Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 45
  1. #16
    peramoure is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    237
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Peoria, man - you are so hung up on Suh it borders on insanity. You throw out Brees like he is the norm - like all teams acquire a franchise quarterback through free agency and just go out and win the superbowl. I wasn't reading who was posting each individual post and I had to go back to find out who was defiantly making every possible argument, logical or not, to draft Suh.

    You said that money doesn't matter - REALLY? Do you realize the Rams are a business and not a fire pit for dollar bills? As a BUSINESS OWNER, and not as a rabid Suh fan, would you propose that Suh brings people to the stadium or a guy that touches the ball every down? Did Chris Long sell tickets? Carriker? Pickett? Kennedy? Secondly, you said Bradford choked in big games, and then went on to say that the reason why is that the big 12 has a crappy tie breaker. You discredited arguably the most prominent "football scout" on TV, John Clayton, because he referenced Carriker and Long as DTs, despite the fact that we've drafted dlineman to have them fail. Cmon man - I can understand rooting for Suh, but just blindly throwing darts at the board to try and make the case isn't going to work.


  2. #17
    clarasDK is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Age
    39
    Posts
    424
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    I just see it this way. What is the easiest and fastest path to winning games in the NFL?

    Building a good defence supported by a good running game, depending less on a good QB like the Jets and Bengals did last year. Or build around a good throwing offence with a top notch QB?

    Personally I am for the Defence approach. And the fact that there is no clear cut super star QB in the draft this year just enforces my opinion.

  3. #18
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam View Post
    If a high First Round QB takes five years to develop into TEH GLORIOUS FRANCHISE QB!!!!!!!!111111one in this day and age, you can be sure of a few things.

    1. The coach and GM who drafted him will no longer be employed by the team that picked him.
    2. He will be the franchise QB for a different team than the one that picked him.
    3. The team that drafted him drafted his replacement high in the first round last offseason.

    High First Round picks are not allowed the luxury of a 5-year developmental curve in the modern NFL. They are expected to compete at a high level from either Day 1, or close to it.

    People invoke the name of Drew Brees when they speak of Bradford. Guess what? Brees doesn't play for the team that drafted him. The Coach who drafted Brees was fired after Brees' rookie season. The GM...was divinely terminated 2 years after Brees' selection, but presumably he escaped Mike Riley's fate by starting his tenure by drafting Brees. In short-we don't want to draft Brees. We want to trade for Brees.
    Your dreaming if you think that a QB is supposed to compete at a high level day 1. He has to show flashes of potential and start to show some consistency. He has to prove that he can lead his team to victory in the future.

    3 to 5 years I guess you didn't read the whole thing. Let me clear it up more like 3. When I say 3 years to develop I'm saying it will take that time for them to reach there full potential.

    Bress doesn't play for the team that drafted him because he had a major shoulder injury and he was being replaced by a top 5 pick who the team felt developed in into a Franchise QB. They though Rivers was ready to take the reigns 3 years after he was drafted and they were right and now Rivers is an elite QB in this league.

    I have no clue what you are talking about when you say you don't want to draft Brees you want to trade for Brees.

  4. #19
    BarronWade's Avatar
    BarronWade is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,427
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    I got a question for you guys.

    Do you think our Defense is completely horrible?

    Honestly when i watched them last year i saw some good stops. ANd they kept us in games and we have a tough red zone Defense.

    I think the problem was our offense consistantly getting 3 and outs or getting 1 st down then out. Our D was gassed.

    We need a QB that can get us down the field.

    Also the only reason Bulger is on our roster is so other GMs dont think Bradford is a lock

    But there is no way we pay over 8mil to Bulger in a year without a cap.

  5. #20
    Springfield Rams's Avatar
    Springfield Rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    133
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Bradford isn't franchise QB material, he's Chad Pennington, nothing more. Devaney has to draft Suh and worry about QB in 2011 when a lot better QB prospects will be available (Locker, Johnson, Mallett). Rome wasn't built in a day, the type of team Devaney should want to build is one that isn't solely dependent on one player.

  6. #21
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by BarronWade View Post
    I got a question for you guys.

    Do you think our Defense is completely horrible?

    Honestly when i watched them last year i saw some good stops. ANd they kept us in games and we have a tough red zone Defense.

    I think the problem was our offense consistantly getting 3 and outs or getting 1 st down then out. Our D was gassed.

    We need a QB that can get us down the field.

    Also the only reason Bulger is on our roster is so other GMs dont think Bradford is a lock

    But there is no way we pay over 8mil to Bulger in a year without a cap.
    Honestly I like the Ryan Scott Combo and I still have some faith in Carriker and we have some decent rotational DTs. I like our DTs more than most people do. Scott and Ryan were really getting consistent penetration last year in the run game. Especially Ryan who was top 3 among DTs in the league in tackles for loss. If Scott played how he played like he palyed toward the end of the season I think he would have been up there in tackles for loss also. We really don't know what former first rounder Carriker can do in this system I would like to see. Not saying we couldn't use Suh or McCoy just saying I like the guys we have now.

    I like the secondary with Flethcer, Bartell, OJ and Butler. I also like Vobora on the strong side with Lauranatis in the middle. WLB definately a huge hole.

    IMO DE is our biggest defensive need. I like how Chris Long has come along and I think he will get 8+ sacks this year. Even if Hall and or Little are brought back we need a young pass rusher opposite Long.

    Defensive need list IMO
    1. DE
    2. WLB
    3. DT
    4. CB

  7. #22
    BarronWade's Avatar
    BarronWade is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,427
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Springfield Rams View Post
    Bradford isn't franchise QB material, he's Chad Pennington, nothing more. Devaney has to draft Suh and worry about QB in 2011 when a lot better QB prospects will be available (Locker, Johnson, Mallett). Rome wasn't built in a day, the type of team Devaney should want to build is one that isn't solely dependent on one player.
    Can we stop looking forward to the 2011 draft!!!!!!!!!!!?????????

    Locker is a top 3 pick. Mallet a likely top 5 pick. Who will pick them? Most likely a new GM and a new Coach.

    We must see improvement next year. A franchise QB that shows promise as beastly pointed out will make us feel more hopeful of a turnaround.


    And by chad pennington do you mean the guy that help a 1-15 team to become 11-5 the next year?

    injuries are part of the game and im sure we can teach Bradford to protect his shoulder when being tackled.

  8. #23
    BarronWade's Avatar
    BarronWade is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,427
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by 39thebeast View Post
    Honestly I like the Ryan Scott Combo and I still have some faith in Carriker and we have some decent rotational DTs. I like our DTs more than most people do. Scott and Ryan were really getting consistent penetration last year in the run game. Especially Ryan who was top 3 among DTs in the league in tackles for loss. If Scott played how he played like he palyed toward the end of the season I think he would have been up there in tackles for loss also. We really don't know what former first rounder Carriker can do in this system I would like to see. Not saying we couldn't use Suh or McCoy just saying I like the guys we have now.

    I like the secondary with Flethcer, Bartell, OJ and Butler. I also like Vobora on the strong side with Lauranatis in the middle. WLB definately a huge hole.

    IMO DE is our biggest defensive need. I like how Chris Long has come along and I think he will get 8+ sacks this year. Even if Hall and or Little are brought back we need a young pass rusher opposite Long.

    Defensive need list IMO
    1. DE
    2. WLB
    3. DT
    4. CB
    idk about Scott i think he is more of a rotational DT. It would work if AC can stay healthy. But i agree with you on Ryan.

    Also look at the depth we have at DT

    Ryan
    Carriker
    Scott
    Ramsey

    That is alot of starting experience

  9. #24
    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: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    I'm starting to lean to the take the QB crowd. Balzer made a comment that the Rams won the Super Bowl without big name DT's. You need the QB to be a stud though. Take Bradford and draft that DT from UCLA in Round 2

  10. #25
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,542
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by txramsfan View Post
    I'm starting to lean to the take the QB crowd. Balzer made a comment that the Rams won the Super Bowl without big name DT's. You need the QB to be a stud though. Take Bradford and draft that DT from UCLA in Round 2
    The Ravens and Bucs won it w/o big name QB's.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  11. #26
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,296
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    The Ravens and Bucs won it w/o big name QB's.
    And the Colts just lost one with perhaps the biggest name QB, too.

    Simply put, it takes more than a franchise QB to be successful in this league. The people who argue you need a franchise QB to win in the NFL generally don't include the other caveats to that point - you also need to protect him, give him weapons to use, and a defense more capable than not of stopping the other team from scoring.

    The Rams have very few of these pieces, IMO. And while they'll certainly try to acquire them, I think you have to wonder how well a rookie QB is going to develop in the meantime. After a year or two, does he start to look more like Matt Ryan or David Carr? The Rams aren't a strong enough team to protect their rookie passer behind a top running game and defense, and the expectations of a first overall QB means he's going to see the field sooner rather than later.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Two
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  12. #27
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    And the Colts just lost one with perhaps the biggest name QB, too.

    Simply put, it takes more than a franchise QB to be successful in this league. The people who argue you need a franchise QB to win in the NFL generally don't include the other caveats to that point - you also need to protect him, give him weapons to use, and a defense more capable than not of stopping the other team from scoring.

    The Rams have very few of these pieces, IMO. And while they'll certainly try to acquire them, I think you have to wonder how well a rookie QB is going to develop in the meantime. After a year or two, does he start to look more like Matt Ryan or David Carr? The Rams aren't a strong enough team to protect their rookie passer behind a top running game and defense, and the expectations of a first overall QB means he's going to see the field sooner rather than later.
    I agree with you Nick and you make some good points. Different teams have handled their rookie franchise QBs in different ways. You have the Ravens and the Jets who had a strong run game and good defense and didn't necessarily have the greatest weapons on the outside. Then you have the Falcons who had a decent defense, but a great defensive coach at the helm. They focused on building a good line and they also brought in a great RB and they already had Rody white as a number 1 wideout. Devaney came from that orginization I think he is trying to do something similar. He really likes the offensive line he has built Steven Jackson is a top 3 back in this league. The complementary weapons seem to be in place, but we definately could use some elite playmakers on the outside and maybe you could get that at the top of round 2. Spags had 2 elite players on that superbowl D IMO Osi and Justin Tuck. When he left Giants went downhill I don't think they were able to regain the affect he had on the defense. I think he and his defensive staff did a great job with what they had even though it didn't show up on the stat sheet. I think Spags and Devaney have made huge strides in setting up an environment where a young QB can succeed and they will continue to do so.

  13. #28
    SJacks039's Avatar
    SJacks039 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    ILLinios
    Posts
    187
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    I guess i could respect if we drafted bradford , but I think Suh is the best option. If we are going to have double digit losses with either of them, why wouldn't you take suh and try your best to get jake locker next year. I think if we get bradford we are rushing things. I like the option of taking a qb in the third or fourth this year.

    Bradford could be a good quarterback, but he will get malled playing with us. That is not a good way to start his career especially because he hasn't shown to be very tough yet. I believe jake locker is a much better prospect. I've seen more toughness(all the rushing yards) I saw highlights on some throws he made against usc and a couple other games and he definitly has real good zip on it while also placing balls where only his reciever could get it. I think he is worth the wait and why not build up our trenches until we find OUR guy even if it isn't jake locker.

  14. #29
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by SJacks039 View Post
    I guess i could respect if we drafted bradford , but I think Suh is the best option. If we are going to have double digit losses with either of them, why wouldn't you take suh and try your best to get jake locker next year. I think if we get bradford we are rushing things. I like the option of taking a qb in the third or fourth this year.

    Bradford could be a good quarterback, but he will get malled playing with us. That is not a good way to start his career especially because he hasn't shown to be very tough yet. I believe jake locker is a much better prospect. I've seen more toughness(all the rushing yards) I saw highlights on some throws he made against usc and a couple other games and he definitly has real good zip on it while also placing balls where only his reciever could get it. I think he is worth the wait and why not build up our trenches until we find OUR guy even if it isn't jake locker.
    Bottom line we are drafting for what could happen in 2010 not 2011. We can't pass on a guy just because we want another guy next year. You never know what could happen maybe we have double digit losses, but another team is worse and takes Locker.

  15. #30
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Jon Claytons take on the Rams pick

    Quote Originally Posted by 39thebeast View Post
    Your dreaming if you think that a QB is supposed to compete at a high level day 1. He has to show flashes of potential and start to show some consistency. He has to prove that he can lead his team to victory in the future.
    Really? In this town, which brought out the long knifes for Bulger and his contract within a year? In the same town that has repeatedly trotted out the "Chris Long is a bust" bit? Bradford's going to be making more than Bulger, and presumably Long. If he ain't at a Pro Bowl level from year one, everybody is going to call for heads to roll...and they probably will. If the Rams could win, some of this might be lessened, but this team ain't winning crap next year. The patience for a developmental curve does not exist.

    3 to 5 years I guess you didn't read the whole thing. Let me clear it up more like 3. When I say 3 years to develop I'm saying it will take that time for them to reach there full potential.
    Unless you have a good supporting cast to mask your weaknesses, you, and the people who drafted you, don't have 3 years.

    Bress doesn't play for the team that drafted him because he had a major shoulder injury and he was being replaced by a top 5 pick who the team felt developed in into a Franchise QB. They though Rivers was ready to take the reigns 3 years after he was drafted and they were right and now Rivers is an elite QB in this league.
    So why did they take Rivers, or any QB for that matter when they did? Brees, who was the 33 overall pick and their presumptive franchise QB of the future when drafted was taking too long to develop and they implicitly pulled the plug on his development when they took the big money QB. Then Rivers held out of training camp, leaving Brees as the starter out of necessity. Brees finally started playing to his theoretical potential, putting the Chargers over a not insubstantial barrel. When his contract expired, the Chargers could not keep both because of the cap, so they parted ways with the back who had taken too long to develop.

    I have no clue what you are talking about when you say you don't want to draft Brees you want to trade for Brees.
    It should be pretty obvious. San Diego invested a lot of time and effort in developing Brees and ended up with little to show for it. New Orleans picked a fully-developed and operational Brees and is the defending World Champions. (Admittedly it wasn't a trade, but still New Orleans got their QB for not a whole lot of effort.)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Gordo Live
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -03-17-2008, 07:59 PM
  2. Jim Thomas Live-Feb. 5th
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -02-06-2008, 12:24 PM
  3. Postgame With Gordo
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -10-14-2007, 08:47 PM
  4. 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
  •