Robinson/Matthews AND Yankey/Su'a-Filo might be a bad idea.

  • 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.
Boffo97

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
There's been some talk about grabbing a tackle AND grabbing a guard later to make our OL supreme.

On paper, the idea has merit... but there's one big problem. If that's our plan, the two will likely start at our two guard positions, which are the current weak links in our line. Therefore, we wouldn't be signing any starting quality guards in FA.

BUT if we don't... then it would become obvious to other teams what we're doing, and our chances of getting outmaneuvered for Yankey/Su'a-Filo go way up.

Or is there a way out of this dilemma I'm not seeing?
 
Nobody knows what we're gonna do. Snead is doing a great job from that prospective.
 
I'm all for us drafting one of the top two tackles with our first selection and then a guard early in round two.

Boffo97 said:
... our chances of getting outmaneuvered for Yankey/Su'a-Filo go way up.
Click to expand...
I don't think that any team is going to pick a player purely so that we don't get him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuiltRamTough
Flipper_336 said:
I don't think that any team is going to pick a player purely so that we don't get him.
Click to expand...
But teams who want a guard themselves will know they have to leapfrog us.
 
Boffo97 said:
But teams who want a guard themselves will know they have to leapfrog us.
Click to expand...
True. But Snead has shown that he's more than willing to move around if he wants a certain player. If we trade down from #2, we will have the ammunition to trade back up into the late-first to grab Yankey or Su'a-Filo if needs be.
 
Boffo97 said:
But teams who want a guard themselves will know they have to leapfrog us.
Click to expand...
How would they know that? Based on what we do or don't do in FA? I'm not buying that. We could just as easily draft OLine anywhere in the draft(rds 2 thru 7). We could also grab a vet after the draft.
 
I have not seen any reports of the Rams talking with OL FAs yesterday or today but there were several reports linking them to FA DBs. Know that DB is one of the areas of weakness would make things better if they could fill one of the holes in the FA period with a young proven guy.

If the Rams could trade down from #2 to #6 and #37 That would pretty much assure the Rams of 1 of the top tackles and one of the top guards without being blocked by others snatching them up in front of us and still having additional picks in the first two rounds.

6, 13, 37, and 44 would be a great start to this years draft and filling some holes with premium talent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NJRamsFan
Boffo97 said:
There's been some talk about grabbing a tackle AND grabbing a guard later to make our OL supreme.

On paper, the idea has merit... but there's one big problem. If that's our plan, the two will likely start at our two guard positions, which are the current weak links in our line. Therefore, we wouldn't be signing any starting quality guards in FA.

BUT if we don't... then it would become obvious to other teams what we're doing, and our chances of getting outmaneuvered for Yankey/Su'a-Filo go way up.

Or is there a way out of this dilemma I'm not seeing?
Click to expand...

For one, Yankey and Su'a-Filo aren't the only two guards in this draft class.
Secondly, the OT selection could very well play OT, moving Barksdale back to being the swing guy that is still needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BonifayRam
Although I can't help but root for the "sexier" draft pics, investing early and often in the o-line could really pay off. Barring another Jason Smith catastrophe. SF and SEA both did it and it played a large part in them becoming elite.
 
Maybe we should go for both top tackles. Jake Matthews can slide immediately into the LT slot. Greg can man the RT position if Jake Long is not ready, or start out at LG while Jake mans the RT spot.

We can choose one or the other at #2 overall and trade up from #13 overall for the other. Alternatively, we can move down to #4|#6 overall for one and try and trade up for the other.
 
jap said:
Maybe we should go for both top tackles. Jake Matthews can slide immediately into the LT slot. Greg can man the RT position if Jake Long is not ready, or start out at LG while Jake mans the RT spot.

We can choose one or the other at #2 overall and trade up from #13 overall for the other. Alternatively, we can move down to #4|#6 overall for one and try and trade up for the other.
Click to expand...

What would you do with long in this scenario...not that I'm opposed to it
 
NJRamsFan said:
What would you do with long in this scenario...not that I'm opposed to it
Click to expand...

I mentioned it in the post: if jake Long is ready after his rehab, he plays at RT while Matthews mans the LT spot. It could be that Jake Long starts out at LT until Matthews feels comfortable, then let them switch. Jake Long has been having increasing problems with speed rushers as he fights age and injuries---the younger Matthews may be the best LT option in the short term.
 
jap said:
I mentioned it in the post: if jake Long is ready after his rehab, he plays at RT while Matthews mans the LT spot. It could be that Jake Long starts out at LT until Matthews feels comfortable, then let them switch. Jake Long has been having increasing problems with speed rushers as he fights age and injuries---the younger Matthews may be the best LT option in the short term.
Click to expand...

so you did lol...idk what i was reading :doh:. Honestly, if we can get them both on the team I can't say I would be opposed. Although, Imo it might be a little overkill
 
NJRamsFan said:
so you did lol...idk what i was reading :doh:. Honestly, if we can get them both on the team I can't say I would be opposed. Although, Imo it might be a little overkill
Click to expand...

They will certainly choose the best man for their offensive scheme and go from there. It's easy to go crazy with draft speculations. :LOL:
 
  • Like
Reactions: NJRamsFan
NJRamsFan said:
so you did lol...idk what i was reading :doh:. Honestly, if we can get them both on the team I can't say I would be opposed. Although, Imo it might be a little overkill
Click to expand...
We won't be able to run or pass, but we'll have a lot of protection while we're not able to do anything. ;)

(That last line needs some sort of halfway blue color.)
 
Boffo97 said:
We won't be able to run or pass, but we'll have a lot of protection while we're not able to do anything. ;)

(That last line needs some sort of halfway blue color.)
Click to expand...

Idk, with an o-line like that the qb sneak could be devastating
 
jap said:
I mentioned it in the post: if jake Long is ready after his rehab, he plays at RT while Matthews mans the LT spot. It could be that Jake Long starts out at LT until Matthews feels comfortable, then let them switch. Jake Long has been having increasing problems with speed rushers as he fights age and injuries---the younger Matthews may be the best LT option in the short term.
Click to expand...

I agree with your scenario!
 
jap said:
You really ought to credit BonifayRam as he first suggested sliding Jake Long to the right side.
Click to expand...
I blame this post on my eye glasses. At first, I was disagreeing with you, because I'd exposed your post to my naked eye. After I posted, I found my glasses, my eyes agast to see, I'd repeated your post verbatim. So I edited, and slinked away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back