Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28
  1. #1
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,649
    Rep Power
    57

    is help at receiver that necessary?

    The Rams have traditionally run out of at least a 3WR set, but the times are changing. Al Saunders has come in, as had Linehan years previously, and they are much more fans of the TE position than Martz ever was.

    We have Holt and Bennett starting at WR, which isnt a bad combo at all if they are healthy. McMicheal is clearly the starting TE, and Becht and Klop will be competing for the second TE spot. We now have a decent guy to be a pass catching/running FB in Brian Leonard, and of course we have Steven Jackson.

    I think, at the current time, that although it is tempting to take a WR in the draft now that Bruce is gone, that we should probably wait until after the first two rounds to do so. I think DE and OT are bigger priorities.

    We need to be keeping Bulger upright, its the number one priority on this offense. He has been running for his life and taking hits all the time behind our weak OL, but if we can keep him healthy then the offence will be fine. Especially since i see us going to more of a Kansas City style run offence, and utilising Jackson a lot on runs and passes. I think we will also be using the TE a lot more than over recent years, especially after what Saunders has done with Tony Gonzalez and Chris Cooley. Saunders' previous offences have not been heavy on WRs, and he managed to get by in Kansas with only minimal talent at the position.

    For that reason, i see us grabbing an OT in the first two rounds of the draft, with the other pick being a DE. We need to get someone in at OT in case Pace gets injured again and as competition for Barron. I think with some competition Barron might improve, but all the time he has been in STL, Barron hasnt been pushed by anyone for his RT spot, so he hasnt been working as hard. Whoever doesnt win the RT job could slide across to RG, and id like to see Incognito given a go playing C.

    My ideal draft situation would be to trade down a few spots with a team seeking McFadden, maybe the Jets, and pick up an extra second rounder in the deal. Then we would take Gholston with our first rounder, and then grab an OT and WR in the second. The draft is fairly deep at OT and WR, so there is still a lot of value to be had in the second round.

    your thoughts?


  2. #2
    Fat Pang's Avatar
    Fat Pang is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,603
    Rep Power
    64

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    Very pertinent comment tomhawk and I'll agree with the premise for it.

    Makes the knee-jerk "omgwthhavewesignedanotherTEIbethe'sanotherFOSLletsridiculehimrepeatedlyusingthesameoldjokesuntiltheFOgetthehintandstartlisteningtous" comments look a little less understandable then they do in this post.



    Hey, I'm venting..............

  3. #3
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,649
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    i just think people arent used to the idea of the Rams having more of a base 2TE offence instead of a base 3WR offence

    but with Jackson's power running game, two TEs might be the best way to go about it

  4. #4
    laram0's Avatar
    laram0 is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    57
    Posts
    9,155
    Rep Power
    107

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    Yes Saunders has had some success with his KC style of offense but I ask how many Playoff games did they win with Saunders running the offense?

    The KC offense if you will is nice and all but we still need more speed at the WR position. To me the ultimate offense can run the ball inside and outside and stretch the field via the air. Wow that sounds familiar "GREATEST SHOW ON TURF"?:r

  5. #5
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,649
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by laram0 View Post
    Yes Saunders has had some success with his KC style of offense but I ask how many Playoff games did they win with Saunders running the offense?

    The KC offense if you will is nice and all but we still need more speed at the WR position. To me the ultimate offense can run the ball inside and outside and stretch the field via the air. Wow that sounds familiar "GREATEST SHOW ON TURF"?:r
    i do agree we need some speed at WR, but Stanley is pretty quick and you can grab speed at WR without picking one in the first two rounds. We got Curtis in the third round and he was a burner

  6. #6
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    That's a valid point about the importance of the no. 3 receiver in the current offense. If Holt was a little younger and didn't have the knee problem, I'd agree. As is, I think it's still a high priority because we don't know how long Holt is going to be around, and we don't want to get caught flat-footed when he retires. Even the staunchest Bennett apologists probably don't want to see him become the number one option in the near future.

  7. #7
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    OMG, definately need another WR. With Holt's knees? With the historical perspective of Bennett's production? In my opinion, right now, we go into the season with just 1 and 1/4 WR. Hagans? What has he ever done?

    Geez, some of you think just because they are on the Rams roster that they are some kind of offensive stud.

  8. #8
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,494
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    Right now, opposing defenses have no reason to keep a FS in deep coverage. Why? Because, as good as Holt still is, he is not a threat to burn guys deep anymore.

    The Rams need a guy who has the speed to get behind the defense and burn you for a TD. That will keep opposing defenses "honest," rather than allowing them to crowd the short to mid-range routes.

  9. #9
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,867
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    The Rams need a WR in the early part of the draft(round 2-3) not because of the immediate need, I think that between Hall, Stanley and Hagans, one can turn out to be a good enough third WR. The issue is that in three years, the time it usually takes wide receivers to get accustomed to the league, Holt will be in serious decline, Bennett will be in decline and Hall will probably be out of the league.

    We need a highly regarded wideout so that they can step into the starting position right when they're ready to. Sure, there are the Marques Colston's out there that come out as rookies ready to play, but that's hardly the norm, especially from a round 7 guy.

  10. #10
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,965
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    We have to add a WR that can get deep and take a slant to the house as well. We are very slow at WR, we might have to draft a couple. If we could get two guys like Curtis and McDonald the would be great.

  11. #11
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,649
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    im not saying that we are great at WR

    i just think that in the grand scheme of things a OT or a DE would be far better picks. We have two starters at WR, we dont have two starters at DE. We have two starters at OT, but one has been injured the last two seasons and the other is in danger of losing his position because of penalties

  12. #12
    serkicker32's Avatar
    serkicker32 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fuquay Varina nc
    Age
    27
    Posts
    356
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    I would like to see Hagens and Stanley get a chance as third receivers, they both have the moves to break a short catch into a longer gain, and hopefully they have been useing their time burried on the depth chart to learn from two of the best out there at running routes

  13. #13
    BIG-BLUE's Avatar
    BIG-BLUE is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Roseville,CA USA
    Age
    53
    Posts
    655
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    tomahawk, couldn't agree with you more. Our lines are not ones that put fear into the opposition & you need to build a team thru your lines in my opinion. You HAVE to have a strong foundation to carry you to the next level. With out it your just setting yourself up for maybe a short run @ the playoffs. I would love to see us develop into a power house running team with a nasty hard hitting defense that puts fear into our opposition.

  14. #14
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by serkicker32 View Post
    I would like to see Hagens and Stanley get a chance as third receivers, they both have the moves to break a short catch into a longer gain, and hopefully they have been useing their time burried on the depth chart to learn from two of the best out there at running routes
    I'm sorry, but I have to ask this question. How have you seen Hagans/Stanley enough to know they have the moves to do what you said? Is there a YouTube video of them or something?

  15. #15
    Mooselini's Avatar
    Mooselini is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    3,724
    Rep Power
    28

    Re: is help at receiver that necessary?

    I would still like to get a receiver in this draft. Maybe not a priority, but definately a need. I'm sorry, Bennett isn't good enough. Even with a beat up QB, crap OL, Torry Holt still had a probowl season, even with his knee. That means the excuse for Bennett being injured can be used. Torry is injured, yet still performs better than most WR's in the league.

    I do believe we need a new WR. Third round atleast.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

LinkBacks (?)

  1. -03-07-2008, 09:50 AM

Similar Threads

  1. Injuries thin the ranks in wide receiver corps
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -10-11-2007, 05:15 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: -07-11-2007, 06:43 PM
  3. Wide receiver Bennett gets six-year contract
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -03-04-2007, 11:59 AM
  4. Positional Breakdown Preview: Wagoner
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: -07-09-2006, 11:30 AM

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
  •