View Poll Results: Would you be for/against cutting Long and drafting Clowney?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • For

    2 6.67%
  • Against

    28 93.33%
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 74
Like Tree16Likes

Thread: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

  1. #46
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,531
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post
    I would be OK with cutting Long(From what I've read we would save 10mil)
    Both Rambos and I have responded in this thread by saying that, based on the info we've found on OverTheCap.com which contains information on NFL contracts and cap ramifications, this would create a lot of dead money and no cap savings.
    Last edited by Nick; -12-13-2013 at 08:33 PM.


  2. #47
    Mikey's Avatar
    Mikey is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    886
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    I really can't believe people are trying to justify cutting Chris Long. I could almost understand the idea of trading him, though I wouldn't trade him. Especially when you're going to replace him with somebody who is known to take plays off and can get exposed in the run game at times. I can just see it now we cut Long and draft Clowney who gets 18 sacks next year but we give up 50 yards per game more on the ground and can't get teams off the field.

    How can we even contemplate spending the #2 over all pick on an area of our team that is already a strength! We go four deep with DE's that most NFL teams would love to have and here we have Rams fans deciding to cut one of the best 4-3 DE's in the league. Somebody earlier cited Longs never been a top 5 in sacks. Correct sir but can you guess how many times he's been in the top three in QB pressures? Can you guess how many of those pressures led to another member of the DLine getting a sack? Long is a very good DE and there is no reason the Rams should move on from him. Rams fans were excited that Snead got him to sign an extension. We were a bad team and here's a good player who said hell no I'm a Ram I'll sign this deal it doesn't matter if I could get more from another team I wanna be here as a winner is built.

    Drafting a DE when we have major needs on the OLine, CB, S, WR is a move that Al Davis and Jerry Jones makes. Lets hope Les is smarter than that.

  3. #48
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,671
    Rep Power
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post

    So when you use stats to support your argument, its data. But when someone uses stats to support their argument, those stats don't tell the whole story?
    I didn't cherry pick, though... I gave you the whole picture. That's the difference.


    Lets take a step away from Clowney and go another route. I would be OK with cutting Long(From what I've read we would save 10mil) and letting Hayes start. If you want to go the data route, he has 4 sacks and 8TFLs while playing in less than half the snaps that Long has. His salary is also less than a 1/3 of Longs.
    Sigh. I'm glad you're not the GM.

  4. #49
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,467
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Then demonstrate it, with information or data that support your claim.

    If you want to just claim your opinion to be the truth without backing it up with any supporting evidence, then I'd be happy to link you to the PD board, where that kind of "I'm right, you're wrong, that's all there is to it" juvenility belongs.

    I've gone back and watched 12 of Quinn's 13 sacks this year, and he's been doubled, chipped, or delayed on only two of those twelve.

    So suffice it to say, I'm doubtful that Quinn has been doubled or tripled on nearly every play. But again, you're welcome to provide some actual evidence or support to try and demonstrate the accuracy of the claim.
    Quinn is not a God. If he is being double and triple teamed, do you really think the result of the play will be Quinn getting a sack?

    I re-watched the Cardinals game, and in the first half (all I watched) Rob was 1v1 6 times, and was double or triple teamed 7 times.

    Here are two collages:

    BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?-tjngujc.jpg (CLICK TO ENLARGE)
    BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?-ylkil.jpg (CLICK TO ENLARGE)


    THE DREAM TEAM

  5. #50
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,531
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    I re-watched the Cardinals game, and in the first half (all I watched) Rob was 1v1 6 times, and was double or triple teamed 7 times.
    Alright, so thus far through your early rewatching period, Quinn has actually not been "double and triple teamed nearly EVERY play." Keep us posted.
    HUbison likes this.

  6. #51
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,225
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    I didn't cherry pick, though... I gave you the whole picture. That's the difference.
    The stats you gave aren't the whole picture at all...


    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Sigh. I'm glad you're not the GM.
    Great argument.
    sosa39rams likes this.

  7. #52
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,225
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Both Rambos and I have responded in this thread by saying that, based on the info we've found on OverTheCap.com which contains information on NFL contracts and cap ramifications, this would create a lot of dead money and no cap savings.
    I got my info from Spotrac. From what I read it looked like we would save around 10 million if we cut him. The two sites have vastly different numbers regarding Longs dead money. Check it out. It looks like one of the sites didn't account for Demoff's tweeking of Long's contract last offseason.

    If it's determined that Spotrac is wrong, and we wouldn't save even close to as much as I thought, then this argument is pointless. I can admit that. I tried to find a third site to confirm which site was right, but it was harder to find than I had thought it'd be.
    Last edited by FestusRam; -12-14-2013 at 05:23 PM.

  8. #53
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,225
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikey View Post
    Drafting a DE when we have major needs on the OLine, CB, S, WR is a move that Al Davis and Jerry Jones makes. Lets hope Les is smarter than that.
    The only reason I would drop Long is because I'm under the impression it would give us 10million extra cap space to sign a OL, CB, S, or WR. It's not like I want them to just cut Long and get nothing from it. geez...

  9. #54
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,467
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    I don't condone letting Long go. If we could fetch a 1st rounder or 2nd and some change I'd trade him with all intentions of drafting Clowney, but outside of that nothing changes. I'd still be happy taking Clowney even with Long on the team. In that case the smartest thing to do would probably be slide down a few picks and try to land another person and grab another pick or two, but we'll see.

    If there is a QB someone would take at #2 I would not be against moving down and settling for a CB/DT/S - Not sure if anyone is worth a top 10 though. Clinton-Dix is good but I don't know if he's top 10 good. I like Louis Nix but I feel there is decent DT depth at the end of the first round. CB is shaky right now, we'll see in a few months.


    THE DREAM TEAM

  10. #55
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,225
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    The notion that Long has had a down year along the lines of Finnegan's decline is absurd.
    Talk about cherry picking...

    You're putting words in my mouth. I said their situations were similar, and their both having down years. Never did I say that Finnegan's down year is along the lines of Longs.

    If you want to make a legitimate argument as to why Finnegan might be cut but Long won't, then I'll listen.

  11. #56
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,671
    Rep Power
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post

    Talk about cherry picking...

    You're putting words in my mouth. I said their situations were similar, and their both having down years. Never did I say that Finnegan's down year is along the lines of Longs.

    If you want to make a legitimate argument as to why Finnegan might be cut but Long won't, then I'll listen.
    Because Long is playing well and Finnegan wasn't playing well.

    It's really not very complicated.

  12. #57
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,205
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Because Long is playing well and Finnegan wasn't playing well.

    It's really not very complicated.

  13. #58
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,225
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Because Long is playing well and Finnegan wasn't playing well.

    It's really not very complicated.
    Finnegan's play was hampered by injuries. He played well last year. Don't see Fisher cutting HIS guy after one bad year due to injury.

  14. #59
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,671
    Rep Power
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post

    Finnegan's play was hampered by injuries. He played well last year. Don't see Fisher cutting HIS guy after one bad year due to injury.
    I never said Finnegan should be cut. I'd rather cut him than Long, though.

  15. #60
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,225
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    I never said Finnegan should be cut. I'd rather cut him than Long, though.
    And I never said you did. I just stated that he was the top pick in your poll as a veteran who may get cut.

    I guess it just baffles me how many posters here think Finnegan is an obvious target but Longs untouchable(made clear by our polls). Sounds biased.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hypothetical FA Question: Who Would You Rather?
    By THOLTFAN81 in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: -12-12-2013, 09:28 AM
  2. The Rob Ryan Hypothetical
    By AvengerRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: -01-21-2013, 03:26 AM
  3. Hypothetical Question
    By RamFan_Til_I_Die in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -11-25-2010, 07:04 PM
  4. If you REALLY want to get hypothetical...
    By Bar-bq in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -01-14-2008, 04:29 PM
  5. Hypothetical Question....
    By Karl-Baker in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: -03-13-2002, 10:24 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
  •