Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 70
  1. #31
    yesman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    atlanta
    Posts
    22
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    Clausen was in essence, the "franchise QB" at Notre Dame, and couldn't make a big enough difference in three years of trying.
    Put it like this. If ND and Nebraska swapped Suh and Clausen at the beginning of the year, then Nebraska would have been better and ND would have been worse.


  2. #32
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    I have a sneaky feeling that both sides still may stink next year, hopefully just not as bad.

  3. #33
    molar_pistol is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    az
    Posts
    938
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    Clausen is a good prospect, and while he had good measurables, he was 16-18 at Notre Dame despite playing on a team with better than average talent. I don't see much difference between Jimmy Clausen and Brady Quinn.

    And if you're going to look at drafts, I think you need to look at more than the last two. For every Matt Ryan and Matthew Stafford, there's a JaMarcus Russell and Alex Smith. "Franchise quarterback" is a tough title to earn, and finding one is a crapshoot.

    When a team in free-fall is picking first, they have to get it right. Choosing the wrong guy can set a franchise back years in the re-building process. Suh is seen as the BPA, has the resume to back it up, fills a vital need for the Rams, and IMO is the best bet to realize his potential.
    agree with all of this, but i still like clausen as an nfl quarterback. unless we trade down though, suh is still too good to pass up, i think you underestimate the impact he'll have on this defense. i still think we can pick up a veteran qb like garcia or pennington and pick up a guy to develop or trade for a guy like smith kolb or campbell, this staff has had pretty good success with scouting college and pro talent.

  4. #34
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    Put it like this. If ND and Nebraska swapped Suh and Clausen at the beginning of the year, then Nebraska would have been better and ND would have been worse.
    No.

    /Nebraska fan

  5. #35
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,465
    Rep Power
    128

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    Put it like this. If ND and Nebraska swapped Suh and Clausen at the beginning of the year, then Nebraska would have been better and ND would have been worse.
    Perhaps, but I'd stll take Suh over Clausen in the NFL.

  6. #36
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,490
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    When I say top notch, I mean elite but not freakish. There is top notch like Manning (Clausen's arm is probably a little stronger than Manning's) and then there's freakish like Stafford and Jamarcus Russell.

    Obviously the Rams should only draft him if they think he's as good as I think he is. We shouldn''t just draft the guy because he's the best player at his position. But if he grades as a franchise QB, you have to take him.

    Suh is great, a better prospect than Dorsey, who was the best DT prospect in quite some time when he was coming out. As good as Suh is, you don't take him over a franchise QB. If the Rams think, as I do, that Clausen is a franchise QB, then they should take him.

    It is true that Clausen has great targets to throw to, but that doesn't take away from his talents. To throw only 4 interceptions means is impressive, and can't be explained by talented WRs. Also, his offensive line was not all that great. They fell short of pre-season expectations.
    Well, we can debate the nomenclature all evening, but as I said, I'm simply not as high on the guy as you are. Not that I don't think he's good, but I just don't presently think he's good enough to bypass a player like Suh as the top prospect and the top overall pick.

    No one suggested his surrounding talent was responsible for his decision making (which I praised, by the way), but I think when you look at how he's been able to progress from year to year, the emergence of two potential first round receivers on that roster certainly plays a role. It's worth noting, is all I'm saying. People said the same thing of Matt Leinart and other quarterbacks as well.

    As for the rest of your argument, well I can't say I follow it very well. In my previous response, I argued against taking a player at the expense of your evaluations and at the expense of better players. At first it sounded like you agreed, but then when you said that you take a franchise QB over Suh no matter what, I can't get behind that logic. You have to conduct your evaluations, stack your board, and see where everyone stands. You say on one hand that you shouldn't just draft a guy because he's the best at his position, yet you seem more than willing to pass up on Suh no matter how talented he is because you feel Clausen is deemed a franchise quarterback. I don't see how you can reconcile those statements.

    Plus, it's not as if franchise QBs automatically jump to the top of the draft board; if that were the case, you wouldn't have guys like Roethlisberger, Flacco, Rodgers, etc drafted later in the first round. Even though a guy may be a franchise QB, there are still players who can grade out higher and be more deserving of a pick. There are teams that draft franchise quarterbacks in the 11-20 range, or the 21-32 range. The fact that these guys were viewed as franchise QBs doesn't automatically make them guaranteed picks; obviously some teams passed.

    I look at it this way. Every draft has first round guys who are viewed as franchise QBs or at least have the potential to be franchise QBs. This year, it's Clausen and Bradford. Last year, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman. The year before, Ryan and Flacco. We can keep going and going, but players viewed as "franchise QBs" aren't necessarily rare from year to year, and in more than a few instances, some aren't even among the first players to be chosen.

    But how many years do you have a player as highly regarded as Suh, a player often described as one of the best defensive prospects in the last decade, a player who has been so thoroughly dominant with the tools and determination to keep getting better? I personally don't like the argument that you have to take so and so, but I think if you're going to make that argument, it would be in favor of the guy that's considered to be one of the best at his position in a long time rather than this year's flavor of the month at franchise QB. Unless that franchise QB is also considered to be one of the best in a long time, but I don't think many would classify Clausen that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    The Falcons made the playoffs in Ryan's rookie year. The Lions were, like the Rams are, too far from playoff contention for any particular draft pick to get them to the playoffs.
    And now the Lions would love to draft a guy like Suh.

    I guess my thinking is, if one player isn't going to turn this thing around, and unquestionably that's the case, then I think you'd want to take the best player you possibly can regardless of position, so you've maximized your return on the investment. I think that's the boat many fans are in right now, instead of the "Must have franchise QB no matter what" mindset that some subscribe to.

  7. #37
    yesman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    atlanta
    Posts
    22
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    People said the same thing of Matt Leinart and other quarterbacks as well.
    Leinart dropped because of his weak arm, among other things. Clausen has no significant weaknesses.


    As for the rest of your argument, well I can't say I follow it very well. In my previous response, I argued against taking a player at the expense of your evaluations and at the expense of better players. At first it sounded like you agreed, but then when you said that you take a franchise QB over Suh no matter what, I can't get behind that logic. You have to conduct your evaluations, stack your board, and see where everyone stands. You say on one hand that you shouldn't just draft a guy because he's the best at his position, yet you seem more than willing to pass up on Suh no matter how talented he is because you feel Clausen is deemed a franchise quarterback. I don't see how you can reconcile those statements.
    I'm saying that if you need a QB, and there's a QB that grades out on your board as a franchise QB, then you take him. You can be the best QB prospect in the draft and not grade out as a franchise type QB. If Jimmy Clausen grades out as a franchise QB on the Rams board, then he should be the pick. He should be taken over Suh because as good as Suh is, a franchise QB makes a bigger inpact on a team than a pro bowl DT. That's the nature of the game. You take the player that will help your team the most. And a franchise QB is more valuable than a pro bowl DT.

    Plus, it's not as if franchise QBs automatically jump to the top of the draft board; if that were the case, you wouldn't have guys like Roethlisberger, Flacco, Rodgers, etc drafted later in the first round. Even though a guy may be a franchise QB, there are still players who can grade out higher and be more deserving of a pick. There are teams that draft franchise quarterbacks in the 11-20 range, or the 21-32 range. The fact that these guys were viewed as franchise QBs doesn't automatically make them guaranteed picks; obviously some teams passed.
    It all comes down to liklihood of success. You can draft a franchise QB in the seventh round if you get lucky. Certain prospects have a very high liklihood of being franchise QBs in the NFL. These are the guys that are drafted at the top of the draft. Guys like Big Ben, Flacco, etc were not viewed as sure thing prospects, so they were drafted later. Some teams don't need a QB, so a QB prospect slips. Some teams might not rate a guy that high, so a QB prospect slips. But if a team values a QB as franchise caliber, they will almost always take him over other positions because QB is the most important position not just in football, but in professional sports.

    I look at it this way. Every draft has first round guys who are viewed as franchise QBs or at least have the potential to be franchise QBs. This year, it's Clausen and Bradford. Last year, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman. The year before, Ryan and Flacco. We can keep going and going, but players viewed as "franchise QBs" aren't necessarily rare from year to year, and in more than a few instances, some aren't even among the first players to be chosen.
    You think the Falcons would trade Ryan for Suh? The Lions Stafford for Suh? The Jets Sanchez for Suh? The Ravens Flacco for Suh? Of course not, because franchise QBs are more valuable than pro bowl DTs.

    But how many years do you have a player as highly regarded as Suh, a player often described as one of the best defensive prospects in the last decade, a player who has been so thoroughly dominant with the tools and determination to keep getting better?
    Suh is a great prospect, but there are always great prospects. I'd say Berry is as good a safety as Suh is a DT. A few years ago Dorsey was touted as the best DT prospect in years. Ngata was also very highly touted. Honestly, how much better than Ngata do you expect Suh to be? As good as Ngata is, no team would trade a young franchise QB for him.


    I personally don't like the argument that you have to take so and so, but I think if you're going to make that argument, it would be in favor of the guy that's considered to be one of the best at his position in a long time rather than this year's flavor of the month at franchise QB.
    Flavor of the month franchise QB>pro bowl DT when it comes to impact on a team. If the best kicker prospect ever came out, should the Rams take him since he's the best prospect ever at his position? No, of course not. This is an extreme example, but the principle is the same. QBs have more impact on the game than DTs.

    And now the Lions would love to draft a guy like Suh.
    Yeah, now that they have their franchise QB. They wouldn't give up their "flavor of the month" franchise QB for him, though.

  8. #38
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,490
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    Leinart dropped because of his weak arm, among other things. Clausen has no significant weaknesses.
    Missed my point.

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    I'm saying that if you need a QB, and there's a QB that grades out on your board as a franchise QB, then you take him. You can be the best QB prospect in the draft and not grade out as a franchise type QB. If Jimmy Clausen grades out as a franchise QB on the Rams board, then he should be the pick. He should be taken over Suh because as good as Suh is, a franchise QB makes a bigger inpact on a team than a pro bowl DT. That's the nature of the game. You take the player that will help your team the most. And a franchise QB is more valuable than a pro bowl DT.
    And again, I'm saying that when teams draft guys in the first (maybe even the second) round, they're looking at them as franchise QBs. But there are still guys that get taken ahead of them despite that fact. A team thinking you're a franchise QB is not the end all and be all of the evaluation, IMO. You seem to think it is. We'll have to disagree.

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    It all comes down to liklihood of success. You can draft a franchise QB in the seventh round if you get lucky. Certain prospects have a very high liklihood of being franchise QBs in the NFL. These are the guys that are drafted at the top of the draft. Guys like Big Ben, Flacco, etc were not viewed as sure thing prospects, so they were drafted later. Some teams don't need a QB, so a QB prospect slips. Some teams might not rate a guy that high, so a QB prospect slips. But if a team values a QB as franchise caliber, they will almost always take him over other positions because QB is the most important position not just in football, but in professional sports.
    And that's why the evaluation process becomes so crucial. How many teams thought Quinn had franchise QB potential but just didn't grade him as a high pick? Or did Quinn slip because no one who needed a QB prior to the Browns trading up felt he was a true franchise QB? We'll never know, but the fact that franchise QBs slip in the first round I think can be attributed to more than just other team needs or question marks. It shows that teams can think a guy has franchise QB potential but will pass if they have other prospects graded higher. That's the point I was making here.

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    You think the Falcons would trade Ryan for Suh? The Lions Stafford for Suh? The Jets Sanchez for Suh? The Ravens Flacco for Suh? Of course not, because franchise QBs are more valuable than pro bowl DTs.
    Missed my point again.

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    Suh is a great prospect, but there are always great prospects. I'd say Berry is as good a safety as Suh is a DT. A few years ago Dorsey was touted as the best DT prospect in years. Ngata was also very highly touted. Honestly, how much better than Ngata do you expect Suh to be? As good as Ngata is, no team would trade a young franchise QB for him.
    I think you're understating Suh as a propsect here. I've not seen a defender as highly touted as Suh in recent years. And I say that as someone who has been following the draft for a while. Dorsey and Ngata were great prospects, but neither were as highly regarded IMO. You've said so yourself about Dorsey earlier in this thread, by the way: "Suh is great, a better prospect than Dorsey, who was the best DT prospect in quite some time when he was coming out."

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    Flavor of the month franchise QB>pro bowl DT when it comes to impact on a team.
    Again, I feel as if you're missing my point here, probably because you feel this one is stronger for your position. The point was about how often these kinds of prospects come around.

    Besides, there is no one player - franchise QB or other - who is going to turn around this sinking ship all by themselves. Others have cited examples of teams who have acquired their franchise QB but haven't been able to see the benefits just yet. They're all pieces to the puzzle.

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    Yeah, now that they have their franchise QB. They wouldn't give up their "flavor of the month" franchise QB for him, though.
    See above - the point isn't do you trade one for the other, but rather how they're all pieces towards building a winning franchise. One player can't do it alone, which is why it's important IMO to maximize your talent acquisition with these opportunities.

  9. #39
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by yesman View Post
    It's deja vu all over again. In the 08 draft, the Falcons were faced with the same dilemma the Rams are in now. Do you take "the best DT since Sapp" or do you take the franchise QB.

    That year, some thought that there weren't any legit top 5 stud QBs in the draft, and that the Falcons should go with best player available and take Dorsey. They went against the common opinion of the time and drafted the franchise QB, and it turned out to be the right choice.

    The lions were in a similar situation last year. When Bradford went back to school, many thought the QBs available weren't worthy of the top pick. Many thought the lions should go BPA and take the LB Curry. They took the franchise QB, and, again, it turned out to be the right choice.
    In 2007, the Raiders had the chance to go BPA and take Calvin Johnson, but they took the franchise QB, and it turned out to be the wrong choice.

    In 2006, the Texans could have taken the franchise quarterback in Vince Young, but they took the defensive BPA in Mario Williams, and it was the right choice.

    In 2005, I don't even know who the BPA was considered at the time, but the ***** took the franchise quarterback, and it was the wrong choice.

    ...And now that you mention it, how exactly does Detroit's 2-14 season prove they made the right choice?

    Personally, I'd say the lessons of recent history teach that you trust your scouts regardless of what public opinion says about a player, and the results are mixed as to whether taking a quarterback early is a good idea.

  10. #40
    RAMarkable is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Age
    59
    Posts
    2,093
    Rep Power
    41

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Um....Falconator is that you??

  11. #41
    LongBlood's Avatar
    LongBlood is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Visalia, Cali
    Age
    33
    Posts
    157
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenfleece View Post
    In 2006, the Texans could have taken the franchise quarterback in Vince Young, but they took the defensive BPA in Mario Williams, and it was the right choice.
    Not accurate. The GM Charley Casserly said that it was between Reggie Bush and Mario Williams. What he said it came down to was that Barry Sanders never won a super bowl. I think Barry Sanders was part of a franchise that only won 1 playoff game during his career. Ironically enough Houston hasn't been to the playoffs, yet Reggie has.

  12. #42
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is online now Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,656
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    What I have learned from these two teams:

    1. I learned from Detroit that even if you draft the flashy QB everyone is talking about, your team can still suck.

    2. I learned from Atlanta that they did much better without Michael Vick behind center, so much better that when Vick was once again talking about returning to the NFL, Atlanta said "No, thanks".

    How this applies to the Rams is like this: Drafting a QB may not help us do anything more than we did this year. And Vick, who so many want in horns, was passed on by his former team for a rookie QB who they foresaw as being better than Vick.

    My solution to this contradiction? Wait until 2011 to draft a QB, keep
    Marc at a lower price, and keep Vick as far away from St. Louis as we can.

  13. #43
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by LongBlood View Post
    Not accurate. The GM Charley Casserly said that it was between Reggie Bush and Mario Williams. What he said it came down to was that Barry Sanders never won a super bowl. I think Barry Sanders was part of a franchise that only won 1 playoff game during his career. Ironically enough Houston hasn't been to the playoffs, yet Reggie has.
    Perhaps that was his logic, but the point is that they did take a defensive player because they thought he gave them the best chance to win--and so far it looks like it was a good move.

  14. #44
    LongBlood's Avatar
    LongBlood is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Visalia, Cali
    Age
    33
    Posts
    157
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenfleece View Post
    Perhaps that was his logic, but the point is that they did take a defensive player because they thought he gave them the best chance to win--and so far it looks like it was a good move.
    Then by your logic the same could be said about Cincy, Oak, the Jags, Bills, 'skins, and texans for all passing on Josh Freemen last yr. Same could be said with a hint of a qb question mark for every team that passed on ANY QB in every year of the draft that turned out to be a pro bowler. Good lord, every team passed on Drew Brees!

  15. #45
    yesman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    atlanta
    Posts
    22
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: I hope we learn something from the lions last year and the Falcons the year befor

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Missed my point.



    And again, I'm saying that when teams draft guys in the first (maybe even the second) round, they're looking at them as franchise QBs. But there are still guys that get taken ahead of them despite that fact. A team thinking you're a franchise QB is not the end all and be all of the evaluation, IMO. You seem to think it is. We'll have to disagree.



    And that's why the evaluation process becomes so crucial. How many teams thought Quinn had franchise QB potential but just didn't grade him as a high pick? Or did Quinn slip because no one who needed a QB prior to the Browns trading up felt he was a true franchise QB? We'll never know, but the fact that franchise QBs slip in the first round I think can be attributed to more than just other team needs or question marks. It shows that teams can think a guy has franchise QB potential but will pass if they have other prospects graded higher. That's the point I was making here.



    Missed my point again.



    I think you're understating Suh as a propsect here. I've not seen a defender as highly touted as Suh in recent years. And I say that as someone who has been following the draft for a while. Dorsey and Ngata were great prospects, but neither were as highly regarded IMO. You've said so yourself about Dorsey earlier in this thread, by the way: "Suh is great, a better prospect than Dorsey, who was the best DT prospect in quite some time when he was coming out."



    Again, I feel as if you're missing my point here, probably because you feel this one is stronger for your position. The point was about how often these kinds of prospects come around.

    Besides, there is no one player - franchise QB or other - who is going to turn around this sinking ship all by themselves. Others have cited examples of teams who have acquired their franchise QB but haven't been able to see the benefits just yet. They're all pieces to the puzzle.



    See above - the point isn't do you trade one for the other, but rather how they're all pieces towards building a winning franchise. One player can't do it alone, which is why it's important IMO to maximize your talent acquisition with these opportunities.
    It all comes down to this. For a team like the Rams who have needs at both positions, which player makes the bigger impact on the team over the next 10 years: A franchise QB, or a franchise DT. I bring Ngata into the discussion because he is arguably the best DT in football. As good as Ngata is, if the Ravens had to choose a player to keep between him and Flacco, your flavor of the month franchise QB, then they would keep Flacco. They would keep Flacco because QBs are more valuable and more important in the sport.

    Why do I bring this up? Because I think it is very unlikely that Suh will be a significantly pro than Ngata, if he's as good at all (too early to say). If Clausen becomes a franchise QB in the mold of Ryan, Flacco etc, he'd be more valuable than Suh if Suh becomes a stud DT in the mold of Ngata. They are different style DTs, but the point is still valid.

    You keep trying to make this about who is the top prospect on the big board, but you should be asking who would make the most impact on the Rams. Most knowledgable football fans know that QBs have much more impact on the game than DTs. All of this "best DT prospect in years" stuff means nothing. The question is what is his upside. Unless he will be, by far, the best DT in the league, then he won't make as much impact as your flavor of the month franchise QB.

    Now this whole discussion is moot if the Rams brass don't think Clausen will be a franchise QB. If they do, however, then they will inevitably conclude that he would have more impact on the team than a DT, and Clausen will be the pick.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

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
  •