Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 162
Like Tree234Likes

Thread: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

  1. #136
    Rammed's Avatar
    Rammed is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    403
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    For all those saying silly things about the tradedown here's a little math of all the trades in the first round based on the (yes) old value chart.

    Rams #6 Pick - 1600 Pts
    Cowboys #14 & #45 - 1550 Pts

    Minnesota #3 Pick -2600 Pts
    Cleveland #4, #118, #139 & #211 - 1901.5 pts

    Tampa Bay #5 - 1700 Pts
    Jaguars #7 & #101 - 1596 Pts

    Seahawks #12 pick - 1200 Pts.
    Eagles #15, #114 & #172 - 1136.6 pts
    Last edited by Rammed; -04-27-2012 at 08:44 AM.


  2. #137
    Ahmedrams81's Avatar
    Ahmedrams81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Fairfax, Virginia
    Posts
    642
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Now we'll end up taking another young wr in the 2nd round who will amount to nothing just like Donnie Avery. I can't stand this front office, the rams frustrate me so bad.

  3. #138
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,648
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    If St. Louis doesn't select AT LEAST ONE guy targeted as a potential star wide receiver in today's 2nd round, there is no possible justification or defense.
    Many would argue that such a player does not exist in this draft class, let alone the second round.
    md8 likes this.

  4. #139
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,541
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahmedrams81 View Post
    Now we'll end up taking another young wr in the 2nd round who will amount to nothing just like Donnie Avery. I can't stand this front office, the rams frustrate me so bad.
    Yea, this front office really sucks. All they did was turn a single #2 pick into Michael Brocker, #39, #45, a 2013 first rounder, and a 2014 first rounder. I'm sure one wide receiver will do more for this team than 5 high end players.

    Good freakin' grief.
    laram0, C-Mob 71, md8 and 3 others like this.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  5. #140
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,648
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahmedrams81 View Post
    Now we'll end up taking another young wr in the 2nd round who will amount to nothing just like Donnie Avery. I can't stand this front office, the rams frustrate me so bad.
    Or we could take another young WR in the 2nd round who will turn into one of the best WRs this game has seen just like Isaac Bruce.
    md8 likes this.

  6. #141
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,541
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by jersey
    No- the point is that most people when faced with multiple weaknesses address the area of HIGHEST NEED first.
    I disagree with your premise on several levels. First, you are assuming the highest need is WR. Second, why would the Rams pass on an A- prospect at a position of need to select a B- prospect at a position of need?
    md8 likes this.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  7. #142
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,193
    Rep Power
    69

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    I disagree with your premise on several levels. First, you are assuming the highest need is WR. Second, why would the Rams pass on an A- prospect at a position of need to select a B- prospect at a position of need?
    And I would argue that the Rams DID EXACTLY THAT when they moved down twice in this draft and failed to land Blackmon (an "A-" prospect) at the receiver position. And I DO sincerely believe that with all of our needs, the lack of a game breaking wide receiver is indeed our biggest one.
    Last edited by NJ Ramsfan1; -04-27-2012 at 09:10 AM.

  8. #143
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,648
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    And I would argue that the Rams DID EXACTLY THAT when they moved down twice in this draft and failed to land Blackmon (an "A-" prospect) at the receiver position. And I DO sincerely believe that with all of our needs, the lack of a game breaking wide receiver is indeed our biggest one.
    The second move down had nothing to do with missing Blackmon. Blackmon was gone when the trade was made.

  9. #144
    Dave2oo2 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    124
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    It is a rebuilding team because of the last couple GM/Coach haven't done very well in any aspect. I have more hope for Fisher just because he has been around forever. He is a defense coach that wants to build a team his way and the fans have to have a short memory because it is someone new calling the shots. I didn't really like the pick, (I have said it before, you can read the other posts) but I think we need to calm down because it wasn't like one person was going to make the Rams a dominating team. Let's see what they do the rest of the draft.

    Our defense looks to be pretty good, on paper, and we all know there are going to be incentives for them to play good.... or there was going to be incentives.

  10. #145
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,193
    Rep Power
    69

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by tomahawk247 View Post
    The second move down had nothing to do with missing Blackmon. Blackmon was gone when the trade was made.
    Teams always have scenarios envisioned. One of the worst kept secrets was Jacksonville's love for Blackmon. The Rams put themselves in a position to NOT get him when they traded out of the #2 to begin with. I digress, but I argued awhile back that the deal they made should have been with Cleveland, not Washington. They'd have still (reputedly) obtained at least an additional future 1st rounder and only dropped to #3, not #6.

  11. #146
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,296
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    No- the point is that most people when faced with multiple weaknesses address the area of HIGHEST NEED first.
    Tell that to the New England Patriots, who aggressive traded up twice in the first round not to address their glaring weakness in the secondary but for two front seven players. Or the Pittsburgh Steelers, who passed on what many perceived to be a perfect fit for them at ILB with Dont'a Hightower and instead took a player at a position that many believe can be adequately addressed outside the first round.

    My guess is that most people who are in charge of personnel in the NFL, when faced with multiple weaknesses, address as many as they can as best as they can. Which is what the Rams did. Based on the Mike Silver article from this morning, the Rams were ready to take Blackmon at six. But they have too many needs all over the board to give up resources and move up 1-2 spots to secure one guy. When Blackmon went off the board, they moved down, received even more resources, and got a guy who filled a major area of need. This is smart football, IMO.


    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    With their past failings to get excellent receiving help in rounds 2-7 (covering multiple coaching/front office regimes, I might add), forgive me for not jumping thru hoops hoping the Rams will click on some "find" rather than take the one guy everyone associated with professional football felt was a game breaker- someone the Rams most desperately need.
    Two points here.

    Please, enough with the "past failings" or "recent draft history" statements. It's preposterous to hold past failures of previous regimes over the heads of this one. Simply makes no sense at all. The new regime will be made or broken based on their own choices, not those of their predecessors.

    Two, I loved Blackmon as a prospect and he was my first choice for the Rams, but you're reinventing history by saying everyone associated with football felt he was a game breaker. There were some who were down on him, and some who had him second behind Floyd. Heck, I even saw one ranking that had him third behind Floyd AND Wright. If there was anything close to a consensus about Blackmon, it's that he wasn't the elite receiver prospect that Megatron and A.J. Green were. Even those who thought highly of him and believed he was worth of being a Top 4-6 pick (I'm in this category) acknowledged that.


    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    I am dead set against picking a defensive tackle with the first pick of a draft. Remember a few years ago when some people wanted us to pick Glenn Dorsey with the 2nd pick in the draft? He was the next "great" defensive lineman, and a guy held in much higher regard than Michael Brockers. What exactly has Glenn Dorsey done with Kansas City? Is KC some kind of defensive juggernaut now?
    I would think Ndamukong Suh would be a more recent example of a highly touted defensive tackle the Rams were in contention for, but since he's actually been successful and doesn't support your point, I can see why you'd not bring him up.

    As for Dorsey, I'd point out that a year after drafting Dorsey to be the penetrating 4-3 DT everyone projected him as, Kansas City made a coaching change and transitioned to a 3-4 scheme that did not benefit Dorsey's skill set. So I'm not sure how valid his situation is in this context.

    Regardless, I understand people have predisposed opinions on certain positions in certain rounds. I guess that's fine, but I doubt any NFL team agreed with that opinion and completely took all defensive tackles off their first-round board leading up to this draft.


    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    I just find it amusing that NO ONE- fans or pundits- extolled the virtues of Michael Brockers going into this draft as far as the Rams targeting the guy, now all of a sudden people "love" the pick.
    Well, that's wrong. Howard Balzer reported the Rams' interest in Brockers at the Combine, and I said at the time that he would make a lot of sense for the Rams if they traded down a couple spots. I'd be happy to link you to the quote.

    But as for why a wider portion of the fanbase or media wasn't focusing on Brockers as a match for the Rams, someone already addressed that: the Rams trading out of the Top Ten was a rarely talked about scenario, so obviously any options the Rams may have were they to trade down weren't going to get much attention. Even when the media tried to pump up Fletcher Cox as being an option at six, most fans didn't like the value of any DT at six. So obviously Brockers wouldn't come up since few were discussing another big trade down.

    To try and use that as reasoning as to why it's a poor pick just makes little sense. Again, I can tell you from being in the chat room live during the draft that Brockers was frequently mentioned as a possible target for the Rams as the 14th pick neared.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  12. #147
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,485
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    Teams always have scenarios envisioned. One of the worst kept secrets was Jacksonville's love for Blackmon. The Rams put themselves in a position to NOT get him when they traded out of the #2 to begin with. I digress, but I argued awhile back that the deal they made should have been with Cleveland, not Washington. They'd have still (reputedly) obtained at least an additional future 1st rounder and only dropped to #3, not #6.
    Cleveland's offer was not as good as Washington's, so the Rams made the right call when they traded down to #6. Yes, the ultimate impact of that move was that they lost the opportunity to take Blackmon, but I can't understand how you don't get that Blackmon probably won't be worth more than 3 first round picks and a second round pick (which later became 2 second round picks).

  13. #148
    NJ Ramsfan1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,193
    Rep Power
    69

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Tell that to the New England Patriots, who aggressive traded up twice in the first round not to address their glaring weakness in the secondary but for two front seven players. Or the Pittsburgh Steelers, who passed on what many perceived to be a perfect fit for them at ILB with Dont'a Hightower and instead took a player at a position that many believe can be adequately addressed outside the first round.

    My guess is that most people who are in charge of personnel in the NFL, when faced with multiple weaknesses, address as many as they can as best as they can. Which is what the Rams did. Based on the Mike Silver article from this morning, the Rams were ready to take Blackmon at six. But they have too many needs all over the board to give up resources and move up 1-2 spots to secure one guy. When Blackmon went off the board, they moved down, received even more resources, and got a guy who filled a major area of need. This is smart football, IMO.




    Two points here.

    Please, enough with the "past failings" or "recent draft history" statements. It's preposterous to hold past failures of previous regimes over the heads of this one. Simply makes no sense at all. The new regime will be made or broken based on their own choices, not those of their predecessors.

    Two, I loved Blackmon as a prospect and he was my first choice for the Rams, but you're reinventing history by saying everyone associated with football felt he was a game breaker. There were some who were down on him, and some who had him second behind Floyd. Heck, I even saw one ranking that had him third behind Floyd AND Wright. If there was anything close to a consensus about Blackmon, it's that he wasn't the elite receiver prospect that Megatron and A.J. Green were. Even those who thought highly of him and believed he was worth of being a Top 4-6 pick (I'm in this category) acknowledged that.




    I would think Ndamukong Suh would be a more recent example of a highly touted defensive tackle the Rams were in contention for, but since he's actually been successful and doesn't support your point, I can see why you'd not bring him up.

    As for Dorsey, I'd point out that a year after drafting Dorsey to be the penetrating 4-3 DT everyone projected him as, Kansas City made a coaching change and transitioned to a 3-4 scheme that did not benefit Dorsey's skill set. So I'm not sure how valid his situation is in this context.

    Regardless, I understand people have predisposed opinions on certain positions in certain rounds. I guess that's fine, but I doubt any NFL team agreed with that opinion and completely took all defensive tackles off their first-round board leading up to this draft.




    Well, that's wrong. Howard Balzer reported the Rams' interest in Brockers at the Combine, and I said at the time that he would make a lot of sense for the Rams if they traded down a couple spots. I'd be happy to link you to the quote.

    But as for why a wider portion of the fanbase or media wasn't focusing on Brockers as a match for the Rams, someone already addressed that: the Rams trading out of the Top Ten was a rarely talked about scenario, so obviously any options the Rams may have were they to trade down weren't going to get much attention. Even when the media tried to pump up Fletcher Cox as being an option at six, most fans didn't like the value of any DT at six. So obviously Brockers wouldn't come up since few were discussing another big trade down.

    To try and use that as reasoning as to why it's a poor pick just makes little sense. Again, I can tell you from being in the chat room live during the draft that Brockers was frequently mentioned as a possible target for the Rams as the 14th pick neared.
    To address several points:

    NOWHERE- as some seem to assert- did I ever suggest the Rams move UP to get Blackmon. I don't believe they should have traded down to begin with, but that's another argument for another time (which everyone disagrees with me on as well). It's been suggested, though I can't prove with any certainty, that a deal could have been had with Cleveland in which the Rams could have STILL gotten a future #1 (and Lord knows what else), and only dropped to #3 instead of #6 and gotten Blackmon or even Trent Richardson at that spot.

    Your point about Ndamokong Suh is well taken, but I'd counter that Suh was regarded as a -once-in-a-lifetime prospect who was and is ten times the player and pass rusher as Michael Brockers is. He is simply the one exception to the rule. I didn't neglect to mention him purposely to prove a point. And as a jerk of the highest order who is an embarrassment to his team, Suh is a guy I'm glad we don't have instead of Bradford.

    Yes, you cannot hold the current regime responsible for the sins of the past. But it is both understandable and perfectly logical for a fan of a team with a horrific track record and a litany of past failures littering the landscape to bring up past bad drafts, past bad records and past poor decision-making. Skepticism with this football team is rooted in past failures. And this is coming from a guy who endlessly championed the hiring of Jeff Fisher.

    I think I've said enough on the subject. I simply feel that getting a game-changer and someone who the majority of coaches/front office people thought was an elite offensive talent was essential in the first round. You cannot hope to unearth an offensive stud in the latter rounds, while it is MUCH MORE likely to get a real good interior lineman at that time. I don't agree with the strategy.

    Like all Rams fans, I hope I'm mistaken and all decisions turn out well.

  14. #149
    RebelYell's Avatar
    RebelYell is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    St. Louis ,Missouri
    Posts
    2,334
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    Why do people feed the troll?

  15. #150
    KCRamFan's Avatar
    KCRamFan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Age
    40
    Posts
    79
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: 2012 Rams First Round Pick (#14): Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

    While I was bummed Jacksonville traded up and took Blackmon, but even if he was available at #6 he doesn't automatically solve this team's problems like some of you seem to think. There are so many needs on this team it isn't even funny.

    As I saw things there were 3 areas in which the Rams needed to improve:

    1. Defend against the run.

    The pick of Brockers I think will help out from what I am reading about him. If Fisher/Snead really think he was the best available DT on their board then I am fine with the pick. I am tired of watching the Rams get gouged for big runs against average RBs. Hopefully we can also pick up a quality OLB somewhere in the next few rounds.

    2. Protect the QB.

    3. Score more points on offense.

    I firmly believe that if we get #2 fixed, it will help with #3. We could have all pro WRs out there but the way the Oline played last year it wouldn't have mattered. They gave up the most sacks in the NFL. Getting multiple picks in the next few drafts should hopefully allow us to fix that problem by getting more players and adding quality depth.

    If we can get a great offensive line, then Bradford can make average WRs look like all-pros, not to mention what it would do to help the running game. Just look what Trent Green/Priest Holmes/Larry Johnson did in KC behind that offinsive line they had while Vermiel was there as the coach. Can any of you really name all the WRs they had, yet they were at the top/near the top in scoring.

    I personally think we are off to a good start to addressing the needs of the team. Not everything will be fixed in one draft but as long as we continue to add quality players to the roster, it won't be long before we are back competing for playoff games.

Similar Threads

  1. BernieM's 2012 Complete 7 Round Rams Mock Draft
    By BernieM in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -04-14-2012, 11:44 PM
  2. Replies: 51
    Last Post: -01-19-2012, 06:39 PM
  3. First Look: Rams 2012 First Pick Poll
    By AvengerRam in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: -12-01-2011, 07:59 PM
  4. Replies: 18
    Last Post: -04-24-2010, 02:42 PM
  5. Replies: 65
    Last Post: -03-02-2009, 02:21 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •