Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 55
  1. #16
    Falconator Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I've heard it quite often, yes.

    You know who says it a lot? Scott Wright, founder of NFL Draft Countdown, the internet's best free draft site. Go to his site and read the first pick of his mock draft - he uses that exact saying when talking about Detroit and his prediction that they will take Stafford.

    Want to know what he said about the Rams' QB situation on his site? "I don't think I see the Rams considering a quarterback in round one. The wheels have fallen off for Bulger but I think there is enough history there that they know it's not all his fault. I think they will focus on getting better around him rather than starting over completely."

    Let me repeat because I don't think it can be emphasized enough - the Rams gave Bulger the most expensive contract they've ever given any player. Whether or not YOU feel he's their franchise QB doesn't change the fact that he's making franchise QB money.

    This wasn't a deal signed back in 2003 or something. The ink on this thing isn't even two years old. The unavoidable fact of the matter here is that Bulger is being paid like a franchise QB; thus, in that regard, the Rams have a franchise passer right now.

    Now, do they need a QB of the future? I would say yes, but someone we can sit and groom without the pressure to play. Spend a second overall pick on a QB, and tell me that pressure doesn't exist. Not going to happen, because the demand is that those guys make an immediate impact on your ball club. That equates to rushing a guy on the field before he's ready. And I'm sorry, but I don't think Stafford or Bradford came come in during their rookie year and have a Matt Ryan kind of campaign. Bradford is too raw and Stafford still has big questions about his decision making and judgment IMO.

    Simply put, actions and decisions have consequences. Those consequences can't just be ignored, yet there are no real answers from the pro QB crowd regarding how this team is going to juggle Bulger's deal, a rookie QBs deal, and still improve at the numerous other areas they need to improve upon. As I said earlier, it's easy for fans to shrug off the cap implications in casual discussion. It's a lot harder for guys like Devaney and others in the organization to just overlook those details.
    I understand "your take" above and you have some good arguments - I grant you that.

    Do I think that either Sam Bradford or Matthew Stafford could have the "rookie impact" of Matt Ryan? - My answer is "NO"(and for the record, I did not bring up Matt Ryan this time! - but that is a pretty easy answer when you consider Matt Ryan has had the best rookie QB campaign this side of Dan Marino (with no apologies to Rothlisberger). However, who here on this board thought Matt Ryan was going to have a rookie year like this? If your honest, most of you will probably admit you either "did not like him at all and thought he would be a bust" or you thought he would have a rough first year and just be some average type of NFL QB.....Well, I was wrong about him and you probably were too....

    And, for the record, a very good and SMART QB makes the offensive line better - this is a FACT.....Falcons basically have the same offensive line as last year and I think we gave up 47 sacks in 2007 and like 16 sacks this year - same offensive line except for Sam Baker and Baker has missed like 8 games.....we did get your new offensive line coach though - Paul Boudreau - that helped. But if you interviewed each offensive lineman, they would be quick to give their new QB praise for recognizing blitzes and getting the ball out early, etc.......its underappreciated by you guys how much better an "aware" and smart QB can make on an offensive line - Bulger does not have that kind of feel or prescence to make his offensive line look better.

    What I am telling you is its a very "simplistic" answer to just say "take a QB in the 2nd round".......The Quarterback position accounts for about 25% of a teams success or failure - no that is not a scientific answer and is just my opinion but its a FACT that the QB position dwarfs all other positions in value and importance - including offensive tackle. The two next impactful positions are probably left tackle and defensive end but they are still light years behind the QB position.

    There was a very good article written about taking a QB in 1st round or in the "top 10" versus waiting until later rounds - if I find it I will post it. Of course it touched on the many QB busts in first rounds but also went onto show how very poorly the 2nd and 3rd round QBs have done in the NFL - the conclusion of the article was that even though its "even money" that you could draft and bust on a QB early in the draft (1st round) - your odds are HUGELY increased that you could get a really good QB which seems simple and logical - bottom-line, you have to just be "flat-out" lucky if you get a franchise QB past the first round.

    And those that love to bring up the Trent Dilfer argument (average QB who won a SuperBowl) - well I would say this - there has been 41 superbowls to date - go back and look and tell me how many of the QBs that won the Lombardi Trophy were not in the "top 20%" of the league's QBs at the time they were playing - not bloody many!!!!

    I used to be a guy that just loved "the big arm" but after watching Matty Ice's success this year and thinking back to some of the all-time NFL greats (Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, Drew Brees) - I think each of those guys did not have a lot of great physical traits but are "students of the game" and hard, hard workers. Peyton Manning, Tom Brady and Matt Ryan have more physical skills than the previous three - but they have those same intangibles as well - you have to have those intangibles and "want the ball" with two minutes left to be great (and yes, I know Matt Ryan has not earned that moniker yet!)......

    Does Sam Bradford or Matthew Stafford have all those intangibles to go with their physical abilities? I don't know the answer to that but I can promise you that Billy DeVaney is going to interview both these guys, study them hard, watch every throw both of these guys have ever made, quizz them on the white board with formations, etc. and put them through the paces on workouts......If DeVaney is worth his salt(and I think he is) - he will know before April 25th if either of these guys has a "great shot" to be a franchise QB......IF he thinks either does, he will pull the trigger and grab one of these guys - Marc Bulger's contract be damned!
    Last edited by Falconator; -12-23-2008 at 07:56 PM.


  2. #17
    Action_Jackson is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    142
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    There is no chance we will take a QB with our 2nd pick

    Simple as that

  3. #18
    Falconator Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Quote Originally Posted by Action_Jackson View Post
    There is no chance we will take a QB with our 2nd pick

    Simple as that
    While you may ultimately be proven right, I think you are "dead wrong" that it is not a possibility.

    While there is no way for you or me to really prove our point about what "Billy Devaney is thinking" - I am confident that DeVaney has not ruled out taking a QB at #2 overall - if he studies and falls in love with one of these guys....

    I think part of being a successful GM is having an open mind in December, January, February and March - by the beginning of April DeVaney's mind will be "set" but not now - no way, man......

    Billy DeVaney knows the importance of the QB position.......

    AGAIN, I am not saying the Rams will 100% take a QB in 1st round - I'm just telling you its a distinct possibility - and you guys are saying that its not - I just 100% disagree there.

  4. #19
    eldfan's Avatar
    eldfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Greenville N.C.
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    I don't know how the boards will be stack but if a QB is the highest rated player take him.
    :ramlogo:

  5. #20
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,874
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
    Do I think that either Sam Bradford or Matthew Stafford could have the "rookie impact" of Matt Ryan? - My answer is "NO"(and for the record, I did not bring up Matt Ryan this time! - but that is a pretty easy answer when you consider Matt Ryan has had the best rookie QB campaign this side of Dan Marino (with no apologies to Rothlisberger).
    Let me rephrase then, because I don't think I stated my point well.

    What I was trying to convey was that I think both Stafford and Bradford are going to need to sit and learn for a while to get up to snuff in the NFL. Bradford especially, but Stafford as well because of his decision making. Stafford's been able to find success at Georgia despite a lack of talent around him, but I don't think that will be true at the next level, especially early on.

    I don't think they are the kind of QB that can come in and contribute immediately like a Ryan or a Flacco or a Roethlisberger. Nor are the Rams a team like the Ravens or Steelers or, to an extent, the Falcons, who can protect a young quarterback with solid to strong defensive play and a stout running game. We're the league's 27th ranked running offense, tied for second to last in rushing touchdowns. The defense... well, it speaks for itself.

    Even with some offseason additions, I don't think this team is to a point yet where a rookie QB could come in and be protected enough to minimize his mistakes. And when you draft a QB that high, it's to see the field sooner rather than later. That pressure to get the guy on the field is not what the Rams need, IMO. What they need is someone they can sit behind Bulger while we get later into his deal - to a point where moving him becomes an actual viable option if we want to do it - and learn from the sidelines and in practice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
    And, for the record, a very good and SMART QB makes the offensive line better - this is a FACT
    Yes, but I think we would disagree about the extent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
    we did get your new offensive line coach though - Paul Boudreau
    Then that should tell you the kind of personnel blow-up we need on the offensive line, since he couldn't do much of anything for this unit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
    What I am telling you is its a very "simplistic" answer to just say "take a QB in the 2nd round"
    But it's not very simplistic to say, "You can get a stud offensive tackle in the late 1st /early 2nd round area"? Hmmm, I see.

    Besides, no where am I advocating for a QB in round two specifically. I'm simply arguing against a first round passer because, primarily, of the massive financial investment this team recently made in Bulger. I don't really care if we end up drafting a passer in the second or the seventh - find a guy you like whom you think you can groom and develop over the next 2-3 years, which is about how long I think it's going to take to fix the various major problems on this roster.

    But the Rams won't be able to spend 2-3 years grooming the second overall pick in this draft; he'll more than likely be on the field in 2009 if he's taken. Throwing a guy into the fire without many tools around him to help him succeed does not sound to me like a situation that's going to breed outstanding quarterback play.

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
    Marc Bulger's contract be damned!
    Again, this is where your argument falls apart for me, because you keep trying to sweep Bulger's contract under the rug as if there were no consequences to that signing and how it affects what the Rams can do in the immediate future.

    It's been my experience that those who advocate drafting a QB, like yourself, have no answer to the financial issue. The argument boils down to "you don't pass on a franchise QB" even though the Rams, according to the books, are already paying someone to be that franchise QB.

    Maybe the contract was a huge mistake in your opinion, but it's there and it has to be dealt with, not ignored or shrugged off or "be damned."

  6. #21
    IzzyHigh1212 Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    You need an offensive line that can keep the rookie QB on his feet. We don't have that great of one. THAT needs to be fixed first. If we can build a solid offensive line during the offseason, I believe Bulger's confidence will come back. These last couple of games you can see signs of it now that our O-Line's done a pretty decent job.

    If you draft a rookie QB and place him behind THIS line, you potentially have a QB that could have be great, but the beating he could take may end up ruining him.

    Example: David Carr

  7. #22
    Falconator Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Let me rephrase then, because I don't think I stated my point well.

    What I was trying to convey was that I think both Stafford and Bradford are going to need to sit and learn for a while to get up to snuff in the NFL. Bradford especially, but Stafford as well because of his decision making. Stafford's been able to find success at Georgia despite a lack of talent around him, but I don't think that will be true at the next level, especially early on.

    I don't think they are the kind of QB that can come in and contribute immediately like a Ryan or a Flacco or a Roethlisberger. Nor are the Rams a team like the Ravens or Steelers or, to an extent, the Falcons, who can protect a young quarterback with solid to strong defensive play and a stout running game. We're the league's 27th ranked running offense, tied for second to last in rushing touchdowns. The defense... well, it speaks for itself.

    Even with some offseason additions, I don't think this team is to a point yet where a rookie QB could come in and be protected enough to minimize his mistakes. And when you draft a QB that high, it's to see the field sooner rather than later. That pressure to get the guy on the field is not what the Rams need, IMO. What they need is someone they can sit behind Bulger while we get later into his deal - to a point where moving him becomes an actual viable option if we want to do it - and learn from the sidelines and in practice.



    Yes, but I think we would disagree about the extent.



    Then that should tell you the kind of personnel blow-up we need on the offensive line, since he couldn't do much of anything for this unit.



    But it's not very simplistic to say, "You can get a stud offensive tackle in the late 1st /early 2nd round area"? Hmmm, I see.

    Besides, no where am I advocating for a QB in round two specifically. I'm simply arguing against a first round passer because, primarily, of the massive financial investment this team recently made in Bulger. I don't really care if we end up drafting a passer in the second or the seventh - find a guy you like whom you think you can groom and develop over the next 2-3 years, which is about how long I think it's going to take to fix the various major problems on this roster.

    But the Rams won't be able to spend 2-3 years grooming the second overall pick in this draft; he'll more than likely be on the field in 2009 if he's taken. Throwing a guy into the fire without many tools around him to help him succeed does not sound to me like a situation that's going to breed outstanding quarterback play.



    Again, this is where your argument falls apart for me, because you keep trying to sweep Bulger's contract under the rug as if there were no consequences to that signing and how it affects what the Rams can do in the immediate future.

    It's been my experience that those who advocate drafting a QB, like yourself, have no answer to the financial issue. The argument boils down to "you don't pass on a franchise QB" even though the Rams, according to the books, are already paying someone to be that franchise QB.

    Maybe the contract was a huge mistake in your opinion, but it's there and it has to be dealt with, not ignored or shrugged off or "be damned."
    Nick,

    you "twisted" some of my main points........

    you said Ryan was protected with "running game" -and your right he has been - but we have Michael Turner - you guys have Steven Jackson who was "all world two years ago" - why can't he be again?

    Falcons defense is not really "good" yet - we are straight up "average" defense.....

    you said Stafford/Bradford are not prepared coming into the NFL like "Ryan/Flacco/Rothlisberger".....Well, last time I checked, Flacco played in Div 1-AA for the Delaware Hens and played out of a shotgun formation exclusively......I think his first year adjustment has been pretty dayum good.

    Regarding what round to draft a QB in......if you don't draft one in first round, you might as well not even bother because your odds go down so much - if you don't want to draft one in first round - might as well wait until next year.........garbage QBs for the most part outside of 1st round or they develop so late they are not with the original drafting team if not taken in 1st round. What's the point really of drafting some QB who does not have NFL talent and "hope against hope" that he makes it.....

    why again will it take 2-3 years to groom the QB? He could play a minimum of 1/2 of the first years games and be ready to go by 2nd year...

    Why would you pay some below average QB $11 million/year - i think that is the more important question than why draft a "franchise QB" if you get the opportunity?

    Think about it.........How utterly STUPID is it to "keep" a "dog-crap" QB when he sucks and pay him like he's Peyton Manning..........I would tell my "bean counters" to go in a room and figure out a way to cut the "son-of-a-bastage"............its hard to believe I have to even bring this up. Salary cap goes up every year......cut the dead weight and move on....

  8. #23
    IzzyHigh1212 Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Marc Bulger up until 2007 deserved that money. Two bad years on two REALLY horrible teams with horrible lines doesn't exactly mean he's a 'dog-crap' QB.

    If we cut him, then that pretty much justifies Steven Jackson's reasoning on holding out so long...as it does with any other player. Salary Cap goes up every year, but the collective bargaining agreement is up pretty soon last time I checked. Anything can change.

    PS: Some of the stuff you're saying makes NO sense at all. I don't even know why we're continuing to argue with you about this. You cut Bulger two years after him signing that contract, then the cap hit is huge. It's not worth it.

    It's mismanagement like this that got us into this mess. One crazy season where your Falcons turned everything around this quick doesn't mean that's the direction we must go if we want to be successful. The fact that you're trying to argue Nick of all people about this is crazy. I'm not trying to hate, but seriously...lol

    Oh..and Steven Jackson isn't playing up to his 'all-world' potential partially because of our O-Line. You seem to ignore the fact that this has been a glaring weakness of ours for almost four years now...and we still haven't fixed it. We can't avoid it any longer if we want to win games in the future. Going with a QB will not magically solve everything. Without Micheal Turner, I would argue that you guys would still be in the same boat as last year...slightly better. If you look at the numbers, most QB's picked in the Top 5 turn out to be duds. Sure, there have been some great ones picked up too...but it's more so up to chance that you find a franchise QB like that.

  9. #24
    Falconator Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Quote Originally Posted by IzzyHigh1212 View Post
    Marc Bulger up until 2007 deserved that money. Two bad years on two REALLY horrible teams with horrible lines doesn't exactly mean he's a 'dog-crap' QB.

    If we cut him, then that pretty much justifies Steven Jackson's reasoning on holding out so long...as it does with any other player. Salary Cap goes up every year, but the collective bargaining agreement is up pretty soon last time I checked. Anything can change.

    PS: Some of the stuff you're saying makes NO sense at all. I don't even know why we're continuing to argue with you about this. You cut Bulger two years after him signing that contract, then the cap hit is huge. It's not worth it.

    It's mismanagement like this that got us into this mess. One crazy season where your Falcons turned everything around this quick doesn't mean that's the direction we must go if we want to be successful. The fact that you're trying to argue Nick of all people about this is crazy. I'm not trying to hate, but seriously...lol

    Oh..and Steven Jackson isn't playing up to his 'all-world' potential partially because of our O-Line. You seem to ignore the fact that this has been a glaring weakness of ours for almost four years now...and we still haven't fixed it. We can't avoid it any longer if we want to win games in the future. Going with a QB will not magically solve everything. Without Micheal Turner, I would argue that you guys would still be in the same boat as last year...slightly better. If you look at the numbers, most QB's picked in the Top 5 turn out to be duds. Sure, there have been some great ones picked up too...but it's more so up to chance that you find a franchise QB like that.
    I guess we will agree to disagree.......besides, I have said from the start if DeVaney does not think either of these guys (Stafford/Bradford) are "franchise QBs" then by all means take your offensive tackle.

    As for my Falcons, one point that I made that neither you nor Nick nor anybody can refute is this - Falcons offensive line was just as bad - if not worse - than the Rams offensive line has been the last two years. We drafted the offensive tackle from USC(Sam Baker) but he has missed most of the games this year - so, same line as last year - totally different result - we have a new QB and RB - both who are quite good - but the same offensive line.......hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...........

    I agree that St. Louis needs to upgrade their line - I just don't necessarily think that it "has to be" with a first round pick if you can grab a guy in free agency and draft some offensive lineman in either the 2nd or 3rd or 4th rounds or multiple picks......

    There are many different ways to construct a team and upgrade the Rams. Many of you are "close-minded" and don't have the imagination to see this. Again, not saying that drafting an "Andre Smith" from Alabama is necessarily bad or wrong - but I'm more open to another way to make the Rams better.....via the QB route-if one proves to be excellent prospect.....

    I'm not close-minded to the benefits of drafting the OT, but you are close-minded to the benefits of drafting the QB.......so, go ahead and call me "crazy" if it makes you feel better - but I think I am approaching the situation more like the GM would than you guys that insist that QB is not a legitimate option.......Because Marc Bulger is not the long-term option and most of you know this in your heart-of-hearts......

  10. #25
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,049
    Rep Power
    172

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
    I guess we will agree to disagree.......besides, I have said from the start if DeVaney does not think either of these guys (Stafford/Bradford) are "franchise QBs" then by all means take your offensive tackle.
    You keep falling back on this caveat, but that does not change the fact that you titled this thread "I predict the St. Louis Rams go QB at #2." No qualifier in that title, is there?

  11. #26
    Falconator Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    You keep falling back on this caveat, but that does not change the fact that you titled this thread "I predict the St. Louis Rams go QB at #2." No qualifier in that title, is there?
    dangit, Avenger - how long do you want the title to be?

    "I predict the St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall If Devaney thinks Stafford/Bradford is Franchise QB..

    I will stand by my prediction - that stands on its own (and it has not changed!!!)......so, in other words, I predict that Devaney will want one of these two QBs and deem them to be "franchise caliber"..........However, I'm open to the possibility that it won't happen.......

    Since you are a moderator, change the dang title if you want - sheesh!
    Last edited by Falconator; -12-24-2008 at 12:52 PM.

  12. #27
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,049
    Rep Power
    172

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall* (*See Disclaimers Within

    Better?

  13. #28
    Falconator Guest

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall* (*See Disclaimers Within

    Merry Christmas Avenger
    Merry Christmas Nick
    Merry Christmas Mooselini
    Merry Christmas BigRedMan
    Merry Christmas Azul
    Merry Christmas General Counsel
    Merry Christmas Izzy
    Merry Christmas 39thebeast
    Merry Christmas MauiRam
    Merry Christmas Hubison
    Merry Christmas Eldfan
    Merry Christmas RAMarkable
    Merry Christmas Ram Wraith

    and to all you other rams fans, I wish you a Merry Christmas and much good cheer. May your 2009 season be everything that 2008 was not.....May your QB find his rhythm, may your offensive line find someone to block, may Steven Jackson find his "lost mojo" and may Jim Haslett find a defensive coaching position somewhere else.

    And I wish you to win more games........just not this coming Sunday -

    signed,
    The Falconator

  14. #29
    richtree's Avatar
    richtree is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,147
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall* (*See Disclaimers Within

    Why would you think that the rams would take a quartback ...

    the franchise has been going downhill and when they bring in a new coach and a first year GM will want to make their mark by winning as many games as possible next year......in order to do that they cannot draft a QB in round one....plus the combine will show that all these QB's (besides Stafford) suck.....their will be so QB's from smaller schools worth a shot in later rounds....

    If both tackles aren't available in the draft then we will go with a LB ....

    rams must make their mark in free agency for once ....Corey Chavous, Drew Bennett, and Randy McMicahel, Jacob Bell (ok)

    how about getting a legit player.....

    round 1 -- Andre Smith OT -- Best pick possible
    round 2 -- Kenny Britt WR -- stud !!!! you guys will see his stock soar
    round 3 -- Clay Matthews LB -- to replace Chillar's void
    round 4 -- Donald Brown RB -- Uconn to have 1-2 punch with SJax
    round 5 -- Nic Harris SS -- Oklahoma Star to replace Chavous's weak ass
    round 6 -- Antoine Caldwell C --If lasts late if not take best C available
    round 7 -- Josh Freeman QB -- Prob have to take him in round 6

    this would be the perfect draft up to this point.....

    free agency is be key.....we need a pass rusher and not to sign players that won't help us win now !!!

    Josh Freeman's stock has been shooting up ...he is def worth a chance...

    and Kenny Britt will be the 2nd reciever taken without a doubt....
    he will bench 400 plus lbs., be top 5 faster WR, and vertical jump with size he would be a steal if he is there at pick 2 - round 2 .....

    Obvisouly this is the best draft we could have., but the Rams haven't had very good late round strategy over the last few years....

    Long , Avery were good 1, 2 picks., but we need to focus and make strong picks in later rounds.....

    We also need to decide if Stanley is our special teams guy for next year because Dante Hall just can't do it .....he needs to get cut .....

    I don't think him nor looker will be back ....

    imagine this

    Britt and Avery for next 7 years.....with burton and Stanely....

    Offense will be set .......with an improving line and drafting Andre Smith and a Center in later rounds to help.....

    Bulger has to be our guy for one more year at least ......

    then we need to find guys with size and athelticism on defense......

    DE (rusher)
    LB (big preferable MLB) - But Matthews wouldn't be bad here
    SS - that can really hit to compliment O.A. pick skills
    depth in SPEED AND SIZE!!!!!

    Rams could make a quick turnaround with a solid off -season and maybe a new strength and conditioning coach....

    I am so excited for this years draft I will be going to it ....
    Last edited by Nick; -12-27-2008 at 01:37 AM. Reason: No insults please!

  15. #30
    cfh128's Avatar
    cfh128 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Age
    31
    Posts
    783
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: I predict St. Louis Rams go "Quarterback" at #2 overall* (*See Disclaimers Within

    Falconator, I appreciate where your coming from here. And I understand that drafting a QB did wonders for your Falcons. But the difference here is, the Falcons didn't have much of a choice but to take a QB in the last draft. I mean, Chris Redman? Joey Harrington? They had nothing at that position. Luckily for you guys, Ryan and Turner turned that offense around. But they drafted a QB out of necessity.

    Say what you want about Bulger but I'll take him over Redman or Harrington any day. There isn't anywhere near as big of a need for us to take a QB as there was for the Falcons. At least not with a first round pick. A developmental guy in later rounds, sure, I could live with that. Or maybe in a couple years you take a QB in the first round. But I think if given a better supporting cast, Bulger can still be a very effective QB for this team.

    I could be wrong, but I think due to the success of Ryan and Flacco you are overly excited about what a rookie QB can do for a team. But ask the Cardinals, Raiders, *****, Titans, etc. how much their young QB's have done for their team. Then ask the Dolphins who has helped them more, Jake Long or John Beck? Ask the Browns the same with Joe Thomas or Brady Quinn?

    I think what the doctor ordered for our team is improved play from our young receiving corps, and a better offensive line. I think snagging an elite tackle is going to help Bulger more than having Matt Stafford is going to help Alex Barron.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Postgame With Gordo
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -12-21-2007, 10:18 AM
  2. Jim Thomas Live, October 30
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -10-30-2007, 08:58 PM
  3. Postgame With Gordo
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -10-22-2007, 02:43 PM
  4. Jim Thomas Live
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -09-26-2007, 08:01 AM
  5. Thomas Live
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -09-19-2007, 01:06 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
  •