The reason is probably disrespect for interior linemen, no matter how good.
Come on man. Interior OL is drafted in the first more than ever. Maybe, just maybe, most teams thought the linemen available were no better than what they had and therefore taking one would be a wasted pick.
Maybe they expect Jon Toth to slip to us as an UDFA? I do think not taking any OL was short-sighted though as Whitworth and Sullivan probably won't be here past two more years and we have questionable depth behind them.
Still, our depth may be better than the rookies available. I'll agree that sounds like a sad commentary. But we spent a lot of capital on the OL and it is quite possible it wasn't wasted.
I think that with Fisher's firing, who also helped hire Les Snead (Fisher), Snead emerged as more powerful than he was. No one was fooled that a pick in prior Fisher drafts, was anything but a Fisher favorite that Snead helped him to get. Snead was involved with hiring the HC this time around, and so I would consider him with more responsibility for picks...JMO
Not sure how much of this is accurate. Snead was a KD pick as far as I can tell. Fisher wouldn't really have much knowledge of the guy before he came here. He may have signed off on Snead but.... As far as Snead being involved in hiring McV... do you have anything that really proves that out? Not saying it's not the case but I haven't seen it.
GMs miss a lot too. It's a crapshoot. Greg Robinson was the number 2 overall pick and would have been picked high if the Rams passed on him. Fans have every right to get upset or ecstatic over their teams draft. Don't know how many times I've loved a pick (Tavon Austin) and ended up being wrong. The same with hating a pick (James Laurinaitis) and being wrong.
In my opinion I think it was a huge mistake to pass on Lamp. The Rams offense sucked last year primarily due to the horrible line. I understand they signed some players, but they need to build a line that can dominate if they want to win. The reason the Cowboys were so good with rookies on offense was due to their line. If the Rams want a good offense they need better line play.
I agree... well... mostly. I stopped pontificating long ago as to my prowess in second guessing the pros. First off, it does no good. Second, the fans consistently prove the blind squirrel adage. So maybe the Rams should have taken an Olineman. But there is at least as good a chance that it would have been a wasted pick. I think it is a given though that Dallas' Oline was not available in this draft.
I don't buy this theory at all and it's a theory that is very popular on this board. The theory is that we have good talent on offense, but Fisher was such a bad coach that they all played like crap. Fisher is a .500 coach in the league. He isn't great, he isn't good, but he's not totally abysmal. The guys on the offensive line weren't playing bad just because the coaching was bad (and it was) it was because they aren't that good of players. You win on offense and defense along the line of scrimmage. Having Donald, Brockwrs, and Quinn help the defense play well. The offense has a bunch of borderline starters and a very good LT, but he's 35 and his play and durability can easily jump off a cliff. Why this team doesn't consistently invest in the line with their draft picks baffles me. My main complaint with the Fisher and Snead regimes is that they didn't invest in the line until 2015. I think it was a mistake passing on Lamp.
All that being said, Everette is a great fit with McVay.
Here is where I really take a departure. There are stud olinemen that come up - no doubt. But I personally think coaching has a greater effect on the line than anywhere else. I was all over building the line when we did. We even saw some pretty good play early on. But then the improvement I think we all were seeing simply stopped. Is that the players or the coaching and schemes. I'm going with coaching and schemes. Guess we'll see.
Clearly the Rams line was way worse than all of the other teams listed.
Clearly the Rams OFFENSE was worse.... much like a very good offense can make a defense look better and a good defense can make an offense look better, there are always cause and effect issues in football. Coaching and schemes can be as big of an effect IMO.
Remember we have replaced 40% of our starting O.L. By doing so we have upgraded our depth and hopefully shifted players into a position to be more successful. It is not like we have ignored the O.L. Maybe there just wasn't any projected starters when we drafted worth the loss of another projected player with immediate value to our team.
This
Okay but our center has been injured a lot and he's old. I fail to see the logic in not supplying a young backup. I would take anyone up on a bet that he doesn't start 16 games and he isn't on our team next year.
And would a subpar rookie start over a player we already have?
The LT is 35. Always draft linemen. Always. Kromer may be a great coach, but this line was horrible last year. Why not draft top notch talent when it falls to you? When was the last time the Rams had a pro bowl offensive lineman?
Yeah... I remember Devaney saying you ALWAYS draft a QB. I think that kind of absolute statement makes for taking bad players just because you have a mantra.
The Rams took some players that many thought were very good Olinemen in recent years. So what then adds up to a probowler? Forcing a pick so that you use one of your 8 picks on an Olineman? Or possibly taking what you have and working with them as they might have better talent and no rookie jitters?