Brian Quick Expectations

[RockinRam]

Quick will be handed the keys to the car... he will be treated like he was a top 10 pick. Your right it can be a mixed bag, I think he will be very successful early.

Why would he be treated like a top 10 pick? He was drafted in the second round. Not even in the middle or late first round.

If we treat Quick like a top ten pick, why don't we treat Isiah Pead or Rokevious Watkins as a top ten pick then? Heck, let's just treat ALL our draft picks as top ten picks because it will...give them an ego boost? (I don't understand your reasoning at all on this one.)

Again with the small school stuff... again I will defer to Colston early success.

Again I will defer to Colston

What is with the comparisons to Colston? It is not realistic to compare our rookie to ONE player who ended up being successful coming from a slightly similar situation. For every Colston, there are hundreds of receivers that are now out of the league working day jobs. To say that Quick looks like Colston absolutely does not mean he will BE or PERFORM like Colston.

That's like saying a QB picked around the same round Tom Brady was will perform up to Brady's initial success. For every Tom Brady and Colston, there's hundreds of Rhett Bomars and Keenan Burtons and the like.

My point is we have not seen him play all we have is what we have read or seen in his small school game tape. OTA's it's not just about how he looks on the practice field, how he's picking up the massive amount of plays he learning. How he is adjusting to the NFL practice ect. It not about he look pretty catches passes.

Exactly. We've never seen him play, the only evidence we have on him are OTA reports and the like, so how did you come up with the very doubtful projection that Brian Quick will get 1001 receiving yards?

I don't think using just Colston holds much validity.

Why are you comparing Brandon Gibson to Quick? You can't be serious are you? Gibson was drafted by the Philadelphia Eagles in the sixth round of the 2009 NFL Draft.
Gibson only played in 9 games for the rams as a rookie, he played behind Avery and Laurent. Quick will be our number one, he will get targeted.

Because...like you said, #1 receivers are full-fledged receivers because they are starting.

That is your reasoning. Obviously that does not make sense, which is why I am using Brandon Gibson as an example. Gibson was THRUST into the #1 WR role because we had no better option...meaning he had the OPPORTUNITY to gain 1000+ receiving yards.

Did he?

Obviously not.

And so...just because Quick might be our #1 WR starting day one, does not mean he will gain 1000 receiving yards.

And let's go back to your Colston example. You say Colston succeeded his rookie year coming from the 7th round and being thrust into a starting WR role...well Brandon Gibson was drafted in the 6th round and played his rookie year also. He was drafted a whole round before Colston. Oh my!

So why can't he be a Colston?

Oh wait, because Colston is an exception to the rule. Not everyone can be a Colston.

Yeah it is, but it's possible.

It's possible Tom Brandstater might throw for 4000 yards if we started him because he'll have the opportunity to do so, but does not mean he will.

See Colston never faced that kind of talent but yet he was good enough to play with them. It does not matter if the QB and the O line are great, if the WR cant's beat the DB due to lack of talent or experience he faces he would not be successful. That was your point right, the talent level will be such a huge jump it will take a few years for a player from a small school to adjust right?

Again with the Colston comparison. And yes, a player's surroundings deeply affects his play. When you have a stud QB behind a stud offensive line, that stud QB is going to have a lot of time to throw the ball. As you said earlier, "there is only so much a CB can do". And so yes, with the combination of having talented WRs around him taking off some of the coverage heat, and having the time to just run around and lose the CB due to your QB having ample amount of time in the pocket, a WR is bound to produce more than say being stuck on the Rams team last year.

But to give credit to Colston, he is a good player. He produced what most rookie WRs could never produce. So that is why we should use him as an exception, not a "guideline" or a "standard" where we can unfairly hold our own rookie to.

[Rambos]

Why would he be treated like a top 10 pick? He was drafted in the second round. Not even in the middle or late first round.

If we treat Quick like a top ten pick, why don't we treat Isiah Pead or Rokevious Watkins as a top ten pick then? Heck, let's just treat ALL our draft picks as top ten picks because it will...give them an ego boost? (I don't understand your reasoning at all on this one.)

It's simple really, WR was the number one need this year in the draft. If Blackmon was not taken at 5, we would have taken him. Quick by default is the number one WR and like I said will start form day one, just like Blackmon would have.

What is with the comparisons to Colston? It is not realistic to compare our rookie to ONE player who ended up being successful coming from a slightly similar situation. For every Colston, there are hundreds of receivers that are now out of the league working day jobs. To say that Quick looks like Colston absolutely does not mean he will BE or PERFORM like Colston.

I picked Colston because he was from a small school, don't tell me a player needs years coming from a small school to play at a high level when in fact it has been done and I'm sure Colston is not the only one to have early success.

That's like saying a QB picked around the same round Tom Brady was will perform up to Brady's initial success. For every Tom Brady and Colston, there's hundreds of Rhett Bomars and Keenan Burtons and the like.

I'm not saying he is guaranteed to perform at that level, I'm saying it has been done and that makes is possible. I'm also factoring that the rules in the NFL have changed recently to give a huge advantage to the receivers over the DB.


Exactly. We've never seen him play, the only evidence we have on him are OTA reports and the like, so how did you come up with the very doubtful projection that Brian Quick will get 1001 receiving yards?

I don't think using just Colston holds much validity.

I'm sure you don't he doesn't support your point of view.

Gibson was THRUST into the #1 WR role because we had no better option...meaning he had the OPPORTUNITY to gain 1000+ receiving yards.

Did he?

What year was that i must have missed the year Gibson came into camp as our project number one receiver?

2009 he was trade here after two game right?
2010 It was Avery and Clayton as the ones:

He will join a depleted Rams receiving corps that lost No. 1 option Donnie Avery to a torn ACL in late August. Clayton, 28, never achieved a 1,000-yard receiving season with the Ravens.

2011 Last year we brought in M. Sims-Walker to be the number one... still in search of a number one.

So not sure when Gibson was ever touted as the number one option? Sure he has played a lot due to injures. There is a big difference in my mind from a guy coming in as the number one talent and a guy that get a chance. I would think DX is a closere comparison to Quick then Gibson IMO.



Obviously not.

And so...just because Quick might be our #1 WR starting day one, does not mean he will gain 1000 receiving yards.

And let's go back to your Colston example. You say Colston succeeded his rookie year coming from the 7th round and being thrust into a starting WR role...well Brandon Gibson was drafted in the 6th round and played his rookie year also. He was drafted a whole round before Colston. Oh my!

So why can't he be a Colston? Is it possible? Maybe? Sure it is... will it happen, nowhere will you find in this thread that I said it's a sure thing, just possible that players from smaller schools can play great early.

Oh wait, because Colston is an exception to the rule. Not everyone can be a Colston.

If that makes you feel better... why not say yeah guys from smaller schools that have the talent an given the chance can play can succeed.

It's possible Tom Brandstater might throw for 4000 yards if we started him because he'll have the opportunity to do so, but does not mean he will.

You are leaving out the fact that no FO few in a private JET worked him out and said yeah this guys is special we can take him at 33 in the draft when the so called experts say he is a reach at 33. One other note the Rams kept this under wraps about the Quick, wonder why?

The thing about Tom Brady is they new they had something special, they carried four QB in his rookie year, why they knew he had talent.

Again with the Colston comparison. And yes, a player's surroundings deeply affects his play. When you have a stud QB behind a stud offensive line, that stud QB is going to have a lot of time to throw the ball. As you said earlier, "there is only so much a CB can do". And so yes, with the combination of having talented WRs around him taking off some of the coverage heat, and having the time to just run around and lose the CB due to your QB having ample amount of time in the pocket, a WR is bound to produce more than say being stuck on the Rams team last year.

But to give credit to Colston, he is a good player. He produced what most rookie WRs could never produce. So that is why we should use him as an exception, not a "guideline" or a "standard" where we can unfairly hold our own rookie to.

First I think you are taking my 1001 yard project a little too seriously. Second I think Quick is the exception to the rule.

Bottom line is we both want him to do well lets hope I'm right... think we will agree to disagree.