Which rookie would you like to see more of in Week 2?

[FestusRam]

We got alot of rookies with exciting potential!

Who are you looking to see more out of on Sunday?

Personally, I went with Givens.

It was close between him and Richardson, but we need a deep threat wide receiver to emerge.

[FestusRam]

Woops. Accidentally went with Rich, but you get the point.

[BarronWade]

I dont know why so many people voted for Quick he hasnt done anything to prove he is ready YET! give him time

BUT man did you see Givens run through the Detroit secondary on that mis throw to him...Sam knows he wants that ball back and next time he will connect with givens

That Givens play could have been a GAME BREAKER! remember last year when Torrey SMith man handled our secondary? Thats what i think Givens is capable of doing

[TorontoRam]

I guess Austin Davis is not an acceptable alternative. He's a rookie but he's not on the list. However, I'll write him in just for the heck of it. I'm not saying that he should start, but perhaps he's kind of like Tebow to Sanchez, insofar as he could be a compliment in certatain situations. In some ways, I think that NFL teams get married to a single player (especially QBs) even though like the NBA they could substitue freely in certain situations if for no other reason just to give the opposition a different look and to give the starter a rest etc. The NFL does it with WRs and with RBs so why not do it with QBs. 'Discuss among yourselves,' as they said on SNL.

[RAMarkable]

I went with I. Pead. Just think Schotty could use him on screens and draws and what not. We have gotta get this guy out in space with the ball in his hands.

Also, I would like to see the Rams run the occasional sweep play; much like the Whiners do. If done correctly and Pead gets the corner - LOOK OUT!!

At any rate that is my story and I'm sticking to it...

(Heh...just noticed, I. PEAD; now THAT'S funny!!!)


WHAT SAY YE?

[PARamfan]

I voted Richardson cause the kid justs takes the ball and hits the hole and makes positive yards out of it.

[tomahawk247]

I guess Austin Davis is not an acceptable alternative. He's a rookie but he's not on the list. However, I'll write him in just for the heck of it. I'm not saying that he should start, but perhaps he's kind of like Tebow to Sanchez, insofar as he could be a compliment in certatain situations. In some ways, I think that NFL teams get married to a single player (especially QBs) even though like the NBA they could substitue freely in certain situations if for no other reason just to give the opposition a different look and to give the starter a rest etc. The NFL does it with WRs and with RBs so why not do it with QBs. 'Discuss among yourselves,' as they said on SNL.

The only time i want to see Austin Davis on the field is in the fourth quarter and the Rams have a 40 point lead, and they have decided to give Bradford a rest

[tomahawk247]

I went with Givens, because we need a player to stretch out the D so that the opposition can't just stack the box to take away the run and the underneath pass routes

[r8rh8rmike]

I'd love to see more of Givens in the mix, but I'm not sure the OL will allow it.

[LA Rammer]

Richardson I really like his run style. I could have said Quick but I have a feeling Richardson is gonna be special.

[Haste]

Voted Quick but I really want to see all of them step it up. I want to see some screens and short passes to Pead, At least 10 carries by Richardson, and at least 2 deep passes to Givens.

[Rambos]

Richardson I really think he can help keep the defense off balance.

[TorontoRam]

I'm curious about your rationale. Perhaps you'd elaborate a bit, because I've watched the NFL for decades and the few times that I've seen a team use their back-up in certain situations it has impressed me for some of the reasons that I mentioned and it worked pretty well for the Jets last weekend as I understand it, but didn't watch the game. So, your rationale would be helpful to put your comment into context.

[GROUND DOG 39]

I went with Richardson on the poll, but I would like to see Pead as well. YOU HAVE GOT TO PUT MORE STRESS ON THE DEFENSE. With the receivers on our team, and Jackson as the workhorse. Easy pickings for the opposition. Playmakers need to be on the field, simple as.!

[tomahawk247]

I'm curious about your rationale. Perhaps you'd elaborate a bit, because I've watched the NFL for decades and the few times that I've seen a team use their back-up in certain situations it has impressed me for some of the reasons that I mentioned and it worked pretty well for the Jets last weekend as I understand it, but didn't watch the game. So, your rationale would be helpful to put your comment into context.

It's simple. Austin Davis isn't Tim Tebow. Austin Davis isn't Steve Young backing up Joe Montana. Austin Davis is a undrafted rookie quarterback backing up a former number 1 overall draft pick and Offensive Rookie of the Year winner. Sam didn't play horribly or struggle against the Lions. In fact he had a passing rating of over 100 and didn't turn the ball over.

So I'm curious as to your rationale: why would you want to put Davis on the field unless you really had to?