How the Rams might be setting up to actually land a decent quarterback

[-X-]

We drafted Mannion in 2015..what you talkin, about WILLIS!:boxing:

I'm rounding up. He'll have had all of last year (+ camp) and all of this year's camp.

 

[-X-]

I wish I knew.
He's an X factor, because nobody, other than the coaching staff, really knows.
He has an NFL arm. I think we all know that.
Does he have the NFL acumen? Anticipation, accuracy? I don't know.

Thanks for the RODcast idea.

I think he does have all of the things you mentioned, but I don't know how he'll do when bullets start flying.
That's kind of where I am with any rookie QB that we have -- or get. Talent < performance under pressure.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

However, I disagree with your assessment of Keenum's ability to flourish in a system like that (with receivers who can exploit man coverage)

He throws late on deep throws far too often for my liking. And Mannion was not a good scrambler in college. There is no reason to think he developed the instinct, skill, and agility to do it in the pros where the pass rush will be much harder to deal with.

 

[-X-]

He throws late on deep throws far too often for my liking. And Mannion was not a good scrambler in college. There is no reason to think he developed the instinct, skill, and agility to do it in the pros where the pass rush will be much harder to deal with.

Fair enough. I disagree, but there's no point in rehashing where we differ on those things.
So you're sold on the QBs in this class being able to do all the things you want on the big stage?
Because everybody looks good in college, m'man. Everybody.

 

[Dodgersrf]

Because everybody looks good in college, m'man. Everybody.

Well. Not everybody.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Fair enough. I disagree, but there's no point in rehashing where we differ on those things.
So you're sold on the QBs in this class being able to do all the things you want on the big stage?
Because everybody looks good in college, m'man. Everybody.

I think there is more athleticism with the top three. Goff has great poise but I prefer a bigger arm for this offense. Some say his arm strength is fine. I am not so sure. Love Wentz's potential. I really like Goff too but think he will take more than a year to learn the pro game and that is of course a concern if the Rams trade up to get him.

Do I think the three of them look better than Keenum? yes and was Keenum ever considered a first round QB? The rest of the bunch after the top three just look like perennial backups. I have said in other threads that I don't expect the coming season to be a big success with the negatives that come with the new move. The Rams could be picking top 5 next year and be in position to land a very good Qb without trading up, or a small trade up. So, if they don't like these QBs or cannot make a suitable trade for one of them, then I am fine with rolling with Keenum and trying to get some legitimate weapons on offense, like Doctson or Treadwell in round 1, and Boyd and maybe TE Jerrell Adams.

I concede that there is a lot that goes on in these weeks that we don't have privy to, so I wont assume that Snead didn't try to make a move up if they don't come away with a QB, unless they say otherwise.

 

[jrry32]

I'd prefer not to get into semantics about that QB class, so I'll just yield to your judgement of how it panned out.
But I subtly highlighted the part that worries me the most.

Yes, I realize we have Gurley and Austin and a developing line.

I'm not worried about that. I think there's an argument that we ruined Bradford. But this is a different team. OL appears to be a much better unit, we have a really good running game, and a strong defense (likely). This is a good situation for a young QB. It's a far cry from the 2009 Rams or Expansion Browns.

 

[-X-]

I'm not worried about that. I think there's an argument that we ruined Bradford. But this is a different team. OL appears to be a much better unit, we have a really good running game, and a strong defense (likely). This is a good situation for a young QB. It's a far cry from the 2009 Rams or Expansion Browns.

K. I can accept that.
But I don't think we're set up for a new QB until we get better targets.

 

[Dodgersrf]

K. I can accept that.
But I don't think we're set up for a new QB until we get better targets.

I believe we need to address both this year. Early and often.

 

[JackDRams]

K. I can accept that.
But I don't think we're set up for a new QB until we get better targets.

Would you be happy if we parted with our first and one second, and maybe a first next year, to move up for Goff? And then used our other second for Hunter Henry. And then scooped Anquan Boldin short term? Then suddenly we have Goff with Gurley. And Britt, Boldin, Tavon, and Henry catching Goffs passes. Id be happy with that for now.

 

[-X-]

I believe we need to address both this year. Early and often.

If they can do that, I'll be stoked. But I honestly believe they'll have to sacrifice quality in one area or the other.
Can't get the best QB and the best WRs in the same draft unless you're REALLY lucky.

 

[-X-]

Would you be happy if we parted with our first and one second, and maybe a first next year, to move up for Goff? And then used our other second for Hunter Henry. And then scooped Anquan Boldin short term? Then suddenly we have Goff with Gurley. And Britt, Boldin, Tavon, and Henry catching Goffs passes. Id be happy with that for now.

Yes. But it's gonna take much more than that (IMO) to move up 12 spots in the draft.

 

[Akrasian]

Would you be happy if we parted with our first and one second, and maybe a first next year, to move up for Goff? And then used our other second for Hunter Henry. And then scooped Anquan Boldin short term? Then suddenly we have Goff with Gurley. And Britt, Boldin, Tavon, and Henry catching Goffs passes. Id be happy with that for now.

I'm not X (thank goodness) but I am virtually always against trading future firsts. Needs open up unpredictably. I'd much rather they just trade both seconds than give up a future first. But yes, please sign Boldin, though he apparently is waiting to go to a serious contender. Much more than a burner, I think the team needs a guy who can get first downs often.

Incidentally, normally a first and the Philly 2nd this year, plus a first next year, would be equivalent to a first and their two 2nds this year - enough to somewhat overpay to move up to #4.

 

[-X-]

I'm not X

Nobody's perfect.

 

[Akrasian]

Nobody's perfect.

One of the great closing lines in a movie

 

[Loyal]

Nobody's perfect.

View: http://imgur.com/kHwxXkR

 

[8to12]

Snead was summing up a lengthy diatribe on points scored and quarterbacks' records when their teams score points, saying the Rams have “done a lot of studies ... about quarterbacks and what makes quarterbacks successful.”

“There's been 21 QBs since 2012 that have started 45 or more games. So if their team gives up 25 or more points, there's only one of those QBs who has actually got a winning record, and it's just over .500,” Snead said. “I'll let you guys do the research to figure that out. If your team gives up 17 or less than 17 points, all 21 of those guys have winning records. Now you get into a couple categories, 21 to 24 points, that you give up, 11 of those quarterbacks have winning records and 10 have losing records. If you give up 17 to 20 points, all but three of the QBs have winning records. So to win in this league, it's a direct correlation to how many points you're giving up.”

Is this accurate? Well, yes, technically it is accurate! With nothing else to do on a Saturday but compile QB WINZ I found Snead is pretty spot on.

Here's an issue I have with Snead's remarks above ; There are 12 teams that made the playoffs last season. Combined, they averaged scoring 25.18 points per game regardless of what we know about their defensive efficiency. It can't just be about how many points your defense gives up; there has to be a balance. Your offense has to be highly efficient at scoring and logic tells me a "great" QB is going to get your there better than an "average" QB. To close, if the Rams were to play the Steelers, and Greg Williams was going to have to prepare to face Ben Rothlisberger or his back-up , what do you think his preference would be?

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Here's an issue I have with Snead's remarks above ; There are 12 teams that made the playoffs last season. Combined, they averaged scoring 25.18 points per game regardless of what we know about their defensive efficiency. It can't just be about how many points your defense gives up; there has to be a balance. Your offense has to be highly efficient at scoring and logic tells me a "great" QB is going to get your there better than an "average" QB. To close, if the Rams were to play the Steelers, and Greg Williams was going to have to prepare to face Ben Rothlisberger or his back-up , what do you think his preference would be?

Totally agree. There will be some offenses that will make it very hard for your defense to hold them to 17 points. Conversely there will be some defenses that will make a mediocre QB struggle to reach 17 points. That is what you get in the playoffs and the Rams need to be prepared for a team with a great defense, or offense, or both.

Denver did it this year with an average offense because their defense was dominant, but after. 1 season they lose Trevathan, Jackson, another good player and their elite DE wants QB money. I totally dominant unit is difficult to keep in tact for too many years. If the Rams defense reaches elite status how long will it last? And, if they do, they better have a good enough QB to get the job done because these Windows can close fast.

 

[Ramhusker]

I agree about balance but that is exactly why I'm not too fond of selling the farm for the one pick that MIGHT be the guy. Now, granted, if a guy falls to within a couple of picks from 15 and you want to give up an extra pick for him, sure. But we have the potential to nab a couple of contributors with those 2nd round picks and we need about 4 of them. I think Lynch is just as strong a prospect as Goff and Wentz anyway. I'm thinking a Lynch, Boyd, Adams draft doesn't look too bad.

 

[Picked4td]

Totally agree. There will be some offenses that will make it very hard for your defense to hold them to 17 points. Conversely there will be some defenses that will make a mediocre QB struggle to reach 17 points. That is what you get in the playoffs and the Rams need to be prepared for a team with a great defense, or offense, or both.

Denver did it this year with an average offense because their defense was dominant, but after. 1 season they lose Trevathan, Jackson, another good player and their elite DE wants QB money. I totally dominant unit is difficult to keep in tact for too many years. If the Rams defense reaches elite status how long will it last? And, if they do, they better have a good enough QB to get the job done because these Windows can close fast.

Thats why its important the Rams use their left over cap space and start signing guys to extensions now if they can