NFL.com ranks Los Angeles Rams’ 2018 NFL Draft class dead last in league

[Tailback]

Noteboom looked insanely good everytime I saw him out there. The biggest bummers for me were Obo and Kiser. I thought they could really add something to the D.

 

[wild ram]

I would be more inclined to agree - except the Rams LB corps was Barron - coming off an injured season, having surgeries and in fact wasn't ready for half the season; Littleton, a UDFA who did play well; Ebukam, a 4th round pick with two starts, who was not expected to be a star; and - well, not much of anybody in the other outside linebacker spot. A bunch of question marks, which they tried to fill or back up with marginal vets and late round picks. Meanwhile, to get more bodies for the linebackers mainly, they kept trading down for more picks. Their first 3 picks in 2018 either contributed immediately or at least looked promising for future action (I'm being generous with Allen). They should have tried to move up with some of those 6ths, rather than go for the cattle call approach - maybe they would have been able to find a useful linebacker for a season where they had gone substantially in to contend. Instead, they ended up having to trade a third at midseason to fill a gaping hole with a rent a player. Maybe they can resign Fowler - but he is still a free agent. Fortunately, if he goes elsewhere they should get a comp pick in the 5th or so, maybe even a 4th, next year.

I don't expect everyone to contribute - but if you know you have significant holes all across a unit, and need for things to work out very well on multiple question marks to not have it be something that drags down the team, I would have liked to see the Rams try to find a way to get a higher draft pick rather than have 7 picks in the 5th round or later, and end up having to trade a future 3rd anyway.

I do expect Snead, McVay, and Phillips to hit on more late picks than most other teams - but if you're going all in to be a Super Bowl contender, don't expect 7 late round picks to contribute - try to get some higher picks to fill known holes for the immediate as well as future seasons.

Name all the rookies ?? To say they should have traded up ?? For who ??

The Rams have been drafting excellent. Just as Bonified said. He wouldn’t trade a pick.

Wait until this next draft as well !! Will see what happens ?? With comp picks as well.

Lawlyer was workingnwith the starters in training camp. He wasn’t even mentioned.
wait for him !! Dude is a big guy who will cause
Problems in the passing lanes on slants. Takes good angles to thenQB when pressuring & screens.

 

[Akrasian]

Name all the rookies ?? To say they should have traded up ?? For who ??

The Rams have been drafting excellent. Just as Bonified said. He wouldn’t trade a pick.

Wait until this next draft as well !! Will see what happens ?? With comp picks as well.

Lawlyer was workingnwith the starters in training camp. He wasn’t even mentioned.
wait for him !! Dude is a big guy who will cause
Problems in the passing lanes on slants. Takes good angles to thenQB when pressuring & screens.

Lawler wasn't bad - in camp. He may develop. Of course, he likely could have been picked up as a UDFA.

I have a hard time thinking that if the Rams had made an effort to go for higher picks rather than trying to pick up 8 picks in the 5th or later that Wade didn't have guys he preferred over who they ended up with.

It's possible, but more likely the Rams were caught thinking themselves the smartest guys in the room. They'd had some luck finding late picks who were worthwhile, so let's get a bunch of them, even though they knew that most of the time such players don't work out, especially right away. The problem is, the Rams had serious question marks at all four linebacker spots, and really needed to have higher probability picks at a couple of spots. Instead, they realized during the season that they really had one decent - not great - linebacker during a season they were trying to make it to the Super Bowl, so they ended up trading a third to fill a hole that should have been filled during the draft or free agency. I'm not sure how anybody can point to the results for the linebacker corp and be happy with them, given how much resources the team threw everywhere else.

Look, I like Snead, McVay, and Wade. I think they are generally good judges of talent. But it was a mistake to go for quantity instead of what quality they could have to fill the linebacker holes for 2018.

 

[Loyal]

NFL.com ranks Los Angeles Rams’ 2018 NFL Draft class dead last in league

The Rams’ 2018 rookies just didn’t get a chance to see the field much this year. Does that deserve a failing grade on the draft report card?
Feb 14, 2019
https://www.turfshowtimes.com/2019/...r-rankings-joseph-noteboom-ogbonnia-okoronkwo

The Los Angeles Rams were in an unusual position heading into the 2018 NFL Draft.

Having made headlines repeatedly in free agency bringing in top-level talents through trades before adding DL Ndamukong Suh on a one-year flier, the Rams were in the unique position of both being without a single pick in the top 88 of the draft while also not needing one.

With so much talent amassed on both sides of the ball, there were not going to be very many openings for the rookie class. Perhaps at linebacker there might have been an opportunity with an early pick, but it wasn’t likely given that the Rams didn’t have a pick until #89 and that was the Rams’ sole pick in the first 110 selections of the draft.

But despite the limitations of availability placed on the class, NFL Media’s Jeremy Bergman ranked the Rams’ 2018 rookie class the worst in the NFL last year as the only rookie class to receive less than a “C” grade.

32.) Los Angeles Rams

Round 3: (No. 89 overall) Joseph Noteboom, T, 16 games/0 starts.

Round 4: (111) Brian Allen, C, 12 games/0 starts; (135) John Franklin-Myers, DE, 16 games/0 starts.

Round 5: (147) Micah Kiser, LB, 16 games/0 starts; (160) Obo Okoronkwo, DE, 0 games/0 starts.

Round 6: (176) John Kelly, RB, 4 games/0 starts; (192) Jamil Demby, T, 0 games/0 starts (waived in September, spent most of season on Lions’ practice squad, then was re-signed by Rams in December); (195) Sebastian Joseph-Day, DT, 0 games/0 starts; (205) Trevon Young, DE, 2 games/0 starts.

Round 7: (231) Travin Howard, LB, 0 games/0 starts; (244) Justin Lawler, DE, 16 games/0 starts.

Notable rookie FA signings: KhaDarel Hodge, WR, 14 games/0 starts.

The NFC champions did their team-building through trades and free agency last offseason, opting to part with their first-round selection for Brandin Cooks and mid-round picks for the likes of Marcus Peters and Aqib Talib. Considering all that, Los Angeles’ utilization of its draft capital should grade high; Cooks led the team in receiving, and Peters and Talib shored up the secondary (when healthy and/or hungry for gumbo). But when looking at what the Rams reaped from their 11 picks, it’s easy to label this draft a total bust. Los Angeles got zero starts from their draft picks. None. Zilch. Nada. Noteboom and Allen were smart plays in case there were significant injuries on the depth-less O-line (there weren’t), and Franklin-Myers can grow into a greater role next year. But this haul is easily one of the most forgettable from any team with at least 10 selections in recent memory.

I guess the part I’d push back against is the lack of context of why there were zero starts from the rookies. I don’t put much of that on the quality of the rookies. I put most of it instead on the quality of the roster the rookies were joining.

I’d also quibble a bit with the idea that Noteboom and Allen were added just for significant injuries on the O-line. As our own Joey the Jerk pointed out this week, the offensive line is nearing a point of transition with LT Andrew Whitworth, LG Rodger Saffold III and C John Sullivan all potentially exiting as early as this offseason. Noteboom and Allen weren’t drafted solely for the 2018 season. They were drafted on contracts through the 2021 season.

Myopia aside, I get it. The Rams just got very, very little out of their rookie class. Aside from JFM’s rotational duties and the special teams snaps, it just wasn’t an impact class. Yet.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if next year and beyond as some of these guys get more opportunities in offensive and defensive setups we see this grade start to improve and reflect the quality of the picks themselves and not just the roster bind they were in.

The author is an idiot. Noteboom will be a stud LT in this league.

 

[PressureD41]

Is this a sleeper cell whiner fan writing for this website lmao

 

[wild ram]

Lawler wasn't bad - in camp. He may develop. Of course, he likely could have been picked up as a UDFA.

I have a hard time thinking that if the Rams had made an effort to go for higher picks rather than trying to pick up 8 picks in the 5th or later that Wade didn't have guys he preferred over who they ended up with.

It's possible, but more likely the Rams were caught thinking themselves the smartest guys in the room. They'd had some luck finding late picks who were worthwhile, so let's get a bunch of them, even though they knew that most of the time such players don't work out, especially right away. The problem is, the Rams had serious question marks at all four linebacker spots, and really needed to have higher probability picks at a couple of spots. Instead, they realized during the season that they really had one decent - not great - linebacker during a season they were trying to make it to the Super Bowl, so they ended up trading a third to fill a hole that should have been filled during the draft or free agency. I'm not sure how anybody can point to the results for the linebacker corp and be happy with them, given how much resources the team threw everywhere else.

Look, I like Snead, McVay, and Wade. I think they are generally good judges of talent. But it was a mistake to go for quantity instead of what quality they could have to fill the linebacker holes for 2018.

I don’t beythat for a second ? Who would they have taken. Like some have stated above, it’s hard to judge a draft after 1 season.

Yeah - freaking silly to think all these guys are going to fail. They were alll worth drafting.

Waiting for Lawler as a udfa when the liked him that much ? I’m a fan of the mlb from Virginia(Kiser) as well. He showed so much improvement from OTA’s to the end of exhibition games.

As far as Meyers & Young made the team as well. Plus #69 (Day)added to the young group.
Morgan Fox & D.Easley were never healthy as veteran leaders.
OO - was hurt from the start as well.

D.Folwer will bring back value on the market, plus he was added value after injuries. It was not like the draft picks failed. It was like - wow, we can get a Top 10 draft pick for a 3rd rd pick.

 

[Akrasian]

I don’t beythat for a second ? Who would they have taken. Like some have stated above, it’s hard to judge a draft after 1 season.

Yeah - freaking silly to think all these guys are going to fail. They were alll worth drafting.

Waiting for Lawler as a udfa when the liked him that much ? I’m a fan of the mlb from Virginia(Kiser) as well. He showed so much improvement from OTA’s to the end of exhibition games.

As far as Meyers & Young made the team as well. Plus #69 (Day)added to the young group.
Morgan Fox & D.Easley were never healthy as veteran leaders.
OO - was hurt from the start as well.

D.Folwer will bring back value on the market, plus he was added value after injuries. It was not like the draft picks failed. It was like - wow, we can get a Top 10 draft pick for a 3rd rd pick.

Were they worth drafting? Sure. But the Rams had 4 immediate huge question marks for starting linebackers before the draft. They tried to deepen the linebacker corps with vets that no other team wanted, and with late round picks, without trading up to grab players, or without trading proactively for an undervalued vet before the draft.

Two players they could have moved up to take - Josie Jewell, who would have taken the draft pick that was used to take Brian Allen and a late pick, and Shaq Griffin, who on the point chart would have taken two of their 6ths to move in front of the Seahawks - and not their highest.

Jewell had a solid rookie season, and would have been valuable as an inside linebacker, especially with Barron missing so much time. Griffin had a bunch of people here hammering their desks for him. He's fast - basically would have been a reasonable attempt to fill the hole of Barron and what Wade wanted to do with him before injuries made him a lesser player. Or they could have traded for a 4th year vet who was still cheap, but who wasn't in a rebuilding team's long term plans. Instead they hoped that it would all come together with 4 question marks for a third of the defense. On the OL, people in this forum keep saying that you shouldn't start two inexperienced guys side by side, but rather have support. Why is that so different among linebackers?

But if you're going to go with Rookies, waiting until well after halfway through the draft to start picking linebackers is not a good percentage way to find an impact player the first year - and as we saw, the Rams clearly needed impact linebackers last year. It wasn't a coincidence that the Rams started playing better defensively after getting Fowler. Meanwhile, they got basically nothing from the linebackers they drafted, in a season where they did do a lot to make themselves solid bets to make the Super Bowl. What is so wrong with admitting that they could have improved the weakest unit on the team, instead of taking guys who MIGHT contribute in future seasons?

Incidentally, what makes people think they liked Lawler that much? Normally you don't wait until your 11th pick, in slot 244, to take somebody you really like. While he got some time early in camp, he only played 6 games during the season. If somebody falls to slot 244, and is taken with a team's 11th pick, that screams possible UDFA they decided to lock up.

Morgan Fox is not a veteran leader - especially as an outside linebacker. He was a UDFA repeatedly cut, who did play a little in 2017, although much of the time as a DE.

What it boils down to is that the Rams thought they could fill the linebacker positions with late picks and questionable vets. It didn't work. Yes, some of those players drafted may be useful in future years, but in the meantime in a year they had championship hopes they gambled and lost on acquiring help for 2018. If any team gambles and loses so badly at filling important positions, they deserve criticism, even if other things they do were brilliant.

Oh, and keep in mind #32 - that's where the Rams finished in yards per rushing attempt against. You know, one of the key stats to indicate linebacker positions strength. Dead last. They were bad in 2017, so they knew there was a problem and did nothing really to fix it, except sign unwanted vets and draft linebackers late.

I want the Rams to win. Which means I want them to use their resources wisely, not leave a position group with all question marks.

 

[PhillyRam]

Morgan Fox has never been cut. Was a small school star who made the Rams as an un-drafted FA in 2016. Has played well when called upon.

 

[Akrasian]

Morgan Fox has never been cut. Was a small school star who made the Rams as an un-drafted FA in 2016. Has played well when called upon.

Actually, he's been cut twice. You have to be in order to be signed to a practice squad, and the Rams signed him to their PS twice in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Fox_(American_football)

He's been fine as a UDFA - he's just not really a veteran leader. If the Rams were really counting on him to be an impact player in 2018, that was incredibly optimistic - and if they were counting on a backup to be veteran leader, well, there are issues with that, too.

It's one thing to count on one of several question marks to come through. But to expect an entire position group filled with question marks to come through, seasoned with vets nobody else wanted and late round picks - that is not a good strategy.

Addition: Why are people defending the Rams' strategy for their linebacker group in 2018? It was weak in 2017, they traded two of their starters, left themselves with one vet who had two offseason surgeries and multiple injuries in 2017 and expected him to play all season, and surrounded him with unwanted vets, young players with little playing time who were drafted late or were UDFAs, used only draft picks late in the draft to get other help, and predictably the linebackers were the weakest position group on the team. Seriously - they knew it was a problem area, and used virtually no resources to help it. Why are they being defended for it, when the results were poor?

 

[PhillyRam]

Actually, he's been cut twice. You have to be in order to be signed to a practice squad, and the Rams signed him to their PS twice in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Fox_(American_football)

He's been fine as a UDFA - he's just not really a veteran leader. If the Rams were really counting on him to be an impact player in 2018, that was incredibly optimistic - and if they were counting on a backup to be veteran leader, well, there are issues with that, too.

It's one thing to count on one of several question marks to come through. But to expect an entire position group filled with question marks to come through, seasoned with vets nobody else wanted and late round picks - that is not a good strategy.

Addition: Why are people defending the Rams' strategy for their linebacker group in 2018? It was weak in 2017, they traded two of their starters, left themselves with one vet who had two offseason surgeries and multiple injuries in 2017 and expected him to play all season, and surrounded him with unwanted vets, young players with little playing time who were drafted late or were UDFAs, used only draft picks late in the draft to get other help, and predictably the linebackers were the weakest position group on the team. Seriously - they knew it was a problem area, and used virtually no resources to help it. Why are they being defended for it, when the results were poor?

Okay, I forgot about that... I remembered him standing out in camp and making the roster.

Regardless, I do agree you obviously want as few question marks as possible, but in this league few teams if any can do that. Just not enough cap space or resources to do that.

 

[Akrasian]

Okay, I forgot about that... I remembered him standing out in camp and making the roster.

Regardless, I do agree you obviously want as few question marks as possible, but in this league few teams if any can do that. Just not enough cap space or resources to do that.

Of course you can't fill everything perfectly. But the entire linebacker group were question marks. If that's the case, put at least some decent resources into it, don't just think that everything will work out with long shots. It's not like I was blasting the entire draft - Noteboom is a future quality starter - he didn't play much because the OL had no major injuries. JFM was a quality pick where he was taken. Allen might work out - I think the jury is out on him. I wouldn't have minded his pick being used to trade up, but I can understand them wanting him. But if you have a bunch of question marks this season, use some of your 6ths to move up and take a better prospect - don't think that there are no reasons for players to fall to the 6th round. Even if they end up being solid players, it's usually not their rookie season.

 

[tklongball]

I try to not get too worked up about what Dip-Shits say/write

 

[wild ram]

Were they worth drafting? Sure. But the Rams had 4 immediate huge question marks for starting linebackers before the draft. They tried to deepen the linebacker corps with vets that no other team wanted, and with late round picks, without trading up to grab players, or without trading proactively for an undervalued vet before the draft.

Two players they could have moved up to take - Josie Jewell, who would have taken the draft pick that was used to take Brian Allen and a late pick, and Shaq Griffin, who on the point chart would have taken two of their 6ths to move in front of the Seahawks - and not their highest.

Jewell had a solid rookie season, and would have been valuable as an inside linebacker, especially with Barron missing so much time. Griffin had a bunch of people here hammering their desks for him. He's fast - basically would have been a reasonable attempt to fill the hole of Barron and what Wade wanted to do with him before injuries made him a lesser player. Or they could have traded for a 4th year vet who was still cheap, but who wasn't in a rebuilding team's long term plans. Instead they hoped that it would all come together with 4 question marks for a third of the defense. On the OL, people in this forum keep saying that you shouldn't start two inexperienced guys side by side, but rather have support. Why is that so different among linebackers?

But if you're going to go with Rookies, waiting until well after halfway through the draft to start picking linebackers is not a good percentage way to find an impact player the first year - and as we saw, the Rams clearly needed impact linebackers last year. It wasn't a coincidence that the Rams started playing better defensively after getting Fowler. Meanwhile, they got basically nothing from the linebackers they drafted, in a season where they did do a lot to make themselves solid bets to make the Super Bowl. What is so wrong with admitting that they could have improved the weakest unit on the team, instead of taking guys who MIGHT contribute in future seasons?

Incidentally, what makes people think they liked Lawler that much? Normally you don't wait until your 11th pick, in slot 244, to take somebody you really like. While he got some time early in camp, he only played 6 games during the season. If somebody falls to slot 244, and is taken with a team's 11th pick, that screams possible UDFA they decided to lock up.

Morgan Fox is not a veteran leader - especially as an outside linebacker. He was a UDFA repeatedly cut, who did play a little in 2017, although much of the time as a DE.

What it boils down to is that the Rams thought they could fill the linebacker positions with late picks and questionable vets. It didn't work. Yes, some of those players drafted may be useful in future years, but in the meantime in a year they had championship hopes they gambled and lost on acquiring help for 2018. If any team gambles and loses so badly at filling important positions, they deserve criticism, even if other things they do were brilliant.

Oh, and keep in mind #32 - that's where the Rams finished in yards per rushing attempt against. You know, one of the key stats to indicate linebacker positions strength. Dead last. They were bad in 2017, so they knew there was a problem and did nothing really to fix it, except sign unwanted vets and draft linebackers late.

I want the Rams to win. Which means I want them to use their resources wisely, not leave a position group with all question marks.

Giving up 13points in the SuperBowl is not losing ?? To each his own !!

 

[FrantikRam]

Actually, he's been cut twice. You have to be in order to be signed to a practice squad, and the Rams signed him to their PS twice in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Fox_(American_football)

He's been fine as a UDFA - he's just not really a veteran leader. If the Rams were really counting on him to be an impact player in 2018, that was incredibly optimistic - and if they were counting on a backup to be veteran leader, well, there are issues with that, too.

It's one thing to count on one of several question marks to come through. But to expect an entire position group filled with question marks to come through, seasoned with vets nobody else wanted and late round picks - that is not a good strategy.

Addition: Why are people defending the Rams' strategy for their linebacker group in 2018? It was weak in 2017, they traded two of their starters, left themselves with one vet who had two offseason surgeries and multiple injuries in 2017 and expected him to play all season, and surrounded him with unwanted vets, young players with little playing time who were drafted late or were UDFAs, used only draft picks late in the draft to get other help, and predictably the linebackers were the weakest position group on the team. Seriously - they knew it was a problem area, and used virtually no resources to help it. Why are they being defended for it, when the results were poor?

When did our subpar LB corps lose us a game this past year?

 

[FrantikRam]

Here's what we know about this draft class:

Noteboom looks like a steal - media doesn't know this yet

JFM looks like a solid player

The player everyone was most excited about was hurt to start the year and didn't play

Kiser contributed on special teams

Kelly looked very promising in the preseason but couldn't get much playing time


They can think this class wasn't good - I'd bet on having at least two starters from this class next year and at least one more the year after. I'm excited about it.

 

[Akrasian]

When did our subpar LB corps lose us a game this past year?

Early in the season when the offense was clicking, the Rams survived a few scares but won. The Bears and the close to 200 yards rushing given up would count, though. Allowing over 5 yards per carry (not counting Brady kneel downs) in the Super Bowl was at least partially a failure of the linebacking group - again, a real thumper (which they knew they didn't have before the draft and free agency) would have helped significantly. Not to mention guys who could cover out of the backfield better.

Are you trying to imply that having a seriously subpar linebacking group didn't hurt the team?

 

[Akrasian]

Here's what we know about this draft class:

Noteboom looks like a steal - media doesn't know this yet

JFM looks like a solid player

The player everyone was most excited about was hurt to start the year and didn't play

Kiser contributed on special teams

Kelly looked very promising in the preseason but couldn't get much playing time


They can think this class wasn't good - I'd bet on having at least two starters from this class next year and at least one more the year after. I'm excited about it.

I agree about Noteboom and JFM - alone, they make the draft class acceptable or better - especially since the Rams had traded their higher picks for vets.

I hope Kiser ends up making an impact - he couldn't get on the field except on special teams though, even with the team needing help on inside linebacker, which is part of the problem with the draft. Kelly also couldn't get playing time, even when the first and second string RBs were hurt. Hopefully he will improve on the little things by next season so the Rams will trust him in the offense going forward.

 

[FrantikRam]

Early in the season when the offense was clicking, the Rams survived a few scares but won. The Bears and the close to 200 yards rushing given up would count, though. Allowing over 5 yards per carry (not counting Brady kneel downs) in the Super Bowl was at least partially a failure of the linebacking group - again, a real thumper (which they knew they didn't have before the draft and free agency) would have helped significantly. Not to mention guys who could cover out of the backfield better.

Are you trying to imply that having a seriously subpar linebacking group didn't hurt the team?

Yes, I am.

I'll give you both Seahawks games as games our LBs could have lost us those games - but that's more than offset by their stellar play in the playoffs. And in the Super Bowl we held the Patriots down just fine until the defense was finally so exhausted they couldn't stop the run - citing that the Patriots were over 5 YPC is a little misleading, but even if we take that at face value, the defense as a whole only gave up 3 points in the first 53 minutes of the game.

They were much worse against the Bears, but again, the defense only allowed 15 points. Really just 10 as the Bears got a FG off a turnover and a safety.

I'm not saying better LBs wouldn't have made our team better - but we still would have lost the Super Bowl, and I'm more interested in solving why we lost the Super Bowl first.

The other thing you have to factor is that Littleton and Ebukam will almost certainly be better - both were in their first full seasons as starters and both played well enough at times to give us hope - so even if we didn't address the LB corps it's logical that they will be better next year.

 

[Akrasian]

Yes, I am.

I'll give you both Seahawks games as games our LBs could have lost us those games - but that's more than offset by their stellar play in the playoffs. And in the Super Bowl we held the Patriots down just fine until the defense was finally so exhausted they couldn't stop the run - citing that the Patriots were over 5 YPC is a little misleading, but even if we take that at face value, the defense as a whole only gave up 3 points in the first 53 minutes of the game.

They were much worse against the Bears, but again, the defense only allowed 15 points. Really just 10 as the Bears got a FG off a turnover and a safety.

I'm not saying better LBs wouldn't have made our team better - but we still would have lost the Super Bowl, and I'm more interested in solving why we lost the Super Bowl first.

The other thing you have to factor is that Littleton and Ebukam will almost certainly be better - both were in their first full seasons as starters and both played well enough at times to give us hope - so even if we didn't address the LB corps it's logical that they will be better next year.

Keep in mind that LB play improved after they used a third to get the short term rental Fowler. Which supports the idea that they really should have put some decent resources into the LB squad from the start.

But yes, I think that better linebacking might have made a difference in the Super Bowl. Cut a drive or two short, and maybe the defense isn't exhausted at the end of the game. Have a thumper in the middle, and maybe they need to pass more, and somebody gets to Brady or a pass gets intercepted at a key time or the Rams just have a short field.

Ebukam might be better next year - don't know if he will ever actually be a good starter though. If the rest of the linebacking group was fine, not a big deal, but again for last season they were counting on some of these kids or longshots producing more than actually happened. And if your plan to address the linebackers is to start taking them at pick 160 and later - you're really planning to fail at that, or counting on an unrealistic hit rate for 2018. I would hope that at least some of the kids and the 2018 draftees would be improved in 2019. I still want a vet in the middle the team can count on.

If they move Littleton to Barron's spot, and put a thumper next to him, he might improve. I don't know if he has a bunch of upward room to improve, but what caught the coaches eyes were in 2017 when he filled in at most practices the second half of the season for Barron, so it stands to reason that he might be better than average at that spot, especially with a hard hitter next to him to allow Littleton to do what he does best.

I'm not trying to rip on the coaches, but while they did a good job building up a lot of the team, they tore down the linebackers and felt they could get decent work out of them without using any significant resources, and predictably that turned out to be wrong.