View Poll Results: Who would by your choice at #16 among the listed players?

Voters
68. You may not vote on this poll
  • Chance Warmack, OG, Alabama

    32 47.06%
  • Cordarrelle Patterson, WR, Tennessee

    15 22.06%
  • Tavon Austin, WR, West Virginia

    14 20.59%
  • Jonathan Cooper, OG, North Carolina

    3 4.41%
  • Keenan Allen, WR, California

    1 1.47%
  • Kenny Vaccaro, S, Texas

    0 0%
  • Alec Ogletree, OLB, Georgia

    1 1.47%
  • Sheldon Richardson, DT, Missouri

    2 2.94%
  • Matt Elam, S, Florida

    0 0%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 53
Like Tree21Likes

Thread: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

  1. #31
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,700
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Slot receivers don't generally face press coverage, so that won't be an issue.

    And I agree inially there is a concern over injury for a player of his stature. But after 8 years of football and there's still no injury history, your concern is more like paranoia.

    I reiterate, all players who play for an extended period can expect to be injured at some point. And as in the case of Tavon Austin, a smaller size does not determine it.

    And finally, I'd say Jeff Fisher likes a mixed bag. Chris Johnson is certainly not a big back and Jared Cook is a smallish TE.
    You are right, Austin will play the slot so he won't come up against press coverage, but he will be up against safeties and LB's who can still lay a hard blow. His 8 years of injury-free football came at the HS and college level where his speed was probably his saving grace. That's not true in the NFL. But as you say injuries happen to all players and that comes with the territory.

    As for Fisher, I do think he prefers the bigger players. CJ2K is the equivalent of DRich for us. Smallish RB's thrive because they are low to the ground and their speed speaks for itself. Listen to Jeff when he speaks about the new helmet rule, he says tall RB's don't usually do well or last long, the lower to the ground a RB plays the more productive they are. So Chris Johnson falls into that category. Jared Cook is 6'5" 248 that may not be the size of Gronk, but I don't consider that small even for a TE. If you recall when he was signed he was labeled a "match-up nightmare". Gotta disagree with you on that.

    Bottom line, I respect your desire for Austin and if we draft him, I'll root as hard as anyone for him. I just see him succeeding more with a team like the Chargers than with us. The NFC West has become a hard-hitting division and I don't want to go through another Amendola-like situation where we lose a talented receiver for excessive periods.

    Go Rams!


  2. #32
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,700
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post

    No idea what you're talking about regarding The 80s Rams OL. OK,they were pretty much all 1-3 rounders except for Doug C Smith & all the long term guards were either 1st or 2nd rounders. Heck, The Rams took guards in the first AND second round one year, didn't they (Schad & Newberry).But they were a dominant run team through that decade. Blame the D, blame the inconsistent QB play but at least The Rams OL kept them stable enough to be in the hunt most years.

    In any case, I'll take the level of consistent success The Rams had after triple-dipping for OLers in the mid 70s over the also-ran status of the 80s.And it was when they really lowballed the OL in the 90s that things went sideways, no ?

    And while the Donut Bros of the GSOT were an exceptional bunch, for sure, in their humble beginnings they were all young-ish vets who'd been trained up with other teams & in their prime when they came to The Rams, not cast-off old guys or green projects. The guy you called "old", Timmerman, was 28 & going into his 5th year, after starting 3 for GB.

    The idea that the Rams don't "need" a pedigree OG is a bit silly,imo, when you consider what happened with The mightless Quinn last year and the age/injury cloud hanging over Harvey Dahl, not to mention Wells.

    Having said all that, I'm in favor of taking a worthy skill player at #16 over an equally worthy guard now that J. Long is on board. I just disagree that Austin is likely to be worthy compared to Keenan Allen, pending his health report/workout.
    I recall the Rams drafting Bern Brosteck, C, Wasington in the first round during the late '80's. But you said it right Azul, the defense and the inconsistent QB play were our undoing back then.

    Don't forget the "Doughnut Bros" had the best OL line coach around in Jim Hanifan and a 3 or 5 step drop QB with a quick release in Kurt Warner.

    Glad to see someone else has interest in Keenan Allen.

    Go Rams!

  3. #33
    gap's Avatar
    gap
    gap is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,251
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Defense View Post
    I have to go with the road grader Chance Warmack.
    Careful with the "road grader" references. I shudder to think of the last player we had with that 'nickname'. The only roads he graded was to the QB.


    gap

  4. #34
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,604
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post
    It depends on which part of his resume/profile you weight more heavily when judging whether he will be successful at the NFL level and the team situation he finds himself in. I think you need to look up that word "projection" before you use it as proof that he's better than anyone who has actually produced in the NFL. One stat jumps out at me though, when comparing Hakim & Austin that you don't mention; the huge difference in average per catch. Iirc, TA's is around 11.6 per. Hakim's was 17.8.

    Hmmmmm...so now this zippy munchkin has a touch of Faulk about him, does he ?! Wow....the legend grows....at least in minds like yours that seem to obsess over one player at a time as THE answer to all ills.

    No idea what you're talking about regarding The 80s Rams OL. OK,they were pretty much all 1-3 rounders except for Doug C Smith & all the long term guards were either 1st or 2nd rounders. Heck, The Rams took guards in the first AND second round one year, didn't they (Schad & Newberry).But they were a dominant run team through that decade. Blame the D, blame the inconsistent QB play but at least The Rams OL kept them stable enough to be in the hunt most years.

    In any case, I'll take the level of consistent success The Rams had after triple-dipping for OLers in the mid 70s over the also-ran status of the 80s.And it was when they really lowballed the OL in the 90s that things went sideways, no ?

    And while the Donut Bros of the GSOT were an exceptional bunch, for sure, in their humble beginnings they were all young-ish vets who'd been trained up with other teams & in their prime when they came to The Rams, not cast-off old guys or green projects. The guy you called "old", Timmerman, was 28 & going into his 5th year, after starting 3 for GB.

    The idea that the Rams don't "need" a pedigree OG is a bit silly,imo, when you consider what happened with The mightless Quinn last year and the age/injury cloud hanging over Harvey Dahl, not to mention Wells.

    Having said all that, I'm in favor of taking a worthy skill player at #16 over an equally worthy guard now that J. Long is on board. I just disagree that Austin is likely to be worthy compared to Keenan Allen, pending his health report/workout.
    Don't need to look up the word "Projection" as it is a commonly used word during this period of the NFL season to describe where you think a particular college player may go in the draft.

    Didn't mention any stats when comparing the two because it was not necessary. Austin has a clear 1st round projection and Az Hakim did not.

    Yes sir the "zippy munchkin" has an open field running ability that rivals the great Marshall Faulk. Also has great hands. If you have questions about that, youtube his highlights.

    Apparently you do have an idea of what I was talking about when it came to the 80s Rams O-lines. Certainly can't blame the defense as you suggest as they were always above average. Blame the fact that there was no diversity in the offenses, because there were no weapons. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

    Don't really recall much of anything during the 90s. All I know is, it wasn't pretty.

    Where do you get the idea, that I said or believe the Rams don't need a pedigree OG? If you actually digest my post you will come away with something like the following:

    My point about the O-line of GSOT was that aside from Orlando Pace, they were all drafted in the later rounds. Which tells me, YOU DON'T NEED TO DRAFT A GUARD IN THE 1ST ROUND, I don't care how great a prospect he appears to be.

    It is not, and will never be a position in and of itself, that will make a difference of whether you make it to the superbowl or not. It's just not.

    Good OGs are almost always found outside the 1st round because of it.

    Hence the greatest offense in NFL history.
    Last edited by Fortuninerhater; -03-29-2013 at 10:07 PM.
    Beastified likes this.

  5. #35
    CRAZYHORNS's Avatar
    CRAZYHORNS is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Maryland near DC
    Age
    47
    Posts
    633
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    If you look at 2012 the Rams went on a winning streak when the line got healthy so I have to go with Warmack.

    Go Rams

  6. #36
    CRAZYHORNS's Avatar
    CRAZYHORNS is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Maryland near DC
    Age
    47
    Posts
    633
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Don't need to look up the word "Projection" as it is a commonly used word during this period of the NFL season to describe where you think a particular college player may go in the draft.

    Didn't mention any stats when comparing the two because it was not necessary. Austin has a clear 1st round projection and Az Hakim did not.

    Yes sir the "zippy munchkin" has an open field running ability that rivals the great Marshall Faulk. Also has great hands. If you have questions about that, youtube his highlights.

    Apparently you do have an idea of what I was talking about when it came to the 80s Rams O-lines. Certainly can't blame the defense as you suggest as they were always above average. Blame the fact that there was no diversity in the offenses, because there were no weapons. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

    Don't really recall much of anything during the 90s. All I know is, it wasn't pretty.

    Where do you get the idea, that I said or believe the Rams don't need a pedigree OG? If you actually digest my post you will come away with something like the following:

    My point about the O-line of GSOT was that aside from Orlando Pace, they were all drafted in the later rounds. Which tells me, YOU DON'T NEED TO DRAFT A GUARD IN THE 1ST ROUND, I don't care how great a prospect he appears to be.

    It is not, and will never be a position in and of itself, that will make a difference of whether you make it to the superbowl or not. It's just not.

    Good OGs are almost always found outside the 1st round because of it.

    Hence the greatest offense in NFL history.
    That is true and the same can be said about the QB position. However, out of the 200 plus players that will be drafted you have to find that player in the later rounds. Pretty sure most GM's will miss much more than hit. At least with the couple of Guards at top of this years board the chances of missing is much more unlikely. I would be very surprise if Warmack or Cooper do not have successful careers in the NFL if they do not fall victim to injuries.

    Go Rams
    BIG-BLUE and mde8352gorams like this.

  7. #37
    Beastified's Avatar
    Beastified is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    74
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    It's harder to find a really good skill position player in the later rounds compared to finding a really good guard in the later rounds.

  8. #38
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,003
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Chance Warmack has skill set to become longtime Pro Bowl player

    Guards and centers are far from the most exciting positions to track in the NFL draft. But that doesn't mean hitting on the right interior linemen isn't an important part of developing a championship roster.

    Consider the last four Super Bowl champions. The Baltimore Ravens (Marshal Yanda), New York Giants (Chris Snee), Green Bay Packers (Josh Sitton) and New Orleans Saints (Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks) all had top-flight guards in their staring lineups.

    It shouldn’t be a surprise then that both the best guard and best center in the 2013 draft class hail from college football's two-time reigning national champions.

    Alabama's Chance Warmack offers championship makeup and difference-making power, making him a rare guard with top-10 potential.

    Chance Warmack, G, Alabama (6-2, 317). Warmack is built to control the action inside, combining his powerful frame with smooth feet and strong hands. He looks the part of a durable long-time Pro Bowler. He's the "safest" pick in the early first round, and the Jets (No. 9) and Titans (No. 10) are the likeliest landing spots.

    Vinnie Iyer Sporting News

    We can't afford to miss on our first round picks in this draft if we are going to become a great team again. Take the safe pick!
    Last edited by Rambos; -03-30-2013 at 12:06 AM.
    mde8352gorams likes this.

  9. #39
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,604
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    Chance Warmack has skill set to become longtime Pro Bowl player

    Guards and centers are far from the most exciting positions to track in the NFL draft. But that doesn't mean hitting on the right interior linemen isn't an important part of developing a championship roster.

    Consider the last four Super Bowl champions. The Baltimore Ravens (Marshal Yanda), New York Giants (Chris Snee), Green Bay Packers (Josh Sitton) and New Orleans Saints (Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks) all had top-flight guards in their staring lineups.

    It shouldn’t be a surprise then that both the best guard and best center in the 2013 draft class hail from college football's two-time reigning national champions.

    Alabama's Chance Warmack offers championship makeup and difference-making power, making him a rare guard with top-10 potential.

    Chance Warmack, G, Alabama (6-2, 317). Warmack is built to control the action inside, combining his powerful frame with smooth feet and strong hands. He looks the part of a durable long-time Pro Bowler. He's the "safest" pick in the early first round, and the Jets (No. 9) and Titans (No. 10) are the likeliest landing spots.

    Vinnie Iyer Sporting News

    We can't afford to miss on our first round picks in this draft if we are going to become a great team again. Take the safe pick!
    Chris Snee 2nd round

    Marshal Yanda 3rd round

    Josh Sitton 4th round

    Jhari Evans 4th round

    Carl Nicks 5th round

    Do we really need to continue?

  10. #40
    Azul e Oro is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    2,355
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Chris Snee 2nd round

    Marshal Yanda 3rd round

    Josh Sitton 4th round

    Jhari Evans 4th round

    Carl Nicks 5th round

    Do we really need to continue?
    I think we do....lol....

    DeCastro & Zeitler 2012, Iupati 2010, Albert & Grubbs 2008, Joseph 2006,and many, many more inc multi-PBers, members of excellent offenses,even HOFers...and all taken in the first round. It happens every other year or so.
    If a team takes a guard or a center in the first, it would seem the success rate is pretty darned high. They do have to be special, for sure. If Warmack really is graded that high by The Rams FO, I say you have to seriously consider taking him. I'm sure Fisher knows how valuable Bruce Matthews was. i sure as hell remember how valuable Harrah and Hill were.

    If TA is the guy you think he is & OLers ( or is it just guards?) are better value in the second or later, why would any team pass him up in favor of a mere tackle or guard, several of which are "projected " higher on many mocks? Surely he won't be there at #16 ?

    Of course you don't NEED to draft a guard in the first. Great players at every position have been found outside the first round. That's no argument,imo. If you have a chance to draft what you believe to be a great player at ANY position when you're picking at #16 AND it's a position of immediate need, I think you take it, especially with a double dip.Well just have to disagree on TA being potentially great. If speaking too admiringly of the whiners is distasteful, claiming faulkesque qualities is what ? Maybe he does have some equally elusive moves but I'll believe it when I see it vs NFL defenses and over several seasons as a starter. And Faulk was so much more that I find it hard to believe TA will ever be & needs to be to be worthy at #16; a great runner between the tackles, an effective downfield blocker, and awesome blitz blocker.

    Btw,I'd be fine with them passing on Keenan if they really believe CW is a 10 year multi-PB guard & I think Keenan could be the next Ike Bruce.Then again, I probably have a lot more faith than you do that Sam will make even lesser talented guys better if he has a stable line and system. Nor do I buy what I think is your basic premise that the GSOT or any other SB caliber team was built by taking role players, no matter how exciting vs college defenses, in the first round.
    Last edited by Azul e Oro; -03-30-2013 at 04:38 AM.
    Rambos, BIG-BLUE and mde8352gorams like this.

  11. #41
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,604
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post
    I think we do....lol....

    DeCastro & Zeitler 2012, Iupati 2010, Albert & Grubbs 2008, Joseph 2006,and many, many more inc multi-PBers, members of excellent offenses,even HOFers...and all taken in the first round. It happens every other year or so.
    If a team takes a guard or a center in the first, it would seem the success rate is pretty darned high. They do have to be special, for sure. If Warmack really is graded that high by The Rams FO, I say you have to seriously consider taking him. I'm sure Fisher knows how valuable Bruce Matthews was. i sure as hell remember how valuable Harrah and Hill were.

    If TA is the guy you think he is & OLers ( or is it just guards?) are better value in the second or later, why would any team pass him up in favor of a mere tackle or guard, several of which are "projected " higher on many mocks? Surely he won't be there at #16 ?

    Of course you don't NEED to draft a guard in the first. Great players at every position have been found outside the first round. That's no argument,imo. If you have a chance to draft what you believe to be a great player at ANY position when you're picking at #16 AND it's a position of immediate need, I think you take it, especially with a double dip.Well just have to disagree on TA being potentially great. If speaking too admiringly of the whiners is distasteful, claiming faulkesque qualities is what ? Maybe he does have some equally elusive moves but I'll believe it when I see it vs NFL defenses and over several seasons as a starter. And Faulk was so much more that I find it hard to believe TA will ever be & needs to be to be worthy at #16; a great runner between the tackles, an effective downfield blocker, and awesome blitz blocker.

    Btw,I'd be fine with them passing on Keenan if they really believe CW is a 10 year multi-PB guard & I think Keenan could be the next Ike Bruce.Then again, I probably have a lot more faith than you do that Sam will make even lesser talented guys better if he has a stable line and system. Nor do I buy what I think is your basic premise that the GSOT or any other SB caliber team was built by taking role players, no matter how exciting vs college defenses, in the first round.
    Let's go from the bottom up.

    Firstly, my premise for GSOT is elementary school clear. You don't have to think about it, because I've basically spoon fed it to you if you've bothered to read it. And the premise of it is not up for debate. In other words, you can not argue with facts.

    Now pay close attention.

    It is a fact that Orlando Pace was the only starting O-lineman on the '99 Rams superbowl team, that was drafted higher than the 5th round.

    Therefore it is a fact, that a sucessful O-line can be built using a stud LT (Jake Long in this case) and late round picks. Are you following so far?

    Secondly, my comparison of Tavon Austin to Marshall Faulk was clearly only open-field running ability and great hands. Never said he was Marshal Faulk. To be specific, I said he's a much better version of Az Hakim with sprinkles of Marshall Faulk. You're entitled to your opinion on that as I am mine. If you don't see it, so be it. No harm done. Maybe you will one day.

    Thirdly, teams may pass Tavon Austin up because maybe, just maybe, they need a tackle or guard more. I don't know and I don't care why they pass him up, I just care that they do. My contention is that the Rams are the exact opposite. I believe we simply need playmakers more than we need the best guard in the draft, particularly since history tells us an overwhelming majority of good guards are found in later rounds throughout the league.

    Finally, your opinion is your opinon, mine is mine, and neither is likely to change.

    I certainly believe I've proven my point, so let's just call it a thread and hope the Rams make the best decision.

    Go Tavon Austin or Cordarelle Patterson.
    Last edited by Fortuninerhater; -03-30-2013 at 01:28 PM.

  12. #42
    BarronWade's Avatar
    BarronWade is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,433
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Warmack....I truly believe Bradford will be a great QB and its time we gave a line so can reach his full potential

  13. #43
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,003
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Chris Snee 2nd round

    Marshal Yanda 3rd round

    Josh Sitton 4th round

    Jhari Evans 4th round

    Carl Nicks 5th round

    Do we really need to continue?
    I think you are missing the point. Who is the safer pick at 16? Austin or Warmack?

    If we knew that both players would became HOFers I would take Austin for sure. But we have to look at how both players will project at the next level.

    I would think most would consider Warmack a safer pick then Austin. Drop Warmack in and forget about that spot for ten years. Austin has a lot more questions IMO.
    MauiRam and mde8352gorams like this.

  14. #44
    Azul e Oro is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    2,355
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Let's go from the bottom up.

    Firstly, my premise for GSOT is elementary school clear. You don't have to think about it, because I've basically spoon fed it to you if you've bothered to read it. And the premise of it is not up for debate. In other words, you can not argue with facts.

    Now pay close attention.

    It is a fact that Orlando Pace was the only starting O-lineman on the '99 Rams superbowl team, that was drafted higher than the 5th round.

    Therefore it is a fact, that a sucessful O-line can be built using a stud LT (Jake Long in this case) and late round picks. Are you following so far?

    Secondly, my comparison of Tavon Austin to Marshall Faulk was clearly only open-field running ability and great hands. Never said he was Marshal Faulk. To be specific, I said he's a much better version of Az Hakim with sprinkles of Marshall Faulk. You're entitled to your opinion on that as I am mine. If you don't see it, so be it. No harm done. Maybe you will one day.

    Thirdly, teams may pass Tavon Austin up because maybe, just maybe, they need a tackle or guard more. I don't know and I don't care why they pass him up, I just care that they do. My contention is that the Rams are the exact opposite. I believe we simply need playmakers more than we need the best guard in the draft, particularly since history tells us an overwhelming majority of good guards are found in later rounds throughout the league.

    Finally, your opinion is your opinon, mine is mine, and neither is likely to change.

    I certainly believe I've proven my point, so let's just call it a thread and hope the Rams make the best decision.

    Go Tavon Austin or Cordarelle Patterson.
    We do agree on one thing; your argument is at an elementary school level.

    The 80s Whiner offensive skill player core was also largely built with players taken outside round one. Montana, Craig, Clark,Solomon,Taylor,Tyler,Brent Jones.Only Rice and Russ Francis were first round.

    Never said you said TA was Faulk; I said I disagree that TA's moves should be even called "faulkesque" based on what you saw on his college tape.I played soccer competitively for many years & even now, in my creaky-kneed dotage, could walk onto a field of Yank weekend warriors & look like a star. Doesn't mean I could have been the next Messi. Is that really the best you can do in terms of projected comparison ? Where are the examples of other players of similar size and skillset that were taken in the first and achieved the success you are so blithely sure will be Austin's ?

    This general idea that you should or shouldn't take a guard in the first because most good ones are found later is equally silly.It's about the specific individuals involved and the needs of the specific team.

    Nothing will be proven until the end of the 2015 season when we can accurately assess the choices that will be made in this draft.
    Last edited by Azul e Oro; -03-30-2013 at 03:15 PM.

  15. #45
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,604
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    I think you are missing the point. Who is the safer pick at 16? Austin or Warmack?

    If we knew that both players would became HOFers I would take Austin for sure. But we have to look at how both players will project at the next level.

    I would think most would consider Warmack a safer pick then Austin. Drop Warmack in and forget about that spot for ten years. Austin has a lot more questions IMO.
    Not missing the point at all.

    And not disputing who may be the safer pick.

    The dispute lies in whether the Rams think they can find a suitable LG in the later rounds which history has proven time and time again, they can. And whether a playmaker-starved team like the Rams can afford to pass on Austin/Patterson for an OG.

    I clearly say no, I'd much rather have the best playmaker over the best guard for this team because I know Long and Warford among others are also good guards that will be available later.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. New to the board...
    By BayArea408Niner in forum Welcome to the ClanRam
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -09-13-2007, 12:44 AM
  2. Another Old Ram fan has come on board!
    By RAMFANRAIDERHATER in forum Welcome to the ClanRam
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -08-11-2006, 09:13 PM
  3. Hey Board!
    By LARamHead in forum Welcome to the ClanRam
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: -04-09-2006, 04:35 PM
  4. Replies: 23
    Last Post: -02-18-2006, 09:27 PM
  5. Smart Players, According to the Players
    By AvengerRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -11-05-2004, 02:10 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
  •