received:
    2,435
     
    #192
    rhinobean likes this.
  13. jrry32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    6,281
    Likes Received:
    2,866
    This is flawed logic. Why?
    A) The #1 overall pick is a sunk cost.
    B) The previous regime drafted Sam at #1 overall.
    C) The idea that a run-centric offense is wasting a QB is misguided at best and dishonest at worst.
    D) The idea that a journeyman QB will do just as well as a legitimate QB on a run-centric offense is a laughable supposition.
    E) The Seahawks and 49ers are both run-centric offenses...are they also-rans?

    Jake Long is a dead man walking regardless of what they do this year. He has three years remaining on his contract and the odds that we re-up him after that are pretty minute. Hell, he may not make the end of his contract with all the injuries he had...and that pains me to say because he's a very good LT when healthy.

    Great WRs can be had later. More flawed logic. But we're drafting a man with a LT skill-set to play OG for 3 years at most. Would you have passed on Jonathan Ogden back in the day because LT was not a hole in the boat for them and great OGs can be found later?

    Well, that's your opinion. My opinion is that rookies are quite unpredictable(for the most part) in terms of early impact so drafting a guy based on what he will do/be day 1 rather than looking to the future is poor strategic planning.
     
    #193
  14. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,574
    Likes Received:
    1,362
    Just because you disagree with my logic doesn't make it flawed and certainly doesn't make it "misguided" or "dishonest". Again, I ask if we can please keep the debate on the topic and not try to make it personal.

    A & B) Basically the same argument... but still, Fisher came to a team that had a #1 overall QB. If he wants the team, long term, to be running dominated, then that asset is not being used effectively. He's also being as big a control freak as the previous coach was accused of being, but I don't want to reopen that can of worms.

    C & D) Also basically the same argument... and not even an argument. It's really only name calling. Sure, the highly drafted QB might be slightly better, but you're limiting his ceiling (just as you are by not giving him a #1) if you limit his job to managing a run-centric offense. You can use an expensive custom made sword to cut steak, but a common steak knife will do the job just as well and be a lot cheaper.

    E) The Seahawks and 49ers are both succeeding because of their defense right now.

    If he can't do the job, admit that it was a failed signing. If he can, let him do it for another year and wait to draft LT when we need to. Drafting a top ten tackle one year after signing Long is going to be seen, fairly or not, as an admission of a mistake.

    Wow. How many times is this argument going to have to be answered? Yes, you can get good, and maybe even great WRs later. But we're not after just another WR. We're after a #1. A #1 MIGHT emerge from a lower round or what we have but it's very, very unlikely. As opposed to the vast majority of great guards throughout history who were drafted later than Top 10.

    Wow, Jonathan Ogden is being clung to like a life preserver around here lately. Yes, if we knew now what we knew then, I probably would have gone with Jonathan Ogden. And if the Rams are convinced that Robinson or Matthews has THAT level of talent, then they should make the pick too. I haven't heard that level of praise for Robinson and Matthews from the pundits and Robinson in particular scares me as a pick at that level because I worry about his unproven pass protection skills.

    With this logic being presented though... the Draft a Tackle camp used to facetiously ask if people would want to draft ANOTHER WR high next year if Watkins didn't immediately dominate. I answered that we wouldn't because the only recent WR we drafted feeling that he had a great chance at being a #1 type was Quick. He's had two years and hasn't shown much. That might change next year, and if it does, that's awesome, but I wouldn't bet money on it. But the logic being used by those who want a tackles could easily apply for clamoring for another "once a decade" tackle next year even if we take Robinson or Matthews. Hell, I think a few people here would take Robinson AND Matthews if we could swing it. Smart GMing involves balancing priorities instead of focusing on one area.

    This is the Not For Long league. (Although, if this league isn't for Jake, that's a good argument to replace him. Heyo!) While I agree that rookies are unpredictable in the sense that anyone we could pick could be a bust, I still think we should follow the conventional wisdom (hence name because it's conventionally wise) and not draft a tackle unless we need a tackle right now. We don't. We need guards. Drafting a tackle to play guard for 1, 2, 3 years isn't the best plan in my opinion.

    You have every right to an alternate opinion. And I'll admit, there's validity to the tackle arguments. I think the Rams are going to be good either way. I just have my personal preference.
     
    #194
    tbux likes this.
  15. tbux Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    369
    Likes Received:
    122
    Boffo I seem to agree with everything you are saying. well put. Cant argue much of that at all. nice post.
     
    #195
    Boffo97 likes this.
  16. blackbart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,451
    Likes Received:
    712
    After what has happened in the first 4 hours of FA I don't see how we draft anyone but Matthews or Robinson with our 1st 1st round pick/
     
    #196
    RamFan503 and rhinobean like this.
  17. Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Messages:
    5,917
    Likes Received:
    2,435
    We'd also better re-sign Williams and Smith too.
     
    #197
  18. tbux Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    369
    Likes Received:
    122
    really? what were you expecting? tell me the logic behind that comment- curious.
     
    #198
  19. Alan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Messages:
    5,917
    Likes Received:
    2,435
    I totally expected a signing. We've recently acquired more CAP room than we expected and have some to spend. Why did they let all the decent players go to other teams? Maybe they are going to use it to sign lots of marginal players like Chris Williams but I don't see the logic of that. So yeah, I expected more and the last 4 hours have not made me happy.

    Maybe I'll see some logic later when I see who they do sign and draft or come to find out we didn't have as much CAP room as I thought. Hope so.
     
    #199
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2014
  20. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,574
    Likes Received:
    1,362
    The only thing I see that's happened in FA is that we're definitely not having Saffold stay.

    I can easily see how the Rams could still not take Matthews/Robinson: Sign an FA guard (always part of the plan, as Saffold was included in this), draft Yankey or Su'a-Filo, and obtain depth either through minor FA signings or later picks.

    Our line is Long / Yankey or Su'a-Filo / Barnes or Jones / FA / Barksdale and we're good IMO.
     
    #200