throwback week



Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    ramhard's Avatar
    ramhard is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    454
    Rep Power
    14

    New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    I've been thinking about the Rams and no matter the individual debates, the Rams have two problems:

    (1). Lack of balance of talent due to salaries of the stars; and
    (2). Lack of physical play (despite the players and coaches protests - see Atlanta game for reference and almost any others the past season).


    The Rams can tinker but to be a champion again - not just making the players - will require them to remedy both of these.

    On (1). The Rams can go the way of the Indy Colts and be entertaining during the season and lose in the playoffs, or can make some tough decisions. Here are the tough decisions. The Rams pay too much money right now to WR's, RB, and at one OT. There is no way the Rams can be balanced paying this much money to Bruce and Holt not to mention what Manu is paid at TE.
    I say the Rams either drastically reduce Bruce's pay or trade him. I know it hurts and he is the heart of the team, but that is what every said when the Patriots traded Lawyer Milloy. The Rams just can't afford to have that much tied up at the receiver spot. I would also either cut or drastically restructure Faulk. He is not worth more than $1.5-$2M a year right now. You can't count on him for more than 9-10 games a year, and even then he is a solid but not spectacular back. Put it this way, if the Rams were on the free agent market to sign a back and they had Jackson, how much would you be willing to pay Faulk if he was a FA from another team? And Pace is a premier OT, but I think his contract issues have handcuffed the team. I would trade him also, and you could sign 2-3 solid linemen with that money.

    Tough things do, but necessary.

    (2). Speaking of tough that brings me to #2. The Rams are a finesse team - period, and can trick their way through the regualar season, but unless things fall right can't make it through the playoffs. So first of all the draft. Don't draft anyone that doesn't have in their scouting report - tough, physical, mean... period. No exceptions. As we already know that means, letting Pollley go, keeping Pisa, moving Thomas to ST and the bench, and bringing in two new LB's (I don't think Chillar is the answer). That also means one new corner in the rotation (nickle or starter) who is physical (maybe Lucas from Seattle), and a hard hitting safety who can cover. Plus drafting a G/T who can run block.

    I know it's a overhaul, and that's why money has to be freed up. The capologist better than me can figure out the best way to clear cap room.
    Last edited by ramhard; -02-07-2005 at 12:26 AM. Reason: grammar


  2. #2
    psycho9985 Guest

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    Not going to happen.We can dream the dream, but common since in our opinions doesnt apply.You and I can see it and all the clanies ,but I dont see the Rams head office spreading out the doe,say like the Pats or Eagles do. We just dont know the formula.When it comes to balance and know how we lost our best to kansas city.

  3. #3
    ZigZagRam's Avatar
    ZigZagRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Louis
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,700
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    I say the Rams either drastically reduce Bruce's pay or trade him.
    I'm not sure but I think that's blasphemy.

    From what I hear from various sources on here the Rams are going to be able to make a bigger splash in free agency this year. We have the Polley money to play around with, not to mention the Aeneas money (I'm sure he was making a large chunk of change). If we can sign Pace long-term or let him go that will free up an enormous amount of money. I do not, however, think Bruce should be traded, as the cap money that we'd save (minus the hit for trading him of course) would not be worth the production we'd lose.

    Bruce should and will be a Ram for life. On the other hand, Marshall should restructure or be dealt. With Stephen Jackson his value is declining. Who knows what we could get for him though.

  4. #4
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,044
    Rep Power
    171

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    Quote Originally Posted by ramhard
    I've been thinking about the Rams and no matter the individual debates, the Rams have two problems:

    (1). Lack of balance of talent due to salaries of the stars; and
    (2). Lack of physical play (despite the players and coaches protests - see Atlanta game for reference and almost any others the past season).
    Both are valid points. You're off to a good start here.

    The Rams can tinker but to be a champion again - not just making the players - will require them to remedy both of these.

    On (1). The Rams can go the way of the Indy Colts and be entertaining during the season and lose in the playoffs, or can make some tough decisions. Here are the tough decisions. The Rams pay too much money right now to WR's, RB, and at one OT. There is no way the Rams can be balanced paying this much money to Bruce and Holt not to mention what Manu is paid at TE.
    I say the Rams either drastically reduce Bruce's pay or trade him.
    I have no problem with the concept of restructuring Bruce's contract to save cap space, but why would they trade him. He still is a 1,000 yard receiver, so he has a lot of value if kept. In a trade, his age would probably mean he'd fetch only 3rd round draft choice or less.

    I know it hurts and he is the heart of the team, but that is what every said when the Patriots traded Lawyer Milloy.
    That's different. He was insisting on a new contract for huge money.

    The Rams just can't afford to have that much tied up at the receiver spot.
    With the offense the Rams run, its necessary.

    I would also either cut or drastically restructure Faulk. He is not worth more than $1.5-$2M a year right now. You can't count on him for more than 9-10 games a year, and even then he is a solid but not spectacular back. Put it this way, if the Rams were on the free agent market to sign a back and they had Jackson, how much would you be willing to pay Faulk if he was a FA from another team?
    Again, I think restructuring his contract is a good idea. But you can't cut him. That's cap suicide.

    And Pace is a premier OT, but I think his contract issues have handcuffed the team. I would trade him also, and you could sign 2-3 solid linemen with that money.
    You can't train him unless he is signed to a long-term deal or franchised. The latter situation would yield 2 #1s, but who'd going to give the Rams that? If a long term deal can be reached, why trade him? As you said, he is a premier OT (and those are pretty rare).

    Tough things do, but necessary.

    (2). Speaking of tough that brings me to #2. The Rams are a finesse team - period, and can trick their way through the regualar season, but unless things fall right can't make it through the playoffs. So first of all the draft. Don't draft anyone that doesn't have in their scouting report - tough, physical, mean... period. No exceptions. As we already know that means, letting Pollley go, keeping Pisa, moving Thomas to ST and the bench, and bringing in two new LB's (I don't think Chillar is the answer). That also means one new corner in the rotation (nickle or starter) who is physical (maybe Lucas from Seattle), and a hard hitting safety who can cover. Plus drafting a G/T who can run block.

    I know it's a overhaul, and that's why money has to be freed up. The capologist better than me can figure out the best way to clear cap room.[/QUOTE]

    I agree that the LB corps is a priority, and toughness is a premium (good tackling would be nice too.

    I don't agree, though, that a team can't run a "finesse" offense and win. Heck, the Eagles could have used a bit more finesse last night. The Rams need, however, to have the ability to run block when necessary, and to play better defense. If they can do those things, I have no problem with the Fast and Furious approach.

  5. #5
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,706
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    Quote Originally Posted by AV
    I don't agree, though, that a team can't run a "finesse" offense and win.
    Finesse offense, yes. In fact, we do that better than anyone, the last 5 years has shown that. But I don't think there is such a thing as a successful "finesse" defense. They just don't exist. Our defense certainly isn't a successful finesse defense. Some would call them a finesse defense, but I would think a finesse defense would generate more interceptions or at least be able to catch one now and then. No, I think our defense isn't as much "finesse" as it is just tentative. They take waaaay too long to read a play and apparently have no ability to read the play before the snap. Couple that with what looks like a reluctance to smash someone, and our defense would certainly look like a "finesse" defense.

    And again, successful finesse defenses are in the same mold as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, & Michael Moore's validity --- they just don't exist.
    "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

  6. #6
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,871
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison
    Our defense certainly isn't a successful finesse defense. Some would call them a finesse defense, but I would think a finesse defense would generate more interceptions or at least be able to catch one now and then. No, I think our defense isn't as much "finesse" as it is just tentative. They take waaaay too long to read a play and apparently have no ability to read the play before the snap. Couple that with what looks like a reluctance to smash someone, and our defense would certainly look like a "finesse" defense.
    Agreed, well said.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  7. #7
    serkicker32 Guest

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    i completely agree with what you are saying ramhard, but the thing is we would still be one year from the superbowl because it would take way too much turnover in our team to become a hard-nosed team, but I still believe we should do it. By the way, I believe the top four teams only had one 1000 yd. receiver.

  8. #8
    theodus69 Guest

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    I don't think Jackson is that big of threat to Faulk.Maybe the fact he is younger and still learning, but that is key(still learning) Not only that, Jackson is already wearing down on the Turf in the dome! They need to change that surface for the life of all their players. If the Line is improved and that is where most of Faulks short comings of late are involved, Faulk could produce 2 more good years and give them time to change that surface. Faulk is damn good on that old stuff! But the thought of drafting a back early would not surprise me. I'm not quite sold on Jackson just yet! The o-line is #1 priority. Once that is addressed then the rest may fall into place!

  9. #9
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,871
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    Quote Originally Posted by theodus69
    If the Line is improved and that is where most of Faulks short comings of late are involved, Faulk could produce 2 more good years and give them time to change that surface.
    Very good point. I think behind a strong offensive line, Faulk still has a couple of seasons left where he could be the team's starter. The problem lies in whether or not that line is going to show up, because from what I've seen, Faulk's ability to make something out of nothing has deteriorated. Based on his contract alone, I think we have to plan on keeping him around.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  10. #10
    adarian_too's Avatar
    adarian_too is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    The Hollow
    Posts
    1,379
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison
    And again, successful finesse defenses are in the same mold as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, & Michael Moore's validity --- they just don't exist.
    Finesse is just another word for pussNboots in football. It should have been the D in pink tights at the beginning of the year instead of Holt with as wimp-wristed as they showed themselves to be.

    It's still as bad as all of that. The system, the coach, and many of the D players should get the pink slip. If the D is being called a finesse D, let there be no mistake - it isn't a compliment.

  11. #11
    DJRamFan Guest

    Re: New Rams - Balance and Toughness

    Quote Originally Posted by ZigZagRam
    I'm not sure but I think that's blasphemy.
    I agree. Bruce is a Ram first and foremost and can stay as long as he wants. It's always sad to see guys like Emitt Smith go to a crappy team at the end of their career.

    There needs to be a massive overhaul at the defensive side of the ball - personnel AND style. Unfortunately there won't be as Marmie is still there. I'm seeing some minor tinkering this offseason, but dead money will hurt this year.

    Regardless of the RB, that OL is pitiful and needs to be changed.

  12. #12
    ramhard's Avatar
    ramhard is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    454
    Rep Power
    14

    Cost per Performance

    Just remember it is not whether a player can be productive but whether the contract cost/price is warranted by that performance. It is not just how much you are willing to pay a player, but every dollar you overpay at one position you have to underpay at another position. I think this is the genius of New England. They don't have positions where they overpay, and they do a good job of evaluating talent in general but also price/performance.

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
  •