Thank God we got guys who can draft

  • 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.
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #41
If Bradford plays like he did last year we will be fine. He took off with our power run approach touching a great Carolina defense. With Robinson and Saffold at OG we should be able to dominate the run game. That will help our pass game.

Another thing to consider, Cook, Austin, and Bailey were in the first year of the system. Austin and Bailey were rookies. They will be more prepared and reacting instead of thinking. Austin broke out in Indianapolis, then got hurt not too much later. Bailey was excellent down the stretch. If Britt can give you what he did in 2009 and Givens can give you what he did in 2012 we will be ok.

The receiving corps concerns me. There is potential there, but it has to be realized. It could be the downfall of our season.
 
This was definitely a defensive draft. Robinson and Mason will definitely help and improve the offenses, but the defense made more splashes in this draft. Overall I'm happy. Next year I think we will see more pcs. added to the offense.
 
The Rams have pushed their chips toward player development on the offense. And... I don't blame them.

Tavon
Bailey
Quick
Givens
Stacy

That's a boatload of guys who may explode with a little patience.
 
Tell me who Phil Simms had when he set the Super Bowl record for pass completions when the Giants won the SB?
Here they are...
Stacey Robinson
Lionel Manuel
Phil McConkey

None of those guys are even remotely close to a true WR1.

But you say Bradford needs a Sammy Watkins to win. Well, if he does, then he's no Phil Simms. And that would be very disappointing to me because I had always thought Bradford would be at least as good as Simms.

It's time for SB to step up his game and show why he was #1 overall. And let's stop all the whining. SB isn't going to be asked to carry the offense, he just has to carry his own weight. Think he can do that? Because if he needs to be carried off the field again this year, then he's done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JYB and rhinobean
FRO said:
I'm legitimately concerned about our receiving corps. They were terrible last year. Hopefully they make the jump and improve. Can't lead the league or be near the top in drops. We will try and beat you with the run game and dominating defense.
Click to expand...

Terrible is overstating it I think, they lacked experience and played poorly at times I will admit. But I think they come on this year as a group and I think they are going to be a pleasant surprise for all of us.

The drops if we count them are how many per game? Is there a breakdown of who and when? Or by game?

Sometimes a stat like that is misleading when quoted as a whole. The difference between #3 overall and #16 can be just a few passes, which when viewed that way is a lot less significant.

So I would like to see some numbers if anyone has them.....thanks!
 
Phil Simms? Really Max? Back to the days of Phil Simms?

Now that's a reach my friend!

Wasn't that when they used to draft a position called running back too?

LOL Wow.

max said:
Tell me who Phil Simms had when he set the Super Bowl record for pass completions when the Giants won the SB?
Here they are...
Stacey Robinson
Lionel Manuel
Phil McConkey

None of those guys are even remotely close to a true WR1.

But you say Bradford needs a Sammy Watkins to win. Well, if he does, then he's no Phil Simms. And that would be very disappointing to me because I had always thought Bradford would be at least as good as Simms.

It's time for SB to step up his game and show why he was #1 overall. And let's stop all the whining. SB isn't going to be asked to carry the offense, he just has to carry his own weight. Think he can do that? Because if he needs to be carried off the field again this year, then he's done.
Click to expand...
 
How many more months do we have to debate Sam's success or lack thereof due to the WR position?

I get it. I do.

I would love a "#1" on this roster too.

Maybe we actually do?

Maybe we don't?

But there is more than one way to skin a cat! And... if friggin Kaeperdick can make it to the NFC championship... And Wussle can win a Super Bowl... That should prove it to anyone that we can win with a healthy Sam.

With or without a "#1".

It's a team game. Thank god!
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: kurtfaulk, Alan, rhinobean and 1 other person
CGI_Ram said:
The Rams have pushed their chips toward player development on the offense. And... I don't blame them.

Tavon
Bailey
Quick
Givens
Stacy

That's a boatload of guys who may explode with a little patience.
Click to expand...
Austin Pettis, despite his physical limitations, is still one of the best 3rd down receivers out there.
His percentage of catches that resulted in a first down are ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alan
CGI_Ram said:
How many more months do we have to debate Sam's success or lack thereof due to the WR position?

I get it. I do.

I would love a "#1" on this roster too.

Maybe we actually do?

Maybe we don't?

But there is more than one way to skin a cat! And... if friggin Kaeperdick can make it to the NFC championship... And Wussle can win a Super Bowl... That should prove it to anyone that we can win with a healthy Sam.

With or without a "#1".

It's a team game. Thank god!
Click to expand...

Look at the top QB's in the NFL and then you tell me how many have a "true #1" WR? How do you define that anyway? Yards? Route running? TD's? It's just a nebulous term as far as I am concerned. Sometimes a guy is the #1 by default because the rest of the WR's on the roster are average.

This debate has raged on many boards, I've been a part of it too. What matters is a solid "group" with guys that have different roles and skill sets. Not a #1, #2, #3, #4. That's a linear way of thinking about the passing game that is for the most part outdated in today's offensive schemes. Plenty of teams are lighting up the passing game with a lot of guys that would be considered #2 types and #3 types. I'm so tired of this played out "we need a true #1" argument because its a fallacy in my opinion. There is ZERO evidence that a team actually needs one to succeed, or even to succeed in the passing game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CGI_Ram and MerlinJones
RFIP said:
Phil Simms? Really Max? Back to the days of Phil Simms?

Now that's a reach my friend!

Wasn't that when they used to draft a position called running back too?

LOL Wow.
Click to expand...
Think you can dial back the sardonic replies a little? It was a legit comparison. All you have to do is provide a reason why you think it isn't without calling into question what you perceive to be the ludicrous nature of the example. Tone matters on boards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JYB
Agreed but I go back a long way with Max, and over a couple of boards. We actually agree on quite a bit and I both respect and appreciate his posts.

It just drives me up a tree on a yearly basis when the Rams treat the passing game like a red headed step child, after which people strike up the same band that "if we can't pass now it's on Sam..."

I mean in all honesty "if we cant hold teams to 14 points or less..." Is a MUCH more appropriate statement.

Offensively the statement should be; "if we can run on our division hopefully that will allow us to pass a little better..."

ANYONE that thinks this draft or FA made any major strides in our pass offense is not dealing with reality. They only hope their is IF Quick and company finally "get it."

So we shall see.

-X- said:
Think you can dial back the sardonic replies a little? It was a legit comparison. All you have to do is provide a reason why you think it isn't without calling into question what you perceive to be the ludicrous nature of the example. Tone matters on boards.
Click to expand...
 
RFIP said:
But for ME, I know today that we could have had Watkins and Z Martin, something I could have easily lived with though I freely admit I never dreamed of Donald being there at 13. He's the wild card in all of this for me. Still trying to factor that in my brain because I believe he will do more as a Ram (much more actually) than Robinson.

But in the end if Watkins quickly becomes the superstar I and most predict, and Robinson ends up being a full time G with limited but not GREAT success there, I will be greatly disappointed.
Click to expand...

Of course, you do realize that if the Rams had selected Watkins, then there's also a chance that Martin may not have been available at #13 don't you? Why? Changing one pick that high could have resulted in changes to selection/trades that occurred afterwards. AND I'd guess that any team that wanted an Olinemen and saw that the Rams didn't grab one at #2 might have traded up in front of the Rams at #13 to get one.

BTW, would still you be disappointed if the Rams were pounding the rock and winning with Robinson? That is the end result we are all hoping for correct?
 
@RFIP. Regarding the offense.. (forgot to insert quote)

Not so fast. I think the whiners averaged only 180 ish passing yds a qame. We can beat that with Bradford.

Our d will shine with Williams at the healm.
 
Last edited:
I agree and understand your point however when SF has to throw, late in halves and games, they can because they have weapons everywhere.

Dodgersrf said:
@RFIP. Regarding the offense.. (forgot to insert quote)

Not so fast. I think the whiners averaged only 180 ish passing yds a qame. We can beat that with Bradford.

Our d will shine with Williams at the healm.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dodgersrf
RFIP said:
Agreed but I go back a long way with Max, and over a couple of boards. We actually agree on quite a bit and I both respect and appreciate his posts.

It just drives me up a tree on a yearly basis when the Rams treat the passing game like a red headed step child, after which people strike up the same band that "if we can't pass now it's on Sam..."

I mean in all honesty "if we cant hold teams to 14 points or less..." Is a MUCH more appropriate statement.

Offensively the statement should be; "if we can run on our division hopefully that will allow us to pass a little better..."

ANYONE that thinks this draft or FA made any major strides in our pass offense is not dealing with reality. They only hope their is IF Quick and company finally "get it."

So we shall see.
Click to expand...
Tell me, how did Seattle score all those points last year with their group of WRs and TEs? Golden Tate, really? And it's not like their OL was stout. Okung missed a bunch of time.

Are you going to sit there and tell me Bradford would have done better than Wilson if he was the QB in Seattle?

Well, if you are then Bradford should have more than enough talent around him this year to generate over 14 pts/game.

Listen, Bradford has either got it or he doesn't. I have been a huge SB backer from before the day we drafted him, but the guy has yet to show me that he's got what it takes to be the guy. Whether it's simply staying on the field or being aggressive enough with his decision making, He has come up short. I hope he doesn't turn out to be a milquetoast type. We need a leader, is Bradford a leader? We'll find out this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JYB
If Robinson turns out to be a pro bowl LG and never successfully transitions to LT it will still be an outstanding draft pick.

This was a defensive draft to be sure, but you've got to draft according to how the draft itself unfolds in front of you. Certainly there's a philosophy going in according to team needs, but you create your board and draft the best players that are presented to you. Occasionally BPA meets need and you've got to go get a guy(trade up)....and other times the value of your draft position doesn't equate to the value of the players available...so you trade down.

Rams overall did a great job letting the draft come to them this year. IMO Snead has learned a thing or two since his first draft in '12. He's getting better at it. Players aren't the only ones who improve with experience ;)
 
3 OL, 2 DL, a QB, a top RB and 4 DBs sounds good to me. We'll have to look at OLB next year if none of the guys we already have step up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back