JavaScript must be enabled to use this chat software. Jackson will be 27 when the season starts. - Page 2

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 26 of 26
  1. #16
    ramsaj28 Guest

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    If we get Mcnabb then draft Suh, we r in the playoffs this year

  2. #17
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Hamilton, On
    Rep Power

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    Well, Bralidore I agree with you. I would love for us to get Suh, but then what does that accomplish?

    We will still need a QB, and yet we have a decent DT rotation that gelled at the end of the season.

    McNabb is not as good as you state. It is true, that your so high on McNabb only because you want Suh.

    I want Suh too, but we cant. Its time to get a QB.

  3. #18
    SLSG Guest

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    McNabb may have 5 more really good years left in him. That may be worth the #33 pick after all, especially with the Rams track record of drafting. At least we know what we are getting with McNabb.

  4. #19
    BrokenWing's Avatar
    BrokenWing is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Rep Power

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    Five more years? That seems like a stretch. Mobile quarterbacks are typically much shorter lived than pocket passing quarterbacks with good offensive lines.

  5. #20
    harrydog's Avatar
    harrydog is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Rep Power

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    I've never been a huge McNabb fan but I still think he would be a significant upgrade. He would also have something to prove which would give him plenty of motivation. He could also help motivate the players around him. I agree that he' not good for 5 more years but 2 is really all we need. We could pick up our QB of the future in next year's draft or even later in this years draft. We could do that even without McNabb because I think that if our OL is healthy, even Bulger will be decent. After all, he used to be decent and I don't think his physical skills have deteriorated.
    Feeling compelled to take Bradford just because we think that QB is our biggest need is not necessarily the best long term solution. We have too many needs. We should take Bradford only if the Ram's front office really thinks that he is the best player available. If they think he is a talent that doesn't come along very often and that none of the other QB's available this year or next have enough potential, then and only then should we draft him.

  6. #21
    CanadianRamsFan's Avatar
    CanadianRamsFan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Rep Power

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    Quote Originally Posted by SLSG View Post
    McNabb may have 5 more really good years left in him. That may be worth the #33 pick after all, especially with the Rams track record of drafting. At least we know what we are getting with McNabb.
    You mean the one year where this group has actually all been together? Why does the spags era get the blame for the crap Losehan did?

  7. #22
    SLSG Guest

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianRamsFan View Post
    You mean the one year where this group has actually all been together? Why does the spags era get the blame for the crap Losehan did?

    point taken

  8. #23
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Rep Power

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE) View Post

    As good as Jackson is, he is NOT irreplaceable and the likes of him has been seen in the league before and will be seen again.
    In the short term and for our purposes, he is. We can't line up another elite tailback on top of every other need we confront.

    Yes i know all that stuff you wasted time posting. The Steelers were a good team before Roethlisberger, my point was they didn't have once in a decade talent on their team but they won with a rookie at the helm who helped them succeed. My point being its unlikely but not impossible and certainly not impossible to attain .500 with one.
    I'd suggest very strongly that Pittsburgh had and has some once in a decade talent on their defense. Which is why they were able to succeed with their rookie QB in the regular season.

    Detroit goes in the 2-14 range every year and though Stafford struggled he had his bright spots and gave the fan base a reason to show up to games. Once again you seem to fail to judge Bradford by his own merit and instead on what slot he's drafted in. Stafford is not Bradford and we're not the Detroit Lions.
    And half of Detroit's home games were blacked out last season. I think you greatly overestimate the ticket-selling and hope bringing capacity of a rookie QB.

    For your info you don't have any idea no more than I do how "close" the Rams are. They could very well be a few breakout season away from winning this division and falling in a wildcard playoff spot. Damn their prior records as everyone is 0-0 right now and old regimes were in charge for 2 of those 3 years.
    The 2009 Rams were arguably the least talented team in the franchise's 70 year history. We are still way behind the rest of the NFC West in terms of overall talent, and cannot hope to close that gap in one season. (At least, barring some stupid "win now" moves that mortgage at least one draft.)

    Why did we have problems against the run last year? We had an offense that couldn't do anything but hand the ball off to Steven and force our tired ass defense back on the field before they could squirt a shot of gatorade in their mouth...
    I pointed this out in another thread, and it bears repeating. The Rams defense had given up the winning points in 9 of our 15 losses by halftime. Our defense wasn't even close to lights out in any quarter last season.

    We typically started the first half strong against the run and then got gashed when guys made mental errors due to fatigue.
    Or they exploited our inability to generate a pass rush from the defensive line until said winning points were scored, at which point they finished us off by running out the clock.

    IMO THESE are our actual NEEDS. QB, OT, DE, OLB, TE.
    The rest are exaggerrated and counting on the fact that players already on the roster won't emerge or will stay injured.
    My sense of pattern recognition and realism leads me to conclude that certain injury-prone players are not going to magically stop being injury-prone any time soon. Additionally, I have little patience to wait for players who sucked too much to get significant playing time on the least talented team in franchise history to magically "emerge."

    I will also make a general point that I wouldn't count Atogwe as one of our defensive leaders for the future until he signs a contract.

  9. #24
    RamsSB99's Avatar
    RamsSB99 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Rep Power

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bralidore(RAMMODE) View Post
    You made so many bogus points I don't have time to cover tham all.
    Thats because I pointed out your lack of knowledge on every point you brought up.

    You want us to draft Suh, ok. Then you want us to squander our rebuilding by using two picks on a 34 year old Qb.
    How is a 3rd and one of our 5th rounders squandering our rebuilding???? Seriously????
    How often does a 3rd or 5th rounder turn into an above average player??? There are 32 picks in each round. The 1st and 2nd rounds are a crapshoot it only gets worse later in the draft. Are you telling me that who we would draft in the 3rd and 5th rounds this year would out produce McNabb over the next three years?? I will remind you again of our past drafts.

    Year 3rd Round & 5th Round picks
    2008 Greco & Schuneing
    2007 Wade & Fry
    2006 Wroten & Haggans

    I would trade all 6 of those players for McNabb the only bad thing is 5 of the 6 are no longer on the team.

    In fact our last five 1st round picks have not out produced McNabb.
    2009 Jason Smith-Not much production 1st year. Has potential but still hasn't out produced McNabb
    2008 Chris Long - I like potential but has not out produced McNabb yet and is now going into 3rd season
    2007 Adam Carriker -Going on fourth season and has not out produced McNabb. Some would label a guy after his 3rd year a bust if he produced as little as Carriker has.
    2006 Tye Hill - Bust no longer on the team. Did not produce was cut.
    2005 Alex (false start) Barron - Has not out produced McNabb in his 5 seasons.

    All draft picks are a gamble why not take who many considered the best player available and get a top QB in the league who you know what you are getting from him.

    Our DT position is in better shape than our QB situation and when I say Bradford will be a good choice Im going off of his potential and game film the same as you are with Suh. The only difference is Im using the first pick on the most important position and your using it on a DT
    It don't matter if you use it on the most important position if the player is not the best player. What if Clausen and Bradford were not in this draft you would still take Tebow or Colt McCoy because its the most important position??? The difference is I am using it on what many say is the best player in the draft and we would be getting one of the top QB's in the NFL right now. We would not be drafting a rookie QB in the hopes that he could become as good as McNabb and be a top QB in the league.

    Best case scenario with Suh is he comes in and dominates in the trenches. Best case with Bradford is he comes in and dominates in the passing game, then gets complimented with Jackson in the runninggame.
    Best case with Suh is he dominates and helps turn Spags defense into a defense like he had with the Giants that stopped the unstoppable Patriots offense going for a perfect season to help them win the Superbowl. Worse case for Suh is he don't contribute in pass rushing but still helps against the run and we still have McNabb a proven leader for the offense and a compliment to Jackson in his productive years. Worse case for Bradford he is injury prone, not a leader, can't translate his talent to the NFL, or takes several years to develop with the clock running out on Jackson.

    As good as Jackson is, he is NOT irreplaceable and the likes of him has been seen in the league before and will be seen again.
    Jackson is one of the top RB's in the game if you were starting a team he would be one of the first RB's picked. He is not easily replaceable and will create another big need when gone. Spags starts with defense and running the ball. If you have a good defense and a good running game you can win several games with time of possesion and running time off the clock.

    IMO THESE are our actual NEEDS. QB, OT, DE, OLB, TE.
    The rest are exaggerrated and counting on the fact that players already on the roster won't emerge or will stay injured.
    You are counting on players that have yet to produce????? We have several young WR's but tell me which one is going to step up and be an above average #1 WR in this league???? Seriously???? We may need to add G as well because we don't have anyone that has been a fulltime starter at G to replace Incognito. We have Greco and we have Setterstrom but both are still question marks at this point and likely below average. Our CB's and FS (if Atogwe is gone) are still suspect as well and below average IMO. We have to hope Jason Smith will be dependable, injury free, and have a solid year after a season cut short by a concussion.

    We have leaders on this team and that isn't the darn problem like everyone seems to think it is. Jackson, Brown, Lau, Atogwe, and Hall are leaders and that's just the guys I hear about.
    If we have leaders and that is not the problem then why do the people that want Bradford keep saying we need a franchise QB to be the leader of this team????? As far as leaders you can look at ours and the only really productive leader that other teams would want would be Jackson or Lau. Both Atogwe and Hall were free to sign with other teams and no one has been knocking down their doors. No one other then the Rams really pursued Brown when he was a free agent. I like those three but come on you look at other teams and they have more productive leaders. Peppers would have been better then those three you mentioned.

    You don't know who will fall to the fifth round this year or who is or isn't a leader in the first place.
    You are seriously counting on people falling to the 5th round????? Over a top NFL QB

    you saying you would trade all these draft picks for one guy is the reason you aren't the GM of a team.
    All these draft picks??? I said two draft picks a 3rd and a 5th for a QB that is near the top of the league. It is almost a sure thing he will be traded this offseason.

    Because that's plain stupid. You underestimate the quality of good depth and potential.
    Yeah depth and potential in the 5th round is more important to a teams success (wins\losses) then having a proven NFL QB who is one of the better ones in the league.

    And again you say im putting words in people's mouths like I was talking to you specifically, the general belief on here is that Suh will come in and dominate, you can deny it all you want but what are you saying, he will come in and not dominate?
    I have never used the words Suh, dominate, and NFL in the same sentence before just now. I have never said he would dominate. What makes you think he has to dominate when you get him and McNabb to outperform Bradford? Do you really think Bradford will come in and dominate this year???? All rookies are suspect but McNabb is not suspect you know what he will do at this level.

    You even said it yourself "I have never said he would dominate but he does.."
    You are putting words in my mouth again and flat out lying!!! If you are going to quote me and put what I said into quotes then you need to get it right. I have never said what you quoted....Show me where I said that!!

    Suh is known for putting pressure on the QB in a gap maintaining system against COLLEGE offensive linemen. His secondary never get credit for keeping a QB in the pocket scanning the field that long so that Suh can push through double teams and all that.
    So let me get this straight. You say Suh who was in a gap system not designed necessarily to get to the QB was double teamed and still got to the QB and you are proving your point that he should not be the pick how???? If he is getting double teamed in a system not designed to get to the QB and still gets to the QB then how do you credit the secondary for him getting the sack? Shouldn't some one else have been free if he is double teamed and them get the sack??? If a QB really has that much time for his WR's to run their routes, look at all his options, see he has nothing, and Suh is getting double teamed don't you think he has enough time to throw the ball away??????

    Amobi Okoye actually got 4 sacks that year and I hardly call that dominating though it is good nonetheless....
    2007 5.5 Sacks as a rookie look it up at or ESPN or SI or Pro-Football Reference and just about anywhere else that posts stats. Unless you personally kept your own stats on Okoye and they are more accurate then ever reputable website out there. Also last year Johnathan Babineaux lead all NFL DT's in sacks with 6. I can see though why you would lie about the stats and call it good and not dominating because it fits your needs.

    The Question is not who has the higher bust potential, which is by the way, impossible to determine.
    If you don't think that teams look at the risk of taking a player (their down side) and only look at their ceiling then you are sadly mistaken.

    Its who would have the greater impact on your team. you say Suh, i say Bradford.
    No here you are putting words in my mouth again I say it would be Suh and McNabb having a greater impact over Bradford. Bradford if he performs well would be lucky to be considered one of the better QB's in the league within the next three years. McNabb is considered one of the better QB's in the league right now and then you add Suh who has been considered many times as the best player in the draft. By the way you never disputed that Suh was not your choice when we clinched the #1 overall pick. I am sure you were on the Suh bandwagon then.

    If you somehow got insulted by my last post (though i wasn't even talking to you specifically) than you need to grow a pair pal.
    All I have to say is your lucky you can hide behind that keyboard because you would not make it in the real world talking like you do to people.

    Instead of lying and making up B.S. you should really try using the quote feature and quote someone with their exact words. Then follow it up by responding to the quote so others can see it instead of twisting words and lying.
    Last edited by RamsSB99; -03-25-2010 at 11:29 PM.

  10. #25
    Bralidore(RAMMODE) Guest

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    3rd and 5th round picks at the top of the round are very much indeed a hinder to a team's rebuilding. Most of a team's stars and depth come from those later rounds. On our own team we got Bartell, Atogwe, Clifton Ryan, Dorell Scott, Bradley Fletcher from those rounds and later and all our building blocks and starters going forward. Around the league I can give out numerous examples of 3rd and 5th rounders making huge impacts including Terrell Owens, Joey Porter, Frank Gore, Zach Thomas, I can name names that could fill up a few pages...I would never trade both those picks for a 34 yr old QB unless his name is Peyton or Brees. Mcnabb just isn't worth it to this team IMO. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

    You keep saying Mcnabb outproduced these young players like they've been in the league 11 years to match Mcnabbs experience and time to accumulate stats. He is in a completely different situation in Philly and is playing a completely different position...

    When i said most improtant player i meant that and the fact that I along with many NFL scouts believe that Bradford is one of the best player's availabe and if the gap between him and Suh is small you damn well can pick him ahead of Suh when you include team need. If you have Peyton Manning on your team but the BPA is a QB, would you take him the number one overall pick or would you pick a guy at a position of need who is similarly rated? Reason would have you pick the latter...

    And your worse case best case scenarios is horribly skewed...

    Best case for Suh is he comes in and dominates in the trenches and helps the defense tremendously and gives us 10 solid years. Best case for Bradford is he becomes the next big thing and puts up crazy points and commands the game from start to finish. Suh is an awesome piece to a decent defensive tackle rotation at best. Bradford is a franchise quarterback at best. Worse cases for both guys can interpreted any number of ways and both would be equally depressing.

    You greatly overrate Mcnabb IMO. Mcnabb is a guy who has thrown for over 30 touchdowns one time in his career and has never gotten over 64 percent in completion percentage and averages 59 percent in his career. He is good but not great and not a Top 5 Qb in the league IMO.

    Your comment about Jackson is fine. He is good bla bla bla. You can win with a good running game and good defense. But how often do teams without good QBs actually win a lot? How many teams actually dominate on defense and have their D and runninggame carry them to championships. Im sure you can name a few like the Jets, 2000 Ravens, 85 Bears, but check how many teams do it on the arm of their QB. You always have a chance of winning a game with an exceptional QB. If the opposing team's offense beats down your defense in a game with you having an elite defense. Then good luck playing catch-up with your runninggame..

    The Eagles have only speculated that Mcnabb MAY be traded and even then they've wanted no less than a second round pick for him. What mkaes you think a 3rd and 5th would do it for them, and if so, its still a bad deal.

    Im indeed counting on players to emerge the same way every team who drafts a player does and the same way your counting on Mcnabb to come in and be an elite QB with (according to you) uor less talented receivers and team. Hopegully he'd be able to actually throw for 64 percent or better for the second time in his career and throw less balls into the ground....

    You have to be kdding me on the quote thing, ill quote the whole paragrap right now:

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsSB99 View Post

    McNabb is still a top QB in the league. Again you should stop the B.S. putting words in other peoples mouths. I have never said he would dominate but he does and is known for applying pressure on the QB from the DT position. None of our current DT's are known or where known for applying pressure from the DT position.
    What I said about Suh and his secondary not getting credit is definetely true. He had all that time to fight through those double teams because the Qb was left standing and running around in the pocket looking for an option dowfield. He didn't throw the ball away because either he was an idiot, thought he could make a play, or didn't see Suh because he was looking downfield. Many other players on Nebraska's Defensive Line got sacks as a result of Suh which is part of Suh's value. I don't even know what your point was on that.

    Yes Amobi Okoye had 5.5 sacks. 1.5 more than what i read on wikipedia. still hardly dominating as i said before and what has Okoye done since then.

    I certainly do and did know that teams look at the downside of a player obviously. Bradford's only real downside is his injury. Suh's only real downside is the type of defense he played in, which can be fixed. After analyzing their downsides I look at their upsides and their potential impact on this team. Which led me to choose Bradford over Suh.

    Basically, you seem to steering towards guys making more of an immediate impact rather than a large impact down the stretch. You said Bradford is lucky to be considered a top guy in the league in three years. Mcnabb certainly was not a top guy in the league his third year, yet the Eagles choose him three years prior to that point at the top of the first anyway. They were rewarded with 5 NFC championship appearances and a Superbowl. Same with any other team that picked a QB high and had success. You have to make some calculated risks when picking a person at the top of the round, Picking the so called safe pick isn't how you get it done. Bradford would be no less safer than Suh if he'd not been injured.

    And I don't know if your a 30 year old whiner or a 10 year old kid, but pal trust me when i tell you I'd say it in your face all damn day long and wait for you to make the first move. I live in the real world buddy and make it just fine...
    Last edited by Bralidore(RAMMODE); -03-28-2010 at 05:46 PM.

  11. #26
    3STL9 Guest

    Re: Jackson will be 27 when the season starts.

    Trade jackson away after 2 years....not now

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. 2008's Top 50 CB's w/ analysis.
    By Bald_81 in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: -01-16-2009, 06:39 AM
  2. Postgame With Gordo, Dec. 30
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -12-31-2007, 03:31 PM
  3. Jackson Not Deterred by Doubters
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -07-29-2007, 06:32 PM
  4. Steven Jackson - Full Speed Ahead
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -06-30-2007, 11:12 AM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: -01-22-2005, 07:11 AM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts