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. blackbart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,479
    Likes Received:
    729
    I was expecting to get one of Verner most likely or Byrd or one of the FA guards that went today.

    The logic, we don't have enough NFL talent to field an O Line right now.
     
    #201
  2. tbux Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    369
    Likes Received:
    123
    We also don't have the money some of those teams have- we aren't going to win bidding wars with teams that are WAY under the cap. Our philosophy has always been to build through the draft, and supplement with FA- many players still out there- be patient- I didn't expect a day one signing- simply hoping we could land one at a fair price- but that is rare on day one. We have good draft picks coming, and only need a few players via FA. be patient- we will be fine. no need to overpay.
     
    #202
    rhinobean likes this.
  3. jrry32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    6,646
    Likes Received:
    3,355
    I'm not making anything personal.

    There is no #1 overall QB. Our QB's name is Sam Bradford. And to argue that he's not being used correctly if our offense is run-centric is a bad argument imo.

    I can stand a debate with another person with an opposing view, what I can't stand is a victim act. There wasn't a single instance of name-calling in my post. You weren't insulted. The closest I came to that was saying that at worst, you were being dishonest with the point you were making.

    I don't care to have a discussion with a person that's going to act like they're being persecuted if I think their argument is incorrect. So, please, cut it out or I'm not going to continue on with this discussion.

    You're not limiting anyone's ceiling. Sam doesn't need to throw the ball 600 times to be effective. Russell Wilson did quite well this year despite being on a run-centric team. Steve McNair did quite well during his time in Tennessee on a run-centric team. Nick Foles led the NFL in QB Rating in 2013 on the #1 team in the NFL in rushing yardage.

    Sam Bradford will not be restricted by us using a run-centric offense. If anything, having a strong running game will help make him a more efficient player statistically.

    And the idea that a journeyman QB can do the job just as well as Sam in a run-centric offense is PREPOSTEROUS.

    Seahawks - 8th in PPG Scored
    49ers - 11th in PPG Scored

    Obviously, their offenses are doing something right.

    Well, if it were me, I wouldn't give a rat's tookus what the media or fans took it as. Because they won't be complaining when Long and Matthews/Robinson are blowing open massive holes on the left side of the OL and giving Sam Bradford ample time to throw.

    The idea that we wait and draft a LT when we need to is poor strategic planning. It ignores a few important facts:
    1. We may not be in position to get one.
    2. There may not be any good prospects available.
    3. Will that rookie be ready to step in as a LT immediately and start?

    I prefer not to fly by the seat of my pants in scenarios like this. We have a shot at a blue chip talent that can start right away at a position of need(LG) and then move over to LT when Long goes. That sounds ideal to me.

    And a great guard might emerge from a lower round...but it's very unlikely. Because when you take a player in the lower round, the odds of you hitting on the pick decrease significantly. So frankly, the Saints finding Carl Nicks in the 5th round does jackshit for us when we draft Rokevious Watkins.

    It's a bad argument. You can find a #1 WR in the mid to late rounds. You can find a great OG in the mid to late rounds. But the odds of you finding either one are not high. They're quite low.

    In fact, lets take a look at the modern era Guards in the HOF:
    Larry Allen -> 2nd round
    Larry Little -> UDFA
    Tom Mack -> 1st round(#2)
    John Hannah -> 1st round(#4)
    Russ Grimm -> 3rd round
    Gene Upshaw -> 1st round(#1)
    Billy Shaw -> 2nd round
    Mike Munchak -> 1st round(#8)
    Randall McDaniel -> 1st round(#19)
    Bruce Matthews -> 1st round(#9)

    Interesting. All but one were drafted in the first 3 rounds. 6 out of the 10 were drafted in the first round.

    If we don't sign a starting caliber OL in FA, hell freaking yeah I would draft both Matthews and Robinson if we could swing it.

    I wasn't meaning a bust. I was meaning unpredictable as in even successful NFL players are hit and miss as rookies.

    Understandable. You have every right to disagree. I don't pretend my stance here is a popular one. I feel quite differently about OGs than most. I don't oppose Watkins as a player, I think he's a plenty talented kid. I just have my board set and prefer certain players over him.
     
    #203
    jjab360 and rhinobean like this.
  4. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    Unfortunately, this part really negates any point in responding to the rest of your post other than saying I disagree with you.

    The only victim act here is what you just pulled. If you disagree with my arguments, you have every right to. You have every right to respond to them. But knock off the "flawed", "misguided", "dishonest", "laughable" crap and just tell me WHY I'm allegedly wrong. Because telling me that I'm being dishonest is definitely a shot at me personally (and why would I be dishonest here?), and the rest are just insults in lieu of arguments.

    I respect you. And thus I think you're better than that. I think the insults are a crutch you don't need.

    I understand that you are passionate in your belief that the Rams need to draft a tackle early. And that's fine. But the people who disagree with you aren't the enemy. They just have another opinion. We're going to be going around like this for another two months most likely, and I think we should take care to not let things get to the "You're stupid." "No, YOU'RE stupid." stage. The best way to do that is to keep things civil and reply to the argument.

    I want what's best for the Rams. Same as you, brother. And it's hard to remember sometimes, but none of us have a vote in this, no matter how hard we pound the table.

    I will admit though that the tea leaves are currently pointing towards you being happier on draft day than I am. And if that's the case, I'll suck it up and fervently believe that the Rams and Robinson/Matthews are going to prove me wrong.
     
    #204
    blackbart and tbux like this.
  5. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,174
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    This^^^

    The idea that we will just be able to pick up a LT when we need him and plug him in IMO is full of holes. Look at where the top LTs have been going in the draft of late. IF there are very good Tackles available when we need one, what will we have to do to get one? Make an RGKnee type of trade up? That sounds like something we'd all like to do. But it appears we are very unlikely to have a top ten pick anytime in the near future. With where LTs are going these days, it is going to likely take quite the trade up to get one. When it comes time that we need a LT (hopefully and I mean HOPEFULLY) not this season, do we really want to plug a rookie in at that position or would we prefer to plug in a second or third year player that knows the game and the offense?

    I understand the desire to have another weapon for Sam and have that weapon be a "true #1". I think we all see Watkins as a potentially good to very good receiver in this league at some point. I personally don't see him as a top 10 pick type receiver but that's just what I think I see. It just seems he has had his status lofted because he is the apparent top receiver, not because he really compares favorably to previous elite receivers. Guess we'll see.
     
    #205
  6. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,174
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    What about when they take them both? :double::D
     
    #206
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2014
  7. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    What about when they take them both? :double::D[/QUOTE]
    Then I hope Sam has a lot of protection while he waits in vain for people to get open. ;)
     
    #207
  8. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,174
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    Nah - He'll just have to decide if he wants to hit Sted 20 yards down field, TA on the slant, Quick on the 9 route, or Cook up the seem. So many targets to decide on. What's a boy to do? Oh yeah. He could just grind down the clock by running Zac or Benny through that gaping hole on the left side.
     
    #208
  9. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    That's what I hope to see from a #1 WR. He'll draw the double teams or at least the attention of the top corner on the other team, making things a lot easier for the rest of the group.

    I'm just not sure a tackle playing as a guard as opposed to a guard drafted later is going to create such a huge improvement that the WRs will have the time to get open they didn't before.
     
    #209
  10. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,174
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    Clearly we're wearing you down. In a couple days you'll be as annoying as any other convert.:D:p
     
    #210
  11. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    Hey, I do have to admit that going into these discussions, my thought was "Draft a left tackle... when we already have a tackle. Dumb. Next question."

    I've softened from that, and I see merit in it, particularly if the Rams don't see Watkins as a #1 WR.

    Outside of WR, when you look at the other top positions, here's what you see: We aren't drafting a QB, we're set at DE, our defensive scheme doesn't need another highly drafted OLB. It'd be either the draft a tackle and play him as guard early plan, or trading out of the top 10 completely for draft picks either this year or in the future.

    Although I would NOT mind the luxury of having a 2nd 1st round pick again next year. Especially if whoever gives it to us pulls a Washington.
     
    #211
  12. laramsoriginal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2014
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    219
    Im on the draft OL early and often team
     
    #212
  13. iced Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Likes Received:
    967
    You must be talking about 7 on 7 drills - cause more than likely bradford will be sacked by the time they get open, and then there's a monumental question of if even said pass reaches them, will they catch it? :D
     
    #213
  14. Memphis Ram Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,812
    Likes Received:
    1,069
    A "#1 overall QB being used in a run-centric offense a waste of capital? Or we talking the return of Ground Chuck or merely a balanced offense geared more towards the run. I'm referring to the later. Along with good defensive play, that's what got #1 overall picks Troy Aikman and John Elway their multiple Super Bowl rings.

    Long vs. Gandy? He might have looked better with Steelers/Saints, but Gandy was a pretty good OT in his own right. Plus, the comparison has to also consider where Long was when the Rams signed him (which is why they got him so cheaply). Point remains that Rams were solid at LT when they moved up for Pace. There was no so-called hole in the boat. They took the BPA. And even moved up to do it.

    And I couldn't disagree more with your take on the selection of Matthew or Robinson's affect on Long. As long as Jake Long is capable of playing LT at a high level, he's your starter there even with their selection. There's a new CBA remember? Rookie contracts aren't as inflated now now. The bonus happens to be that whenever he starts to decline or gets injured yet again, the Rams have a strong option to replace him ALREADY on the roster. In the meantime, they've got another good player shoring up the trenches. Again, quality LTs don't just fall from the sky whenever a team needs one. There are teams that have been looking to fill that spot for years.

    You say Fisher made the change because he was limited by personnel. I say he went back to what he's always done and had success with because of the early failure. AND he recognized that the two best teams in the division and possibly the NFL are winning with the same gameplan for goodness sakes. Both Seattle and San Francisco threw the fewest passes in the NFL and it wasn't even close.

    I believe that we have seen the Rams identity unfold last year and will watch the team build on it this offseason. Mike Martz is gone. Balance with a strong running game and defense are here. And to do that you have to be strong in the trenches. And what better way to do that than obtain versatile players capable of playing at a high level in more than one position while always maintaining that a difficult to fill LT position is always covered.
     
    #214
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2014
  15. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    Well, we'll see what happens. At this point, we're kind of going around in circles. And a huge part of my "draft Watkins" plan was signing a free agent guard... and I haven't heard of that happening yet.

    We have the same goal in mind: Making the Rams better. We just have different opinions on how to best get there.
     
    #215
  16. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,174
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    True - if they don't do something about this O-line by adding some real talent, Bradford WILL be sacked or scrambling by the time they get open. We've already seen that with two more starters in place. :D

    But at least if we go after Watkins, we will have yet another receiver where one of the knocks is his history of drops. I wouldn't make too much of it but the sense is out there. All it means is that this is potentially a problem with his game as he transitions to the pros. As a rookie, drops are always a concern. TA had the drops early on but seems to have gotten past it. Will Watkins have the drops as a rookie? Dunno.

     
    #216
  17. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,174
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    Are there any FA Guards worth taking at this point? Not just asking you Boffo. Anyone?
     
    #217
  18. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    So far the best option I've heard is having Jones play G... maybe with or without signing Alex Mack.
     
    #218
  19. Thordaddy Binding you with ancient logic

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    9,343
    Likes Received:
    2,898
    That IMO would be an absolute coups , people would have to play 9 in the box to stop our running game and FWIW I think it could happen
     
    #219
  20. RamFan503 Grill and Brew Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Messages:
    11,174
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    Do we think paying a center in the neighborhood of $11 - 12 million dollars is wise? He is guaranteed over $10 mil without even testing the market. Seems pretty steep for the one position on the line where we may have a starter AND depth. But upgrades are upgrades and if we could swing it while ending it with Wells, I'd probably be for it.

    Now we don't have Williams returning and Smith may be going to the G-men. Lookin' mighty thin on that O-line.
     
    #220