Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,626
    Rep Power
    167

    Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    I believe that, right now, if the Rams stay at No. 2, the decision comes down to four, and only four, players. They are (in alphabetical order):

    Jadeveon Clowney
    Jake Matthews
    Greg Robinson
    Sammy Watkins.

    Moreover, while we still have a lot of time and events (Combine, Pro Days) before the draft, I don't see a fifth player who is likely to join this group.

    Does anyone disagree with that?


  2. #2
    Sauceman's Avatar
    Sauceman is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    130
    Rep Power
    3

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    I would like to agree with it, but I really hope it gets narrowed down to one of the two tackles. I really don't think we need Clowney (Even if he is, as people think, the best player in the draft), and I'm not sold on Watkins in the top 5 at all. I think either of the two tackles is a fine pick if we have to stay at 2, and I'm okay going WR/Secondary/OL with our couple of picks.

    In short; Yes, these are the only 4 players we should be looking at if we stay at #2.

  3. #3
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,483
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Does anyone disagree with that?
    I do not. Those appear to be the only real options should the Rams stay at pick #2.

  4. #4
    RealRam's Avatar
    RealRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    8,393
    Rep Power
    68

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I do not. Those appear to be the only real options should the Rams stay at pick #2.
    Ditto my friend.

  5. #5
    Vinnie25's Avatar
    Vinnie25 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    858
    Rep Power
    4

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    I agree that currently those are the only four I would consider drafting at #2, but I'm not ruling out the possibility that someone like Barr or Mack jumps into that group with a great combine

  6. #6
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,592
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    I think it may only be 3. I'm not sure Watkins is an option at #2. So I guess I sorta disagree.
    "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

  7. #7
    chiguy's Avatar
    chiguy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,158
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Those are the options.

  8. #8
    RebelYell's Avatar
    RebelYell is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    St. Louis ,Missouri
    Posts
    2,359
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Not saying it is fair but if the Rams drafted Watkins in the first round it would be the 3rd WR taken very highly in the last 3 drafts. Even by taking an elite talent in Watkins, can Les risk even the possibility of being compared to Matt Millen (the worst GM in NFL history)?

  9. #9
    richtree's Avatar
    richtree is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,133
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    I believe that, right now, if the Rams stay at No. 2, the decision comes down to four, and only four, players. They are (in alphabetical order):

    Jadeveon Clowney
    Jake Matthews
    Greg Robinson
    Sammy Watkins.

    Moreover, while we still have a lot of time and events (Combine, Pro Days) before the draft, I don't see a fifth player who is likely to join this group.

    Does anyone disagree with that?
    I agree with that, but I really think that you have to consider
    Justin Gilbert, CB

    As a top 6 pick. There is only one question, will he run a good time. I think the scouts and insiders have him jumping from pick 25 or so to pick 7 -----just keep and eye, CB would a great addition for the Rams and often overlooked because its hard to pinpoint the best one, but Justin Gilbert will be the guy...

    keep an eye on this, he will be top 7 pick one day after combine.

  10. #10
    Randart's Avatar
    Randart is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    569
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Sorry, Randart - hit "edit" instead of "quote":

    The quoted portions are Randart's question, and my responses are in red.

    I got a Scenario for yah AvR what if GW tells Fish & Co. Look I need the best pass rusher available with that first pick weather you trade out or stay... Then Clowney is taken nummero uno, and GW says I don't care get me Barr then and I gurantee you we will whoop heck out of the NFC West!
    I doubt that Williams would have that type of influence, but if the Rams were going to take a "pass rusher" with the 2nd pick, and Clowney was already gone, I suppose Barr or Mack would be among the BPRAs. I just don't see that happening, though.

    What if Stan K. comes in and says hey guys I never get involved but I got to put some butts in this pavillion so if we stay in the top 5 get me the best QB and most exciting guy you can so we got something to get folks going if Sam goes down again!
    Its hypotheticals like that one that make me glad that Stan is not that type of owner. However, if he was, I'd tell him to wait until Friday to take Jimmy Garoppolo, who I think will be better than Johnny Manziel (the guy I presume you were implying).
    Last edited by AvengerRam; -02-14-2014 at 02:20 PM.

  11. #11
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,483
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    Its hypotheticals like that one that make me glad that Stan is not that type of owner. However, if he was, I'd tell him to wait until Friday to take Jimmy Garoppolo, who I think will be better than Johnny Manziel (the guy I presume you were implying).
    This is one of the reasons I'm really interested to see how this draft goes down, because I wonder if a couple of those QB-needy teams in the Top 10 are thinking the same thing.

    If you're Houston, you could take Bridgewater or Manziel or whatever, or you could also take Clowney and then bring in a Garoppolo, McCarron, or Fales on Day Two. How much separation in grade/evaluation will exist between these top 3-4 QBs and the perceived next tier? Is it worth passing on top players at other positions?

    If you're of like mind with Greg Cosell, and you aren't confident there's a true franchise type quarterback in this class, maybe you wait and try to follow the San Fran/Seattle model of getting a cheap and effective passer in the second or third rounds.

    I could see a team like Jacksonville, widely suspected to take a QB early, passing on one and take BPA (Clowney if he falls, as they also have a huge need for a pass rusher), only to come around in Round Two and take their quarterback. They were a team that was burned by reaching on a QB with Gabbert so they might take a different approach here.

  12. #12
    Barry Waller is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Alton, Il. USA
    Age
    63
    Posts
    910
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    I would leave Watkins out. Too many really good receivers in this draft to take one second.

    If Clowney is all he is cracked up to be, and no one gives value in trade, I think you have to take him.

    I mean, Chris Long is in year Seven, so adding another guy to rotate, a possible future Hall of Fame talent, is an easy pick with this bonus pick.

    You can get a top two or three tackle with that 13th pick if that's the biggest need.

    I think if it is Clowney still at #2, and he has show he is the best player in the draft by then, the Rams can get a lot from Atlanta to deal down to 6th.

    If a trade is there, not involving Clowney, who is gone, I believe the Rams will take it as well, and I bet they even sell a bit cheaper than expected if Clowney is gone.
    Barry Waller

  13. #13
    Barry Waller is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Alton, Il. USA
    Age
    63
    Posts
    910
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    <<<f you're of like mind with Greg Cosell, and you aren't confident there's a true franchise type quarterback in this class, maybe you wait and try to follow the San Fran/Seattle model of getting a cheap and effective passer in the second or third rounds. >>

    It should ne noted that when the Niners and eattle took those two QBs, they did NOT count on them to be the starter soon. Seattle hd signed Flynn to be the guy, and the Niners were OK with Smith.

    It should also be noted that the teams that did think they could get a quick starter in round two or three failed more than they hit the jackpot. Even ones trading to move from round two to late round one for a QB mostly struck out.

    For every Nick Foles, Kaepernick, Jake Plummer, Wilson, or Dalton,

    You have Tony Banks, Kevin Kolb, Matt Blundin, Tony Sacca, Billy Jo Hobert, Todd Collins, Kordell Stewart, Stony Case, Eric Zeier, Bobby Hoying, Charlie Batch, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaras Jackson, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne, Kevin O'Connell, Pat White, Jimmy Clausen, Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow, or Brady Quinn. All since 1992.

    And the thing about missing on a third rounder or second rounder on a QB, is that you get NOTHING from them , where another position player could at least be a solid special teamer and backup right away who may also grow into a star.

    There are ALWAYS guys as good as these second rounders in most years on the market, that would win more games right away.

    Now, if you are a good team, in need of a good backup, or have a ton of extra picks and a guy that is too good to pass up falls, then you go for it.

    That's what the Niners and Seattle did with those two guys, and they got lucky, but also these guys got to play on very talented teams with great defenses, O-lines, and running games.
    Barry Waller

  14. #14
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,483
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Waller View Post
    It should ne noted that when the Niners and eattle took those two QBs, they did NOT count on them to be the starter soon. Seattle hd signed Flynn to be the guy, and the Niners were OK with Smith.
    Good point. Maybe a team like Jacksonville rides with Henne until a rookie is ready to take over. I simply wouldn't rule out the possibility of them taking someone at another position, but it's all going to depend on how they view these quarterbacks and if there's one they fall in love with.

  15. #15
    Tampa_Ram's Avatar
    Tampa_Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Bat Yam, Israel
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,954
    Rep Power
    30

    Re: Does anyone disagree with this statement?

    I think the list is pretty accurate. Can't see anyone else added to that list right now.


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: -12-30-2012, 01:45 PM
  2. I have only made this statement once before...
    By bruce4life in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: -12-26-2010, 05:15 PM
  3. Bradford statement
    By richtree in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -04-23-2010, 11:47 AM
  4. Curtis doesn't disagree with Bulgers' comments
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: -12-08-2006, 01:22 AM
  5. Statement team!
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: -01-24-2002, 02:25 PM

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
  •