THIS...Remember Sam Bradford's class where he was the best of the lot? No reaching for a QB, please.
Any remaining doubters that QB is our biggest draft need?
- Thread starter Rams43
- Start date
-
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.
This OL is an offense killer in the state it's in. Fix that before tossing another highly drafted QB back there or we'll just be sitting here in 3-4 years talking about needing another.
I have to say that Nick Foles was set up to fail in St Louis..We started with a LT that needed a veteran next to him to get his play right...That veteran is injury prone, and lasted what, a few games? We had a center with a half season of starts in a couple of years...We had a rookie right side at RG and RT, and then both of those guys got injured, one out for the season..Thank God we got Reynolds in FA....But really, no QB does that well if he's running for his life, every play..In that Green Bay loss, he was hit hard in fully HALF of all passes thrown..I think that effed his mind up.....The Oline has to be examined to see who is getting better, and who is just new and not very good...We need a solid Oline for ANY QB we bring in......
We will be drafting high enough in the first round where OL, or WR will be available if QB is overpriced so there should be no need to worry about another Defensive player.
Generally I subscribe to BPA theory but the best way to help our team Defense included is to improve our Offense
Generally I subscribe to BPA theory but the best way to help our team Defense included is to improve our Offense
He and Matt Cassel can tell their teammates Pro Bowl stories while they sit on the bench. I'm sorry, but I just can't see how anybody thinks Foles is a good QB. Are we watching the same games?
Agreed. It needs to be a WR who demands coverage so we can get some offense beyond the LOS. Or a QB who can get the ball to crappy WR's like they do in Carolina.
The Gurley/Tavon line of scrimmage show has run its course, obviously.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #47
When I suggested QB as our first pick, I was assuming that we would be picking around #5, maybe even a bit higher.
So a top QB should be sitting there for us.
Of course I don't recommend taking a modestly rated QB. But a top player at QB should definitely be there for the taking. Such opportunities are few and far between.
Does anybody believe that our future playoff winning QB is now on the roster? Me neither.
Seems like a no brainer decision for a team in desperate need of a starting QB.
So a top QB should be sitting there for us.
Of course I don't recommend taking a modestly rated QB. But a top player at QB should definitely be there for the taking. Such opportunities are few and far between.
Does anybody believe that our future playoff winning QB is now on the roster? Me neither.
Seems like a no brainer decision for a team in desperate need of a starting QB.
if Bradford can hang in there and make sure we get our extra picks then we trade up and double up on a top QB if possible and a top OL. there will have to be give and take to keep the defensive core together while pushing resources to the offense.
Ram43....I haven't scoured the draft that much, because it's damn depressing...Yet, the only QB that I have heard anything positive about is Goff, and even he got rocked this year in College in a few games.....I just remember the Black hole of a draft that produced Sam Bradford..Aside from his rookie season (which was mostly dink and dunk passes) he was a bust for what ever reason you want to point to..I am pretty sure that no other QB's from that draft class became good NFL QB's..If it is only Goff, he's going Number 1 in the draft, and the price to go up from #4 or #5 to #1, will be horrendous. bThink the RG3 Trade-Light.
bwdenverram
Legend
I believe the Philly trade is already completed...We get their #2, and they don't get jack else.
My point remains even if they are picking around #5 or a bit higher.
The top rated QB in one draft class might be graded as a 2nd rounder in another draft class. Teams shouldn't reach for need. If the team doesn't believe that QB is the guy, then I'd hope they'd pass no matter how media draftnik rate that player.
Lot of posters sound pretty desperate for drafting a QB high. I would rather the team look to get a proven veteran who can at least manage the game if one is available before they look for a blue chip rookie. A rookie will have to take hard knocks for a few years before he shows any real championship promise. We have a first rate D right now. How long can we hod onto our core guys while waiting for a young QB to measure up to championship caliber?
bluecollarram
Starter
We have to start Mannion the rest of the way to see what he has. Maybe he shows promise, then I would be willing to roll with him and a good vet and draft WRs, TE, and linemen. If he sucks then you have 2 guys in the first you can get.
I'll probably get killed for this, but I wouldn't mind getting Bradford back to go along with a rookie. He is injury prone, but at least he is an NFL starting caliber QB.
I'll probably get killed for this, but I wouldn't mind getting Bradford back to go along with a rookie. He is injury prone, but at least he is an NFL starting caliber QB.
It's also how we ended up with Barron, Kenny, Ayers, and Garrett Reynolds. You want to declare those failures too?
The point is to try trading for a proven performer first. Going the rookie route will take years for development, and we may lose players who are at or approaching their prime in the interim.