Seahawks Fans On The Rams Draft Options

[RamFan503]

13 completions for 178 yards, 1 TD, and 4 INTs is winning a game with passing? That's how you view effectively attacking their strength? How about holding the shitchickens to under 200 total yards while out rushing them?

 

[jrry32]

A Touchdown to michael Floyd most certainly did.... And it's not like Arizona has been some juggernaut running the ball - in fact, the exact opposite.

A touchdown to Ricky Proehl beat the Buccaneers 11-6 in 1999. You're not about to honestly argue that the Rams won that game because of their passing attack...right?

Arizona beat Seattle because they held them to 10 points. Their passing game turned the ball over 4 times and was quite awful until that last TD.

FYI, in that game, Arizona's HBs had 142 yards rushing. So their rushing attack wasn't bad in that game either.

I'm not confident in anyone above Tavon Austin the depth chart.. sure, this team has great receivers for depth - nothing startin quality.

I don't see it with our current WR core

I'm confident that Givens can be what he is. I'm confident that Pettis can be what he is. I'm confident that Cook and Kendricks can be what they are. When you add in Austin, that's really not too bad. Especially considering I and a lot of others believe Stedman Bailey can be a rock solid #2 WR.

No, we don't have Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce but we'll be just fine at WR if Sam gets protected. I'd be fine with upgrading but as it stands now, the OL takes precedence. So unless we address it heavily in FA, I don't want Watkins at #2 or #4 or #6 assuming Matthews and Robinson are on the board.

 

[iced]

A touchdown to Ricky Proehl beat the Buccaneers 11-6 in 1999. You're not about to honestly argue that the Rams won that game because of their passing attack...right?

Arizona beat Seattle because they held them to 10 points. Their passing game turned the ball over 4 times and was quite awful until that last TD.

FYI, in that game, Arizona's HBs had 142 yards rushing. So their rushing attack wasn't bad in that game either.

Seattle also had KJ Wright and a few of their rotational DTackles inactive for the game; Fitzgerald and Palmer were also questionable to play as well and were active the last minute.

I'm confident that Givens can be what he is. I'm confident that Pettis can be what he is. I'm confident that Cook and Kendricks can be what they are. When you add in Austin, that's really not too bad. Especially considering I and a lot of others believe Stedman Bailey can be a rock solid #2 WR.

No, we don't have Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce but we'll be just fine at WR if Sam gets protected. I'd be fine with upgrading but as it stands now, the OL takes precedence. So unless we address it heavily in FA, I don't want Watkins at #2 or #4 or #6 assuming Matthews and Robinson are on the board.

And I'm confident that unless Givens and Pettis suddenly change their stripes over night, we're going to be looking to replace our starting receivers. Austin is the only threat.

No we don't have to have Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce - but that's such a drastic over exaggeration of what I'm talking about. You cannot struggle against man to man coverage and expect to be a starting receiver in the NFL - Period. You should not be a starting receiver if you're the only one in the league who couldn't record a touchdown. Spare me the excuses - 31 other teams or 104 other receivers in the NFL managed to catch atleast one, some with back up qb's and worse O-lines.

Rams led the league in drops w/ Sammy at QB - he goes down week 7, rams still finished 7th overall in drops... yea... somethin tells me it doesn't matter who's at QB with a drop rate like that

 

[jrry32]

Seattle also had KJ Wright and a few of their rotational DTackles inactive for the game; Fitzgerald and Palmer were also questionable to play as well and were active the last minute.



And I'm confident that unless Givens and Pettis suddenly change their stripes over night, we're going to be looking to replace our starting receivers. Austin is the only threat.

No we don't have to have Torry Holt and Isaac Bruce - but that's such a drastic over exaggeration of what I'm talking about. You cannot struggle against man to man coverage and expect to be a starting receiver in the NFL - Period. You should not be a starting receiver if you're the only one in the league who couldn't record a touchdown. Spare me the excuses - 31 other teams or 104 other receivers in the NFL managed to catch atleast one, some with back up qb's and worse O-lines.

Rams led the league in drops w/ Sammy at QB - he goes down week 7, rams still finished 7th overall in drops... yea... somethin tells me it doesn't matter who's at QB with a drop rate like that

Actually, the Broncos did.

And Hakeem Nicks also didn't catch a TD.

Givens and Pettis shouldn't be starting. Austin and Bailey should be. Regardless, I'm not opposed to grabbing a WR. I just don't think we need to grab Watkins. Only worth grabbing him if he's the best value. And he's not on my board unless we address OL in FA.

I'm not sure what Seattle having inactive players and Palmer/Fitz have to do with anything.

 

[iced]

Actually, the Broncos did.

No actually the Rams were leading in drops - you can pull up the game against the panthers or the texans: they say it during the broadcast.

And Hakeem Nicks also didn't catch a TD.

Givens and Pettis shouldn't be starting. Austin and Bailey should be. Regardless, I'm not opposed to grabbing a WR. I just don't think we need to grab Watkins. Only worth grabbing him if he's the best value. And he's not on my board unless we address OL in FA.

I'm not sure what Seattle having inactive players and Palmer/Fitz have to do with anything.

Hakeem nicks was in and out of the lineup all year, and i'm pretty sure Cruz was their #1 this season given - even so, you're talking about Eli Manning who threw more picks than a Point guard.

You don't know what seattle having inactive starters on defense at LB and defensive tackle had to do with Arizona's offense, especially with Arizona having key injuries to key players?

Come on man... I know you're smarter than that

 

[jrry32]

No actually the Rams were leading in drops - you can pull up the game against the panthers or the texans: they say it during the broadcast.

I don't need to because I remember for a fact that we weren't because I wrote a post about it on RRF.

Hakeem nicks was in and out of the lineup all year, and i'm pretty sure Cruz was their #1 this season given - even so, you're talking about Eli Manning who threw more picks than a Point guard.

Come on now. So was Givens. And Eli Manning vs. Kellen Clemens?

I'm not defending Givens's play but the whole TD argument is pretty skewed.

You don't know what seattle having inactive starters on defense at LB and defensive tackle had to do with Arizona's offense, especially with Arizona having key injuries to key players?

Come on man... I know you're smarter than that

Other than it being a red herring, no, I don't.

You argued that Arizona beat Seattle because of their passing attack's success. I made a rebuttal. I don't know what you're even arguing now.

If you're giving reasons why their passing attack wasn't effective now, that's irrelevant. Was never the discussion.

 

[iced]

I don't need to because I remember for a fact that we weren't because I wrote a post about it on RRF.

Well then I'd guest you were wrong - because I remember specifically hearing that Rams receivers were leading the league in drops when Bradford was back there.

Come on now. So was Givens. And Eli Manning vs. Kellen Clemens?

I'm not defending Givens's play but the whole TD argument is pretty skewed.

How is it skewed? Nicks wasn't the #1 there, Cruz was. I mean get that right first. Two, he was battling with injuries all season.

Atleast Hakeem Nicks has had some prior success - can't say the same for givens

Other than it being a red herring, no, I don't.

You argued that Arizona beat Seattle because of their passing attack's success. I made a rebuttal. I don't know what you're even arguing now.

If you're giving reasons why their passing attack wasn't effective now, that's irrelevant. Was never the discussion.

I never said that - but what I did say, the game was decided with a passing touchdown. You brought up the rushing offense - I brought up the injuries to palmer, to fitzgerald,and to seattle's D when pointing to the rushing attack..If your QB and stud receiver aren't 100%, and the defense your playing is some important pieces to their front 7 against the run - it's pretty obvious what you should do.

 

[jrry32]

Well then I'd guest you were wrong - because I remember specifically hearing that Rams receivers were leading the league in drops when Bradford was back there.

I was mistaken about Denver. They were tied with us with 21 drops when Sam went down. The Lions were #1 with 27 drops. New England was #2 with 26 drops. So no, I wasn't wrong. We weren't #1 in drops.(not that it really matters...we still earned our place in the top 5)

How is it skewed? Nicks wasn't the #1 there, Cruz was. I mean get that right first. Two, he was battling with injuries all season.

Yea, don't get condescending with me. You get your shit right. Cruz is their slot WR and plays the Z in 2 WR sets. Nicks was their X WR.

Atleast Hakeem Nicks has had some prior success - can't say the same for givens

Which is irrelevant. You made a claim. You were wrong. Own up to it rather than making excuses.

I never said that - but what I did say, the game was decided with a passing touchdown. You brought up the rushing offense - I brought up the injuries to palmer, to fitzgerald,and to seattle's D when pointing to the rushing attack..If your QB and stud receiver aren't 100%, and the defense your playing is some important pieces to their front 7 against the run - it's pretty obvious what you should do.

I brought up the Arizona rushing offense? Seriously, dude?

And it's not like Arizona has been some juggernaut running the ball - in fact, the exact opposite.

This is what you said:

Agreed - but you gotta be able to attack their strength too..That's how how they lost, at home, to Arizona. You have to be able to throw the football in football - you don't just concede to a teams strength

Issue is that Arizona didn't throw the ball effectively. Now, maybe I misunderstood you and all you meant is that the game winning score came from a passing TD but it didn't seem that way from the way it was worded. And if that's what you meant, my apologies, I was in the wrong.

Regardless, I have quite a bit of confidence that Sam is capable of doing AT MINIMUM what Palmer did against Seattle in that game with the WR corp we currently have.

 

[iced]

I was mistaken about Denver. They were tied with us with 21 drops when Sam went down. The Lions were #1 with 27 drops. New England was #2 with 26 drops. So no, I wasn't wrong. We weren't #1 in drops.(not that it really matters...we still earned our place in the top 5)



Yea, don't get condescending with me. You get your crap right. Cruz is their slot WR and plays the Z in 2 WR sets. Nicks was their X WR.



Which is irrelevant. You made a claim. You were wrong. Own up to it rather than making excuses.

K I was wrong about Nicks - even checked his snap count. But Irregardless - 30 other teams have a starting receiver with atleast 1 td... we haven't had a 700 yard receiver

I brought up the Arizona rushing offense? Seriously, dude?

yea, you mentioned them running the ball and they did run it a lot.. but when it came down to it, they used their strength at Reciever and attacked Seattle's strength - their hold-you-long-time Pass D.

This is what you said:


Issue is that Arizona didn't throw the ball effectively. Now, maybe I misunderstood you and all you meant is that the game winning score came from a passing TD but it didn't seem that way from the way it was worded. And if that's what you meant, my apologies, I was in the wrong.

Regardless, I have quite a bit of confidence that Sam is capable of doing AT MINIMUM what Palmer did against Seattle in that game with the WR corp we currently have.

I have confidence in Sam doing that too - however, our receivers making that Grab or even getting open enough like that is completely different story.. ESPECIALLY against Seattle's corners.

 

[jrry32]

K I was wrong about Nicks - even checked his snap count. But Irregardless - 30 other teams have a starting receiver with atleast 1 td... we haven't had a 700 yard receiver

And our QB was still on pace for 32 TDs and only 9 Ints. I think that speaks volumes. Protection means more than WRs for Sam.

yea, you mentioned them running the ball and they did run it a lot.. but when it came down to it, they used their strength at Reciever and attacked Seattle's strength - their hold-you-long-time Pass D.

And they did so ineffectively. Had it not been for their defense, they would have lost.

I have confidence in Sam doing that too - however, our receivers making that Grab or even getting open enough like that is completely different story.. ESPECIALLY against Seattle's corners.

I'm really not too worried about that. If we can run the ball effectively, we can throw on Seattle's defense well enough to win. As long as we play defense.