Jrry32 The Return of the Mock

[jrry32]

Let's put it this way. Until the Rams actually get better players on the roster, why should they cut him?

Because the Rams will have three better QBs after the draft and teams carry 3 QBs max. But I wouldn't cut him immediately. I'd see if anyone was willing to trade anything for him.

 

[Akrasian]

Because the Rams will have three better QBs after the draft and teams carry 3 QBs max. But I wouldn't cut him immediately. I'd see if anyone was willing to trade anything for him.

Teams carry 3 max AFTER final cut downs. But they want 4 going into camp - and after recent years I see no way Snisher will want only one experienced QB on the roster. You might have no problem with that, but I am sure all 32 NFL teams would.

If the Rams get a quality vet in FA or trade, then MAYBE they would cut Foles before the draft - although even then I would be a bit surprised. I would actually expect it to wait until Keenum resigns also. That would give them two vets plus Mannion, and the option of even taking a QB who is a practice squad candidate in the draft if that's the way things fall. But until they have things in hand, I would be shocked to see Foles cut. And yes, the slight chance of a Foles trade factors in also.

 

[Merlin]

Belichick carried 4 QBs the year they drafted Brady (Bledsoe was starter and they had Friesz and Bishop also). But when it comes to camp there are no issues with bringing in 4 or even 5 QBs and then cutting the two who lose out.

Mannion needs to compete straight up with Keenum and Foles, assuming all are still on the roster. The loser gets cut, competition is good for the team. If the Rams bring in another QB then it's a four way battle and cut the guy who is least sharp early in the process due to snap availability or trade Foles to another team.

The rookie of course gets the same ride this year that Mannion just got. Assuming they draft one of course, which I do think we can assume. But Mannion will not be competing with that rookie, he'll be lined up against the vets this go round.

I expect the Rams to carry 3 QBs, either way. Starter, backup, future. Unless they trade up for Goff, in which case I suspect he'd win the backup role rather easily.

 

[jrry32]

Belichick carried 4 QBs the year they drafted Brady (Bledsoe was starter and they had Friesz and Bishop also). But when it comes to camp there are no issues with bringing in 4 or even 5 QBs and then cutting the two who lose out.

Mannion needs to compete straight up with Keenum and Foles, assuming all are still on the roster. The loser gets cut, competition is good for the team. If the Rams bring in another QB then it's a four way battle and cut the guy who is least sharp early in the process due to snap availability or trade Foles to another team.

The rookie of course gets the same ride this year that Mannion just got. Assuming they draft one of course, which I do think we can assume. But Mannion will not be competing with that rookie, he'll be lined up against the vets this go round.

I expect the Rams to carry 3 QBs, either way. Starter, backup, future. Unless they trade up for Goff, in which case I suspect he'd win the backup role rather easily.

The rookie has no business getting the same ride that Mannion just got. This team has no business starting the crap they had at QB this year. They better be playing Wentz, Goff, Lynch, or Cook if there's not some major issue.

And as I said before, keeping Foles in training camp does a disservice to him and this team. There's not enough reps for 4 QBs. A number of people pointed that out last year with Austin Davis.

Teams carry 3 max AFTER final cut downs. But they want 4 going into camp - and after recent years I see no way Snisher will want only one experienced QB on the roster. You might have no problem with that, but I am sure all 32 NFL teams would.

We currently have 3 experienced QBs on our roster counting Foles.(I'm counting Keenum based on my belief that he'll get tendered)

Teams go into camp with 4 QBs because they have a camp body. A 4th string guy that doesn't need to get reps. Because getting the 4th guy consistent reps is pretty much impossible.

 

[Merlin]

The rookie has no business getting the same ride that Mannion just got. This team has no business starting the crap they had at QB this year. They better be playing Wentz, Goff, Lynch, or Cook if there's not some major issue.

I'd make the rookie win the starting job regardless of where I draft him. He'd be free of risk of cuts of course too, though. So if it's Lynch and he needs a redshirt so be it.

 

[Akrasian]

The rookie has no business getting the same ride that Mannion just got. This team has no business starting the crap they had at QB this year. They better be playing Wentz, Goff, Lynch, or Cook if there's not some major issue.

And as I said before, keeping Foles in training camp does a disservice to him and this team. There's not enough reps for 4 QBs. A number of people pointed that out last year with Austin Davis.



We currently have 3 experienced QBs on our roster counting Foles.(I'm counting Keenum based on my belief that he'll get tendered)

Teams go into camp with 4 QBs because they have a camp body. A 4th string guy that doesn't need to get reps. Because getting the 4th guy consistent reps is pretty much impossible.

You keep citing things that could happen in the future for reasons to keep Foles. My point - made repeatedly - is that until those things happen, the Rams have no reason to cut Foles. I don't care if it does a disservice to Foles, since he signed a contract with a lot of money guaranteed and then didn't come close to performing well enough to merit it. I have yet to see any mention of Foles giving any guaranteed money back. Until he does, unless the Rams get a bona fide trade offer, they should keep him until there isn't roster room, in case they need him. Are you saying there is a zero percent chance that Foles could be a worthwhile option as a backup at least, if he recovers some from the Green Bay spearing, and if there is a major injury to a QB in the preseason? I do want you to go on record about that.

I am saying that there is a non-zero chance that he could be useful to the Rams, UNTIL they actually have another decent vet on the roster and/or actually get the QBs you want in the draft. And so long as there is a non-zero chance that he could be useful, why should the Rams cut him?

 

[OldSchool]

You keep citing things that could happen in the future for reasons to keep Foles. My point - made repeatedly - is that until those things happen, the Rams have no reason to cut Foles.

Hehehe so you're getting angry about hypothetical situations created in a hypothetical mock draft?

 

[jrry32]

You keep citing things that could happen in the future for reasons to keep Foles. My point - made repeatedly - is that until those things happen, the Rams have no reason to cut Foles.

I'll just stop here since we don't seem to be arguing very different things:

Because the Rams will have three better QBs after the draft and teams carry 3 QBs max. But I wouldn't cut him (Foles) immediately. I'd see if anyone was willing to trade anything for him.

We saw what Foles was made of in 2015. It was less than Keenum. So no, I don't see him as useful.

 

[jrry32]

I'd make the rookie win the starting job regardless of where I draft him. He'd be free of risk of cuts of course too, though. So if it's Lynch and he needs a redshirt so be it.

Nah. Unless there's a major issue (like he doesn't know the playbook or isn't ready to play), I'm tossing Lynch, Goff, Wentz, or Cook out there. Go through the growing pains and be better for it in 2017. I don't think it'll take a lot from the QB position for us to make the playoffs. Just more than the garbage we got in 2015.

 

[CGI_Ram]

until Keenum resigns

Foles is safe until this.

Then? That's when the gears start turning.

 

[dieterbrock]

Nah. Unless there's a major issue (like he doesn't know the playbook or isn't ready to play), I'm tossing Lynch, Goff, Wentz, or Cook out there. Go through the growing pains and be better for it in 2017. I don't think it'll take a lot from the QB position for us to make the playoffs. Just more than the garbage we got in 2015.

Absolutely.
This isn't a case of a Brady behind Bledsoe, Rodgers behind Favre or a Rivers behind a Brees. They draft a kid with 1st, he starts day 1.
There is nothing to learn from who is on roster and its up to the staff to design the offense around his strengths

 

[OnceARam]

I don't see Boyd being a complement to Gurley. Boyd doesn't seem to be a willing blocker and the last thing we need is a diva at a developing position.

 

[Boston Ram]

Nice draft Jrry. I am wondering if Boyd last till the 2nd though. He could be a late 1st.

Love the Higbee pick. I mentioned this guy earlier this year, really like his game.

 

[lockdnram21]

Like the draft but not a big Boyd fan. Also I have a feeling rams don't draft a qb

 

[Merlin]

Nah. Unless there's a major issue (like he doesn't know the playbook or isn't ready to play), I'm tossing Lynch, Goff, Wentz, or Cook out there. Go through the growing pains and be better for it in 2017. I don't think it'll take a lot from the QB position for us to make the playoffs. Just more than the garbage we got in 2015.

You gotta make the rookie earn it brother. If he's the best guy and proves it in camp then no worries, but installing the guy because he's a high round pick is what new regimes that know they're gonna lose do, not regimes in year 5 of a 5 year contract.

 

[ramfan46]

I love this Draft. I had to reply to say I agree with every pick haha. I'm picky, but this is the goods!