Page 7 of 23 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 345
  1. #91
    OUSooners81's Avatar
    OUSooners81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    21
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    I think we should get a good TE who can block and catch to help out our new QB. Jermain Gresham would of been great, Plus on top of him being a great TE him and Bradford know each other very well.
    Last edited by OUSooners81; -04-22-2010 at 11:35 PM.


  2. #92
    Flippin' Ram's Avatar
    Flippin' Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    2,447
    Rep Power
    32

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    The other teams didn't choose Clausen & McCoy so that we can feel butt hurt over drafting Bradford.

  3. #93
    bigredman's Avatar
    bigredman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    El Paso, Texas
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,815
    Rep Power
    61

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    The point isn't that other teams didn't pick Clausen, it's that we could of had Suh and Clausen. That combination dwarfs whatever Bradford may ever bring to the Rams alone.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  4. #94
    RamsSB99's Avatar
    RamsSB99 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mo
    Posts
    1,131
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by OUSooners81 View Post
    I think we should get a good TE who can block and catch to help out our new QB. Jermain Gresham would be great, Plus on top of him being a great TE him and Bradford know each other very well.
    Uh he was drafted #21 by Cinci.

  5. #95
    OUSooners81's Avatar
    OUSooners81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    21
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Oh sorry, somewhere i read that he hadnt been picked.

  6. #96
    OUSooners81's Avatar
    OUSooners81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    21
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman View Post
    The point isn't that other teams didn't pick Clausen, it's that we could of had Suh and Clausen. That combination dwarfs whatever Bradford may ever bring to the Rams alone.
    Clausen may be good but he would cost alot of money, on top of drafting Suh at #1. I herd that the first day of college Clausen showed up in a limo. I dont think we need that kind of attitude. We need a leader

  7. #97
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,546
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    For those lamenting passing on Suh, rather than taking him and then waiting on Clausen (I guess the Rams' Front Office is supposed to have ESP), I have one question...

    If Clausen is, in fact, a "franchise QB," then why is he still on the board?

    Clearly, NFL GMs saw something in Clausen that they didn't like.

  8. #98
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    The argument that we could have had Suh and Claussen is BS. If we take Suh the whole draft changes literally everyone behind us could be picking someone different. There is no guarantee the draft pans out the same way as a matter of fact I can guarantee things end up much differently.

  9. #99
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Anyways moving on to the second who ya got

  10. #100
    AlwaysBackwards's Avatar
    AlwaysBackwards is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sanger,California
    Posts
    83
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Sergio Kindle Anyone??

  11. #101
    peramoure is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    237
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Agree with Avenger. Hindsight is 20/20.

    If, in 2007, we had just passed on Carriker and selected Darrelle Revis we would be great. And in the second we could have snagged Lamar Woodley and have a pro bowl LB. In the third we could have passed on Le'Ron McClain and got a pro bowl FB. Then in the fourth we should have grabbed Steve Breaston, and in the fifth we should have just grabbed Chansi Stuckey.

    We would have been way better off, silly Rams.

    I hate these "we should have done this or that" garbage. We wanted Bradford, got him, and now we have our guy. If we drafted Suh, we don't have Bradford, and despite what the Suh lovers are saying, there is a reason why Clausen and McCoy are still there.

  12. #102
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    For those lamenting passing on Suh, rather than taking him and then waiting on Clausen (I guess the Rams' Front Office is supposed to have ESP), I have one question...

    If Clausen is, in fact, a "franchise QB," then why is he still on the board?

    Clearly, NFL GMs saw something in Clausen that they didn't like.
    What about McCoy? Two of our 3 QB targets are available tomorrow.

    The Bradford pick was a gamble by the front office. They gambled that the other two QBs would not be available in the second round-and lost. They gambled that somebody would make a decent trade offer and otherwise put all of their eggs in Bradford's basket-and lost. They are also gambling that we won't draft in the top 5 next year. That's fine. They now have two years max to pull a playoff team out of their keisters, or else we should be getting a front office and coaching staff purge that rivals that of Stalin's.

    For Devaney's sake, his luck had better change soon.

    ----------------------------------------------

    More generally, this front office has difficulties reading and projecting the future for whatever reason. They thought that there would be a CBA in place when they planned for this offseason. They thought that our younger players would perform better than they did. They thought that our oft-hurt players would stop being oft hurt. I'm not asking for ESP, but I would like for Team Devaney to actually predict something accurately.

  13. #103
    shower beers's Avatar
    shower beers is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,043
    Rep Power
    59

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam View Post
    What about McCoy? Two of our 3 QB targets are available tomorrow.

    The Bradford pick was a gamble by the front office. They gambled that the other two QBs would not be available in the second round-and lost. They gambled that somebody would make a decent trade offer and otherwise put all of their eggs in Bradford's basket-and lost. They are also gambling that we won't draft in the top 5 next year. That's fine. They now have two years max to pull a playoff team out of their keisters, or else we should be getting a front office and coaching staff purge that rivals that of Stalin's.

    For Devaney's sake, his luck had better change soon.

    ----------------------------------------------
    ...or, they felt that Sam Bradford was the right pick for the Rams, and the best player available. I'd certainly hope that the Rams, or any professional football team for that matter, would not pick a player number 1 overall because they didn't think other players at the same position would be around in the next round.

    They had the option to draft Clausen if they wanted, and they passed on him. They certainly also thought there was a good chance that McCoy would fall to at least the later half of the first round, and had the picks to trade back into the first round if they felt he would be snatched up.

    The Rams were not forced into a pick, or left stuck with someone.

    Can we at least get Bradford onto the practice field before we start declaring our Front Office a bunch of failures?

  14. #104
    shower beers's Avatar
    shower beers is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,043
    Rep Power
    59

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    Also, I certainly didn't see this much support for Clausen before the draft...save for a few people. I don't understand the logic of taking someone to be our franchise quarterback in the second round because the value is right. If you have the opportunity to take the best quarterback in the draft, then take him. Don't settle for a lesser prospect because he's good value for the pick. There's a reason 32 teams (so far) passed on Jimmy Clausen. Maybe it's because they don't feel he can be that surefire franchise quarterback at the next level, maybe it was because they didn't need a quarterback...I don't know. But I do know that the Rams picked the best quarterback in the draft, and we're just finding ways to complain about it, in hindsight.

  15. #105
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,584
    Rep Power
    81

    Re: 2010 NFL Draft Discussion Thread

    WE will never regret our decision if bradford turns out to be a franchise qb. If he doesnt, we are going to suffer for years in all liklihood, both from a lost opportunity standpoint (suh) and from a cap hit standpoint.

    Hindsight is 20-20. We got our guy, end of story. There is no reason to assume that the front office gambled and lost because there is no reason to assume that they wanted suh plus mccoy more than bradford plus who we get in round 2.

    At the end of the day, whoever the qb is, we better protect him and have receivers for him or he isnt going to succeed.

    ramming speed to all

    general counsel


Similar Threads

  1. St. Louis Rams 2010 Mock Draft
    By eldfan in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: -01-31-2010, 11:23 PM
  2. Jim Thomas Live - January 12, 2010
    By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -01-13-2010, 11:38 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: -03-18-2009, 03:53 PM
  4. Jim Thomas Live
    By RamsSB99 in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -03-17-2009, 09:09 PM
  5. Gordo Live
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -04-28-2008, 08:33 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
  •