Where's our big fat sloppy guy??

[TekeRam]

Spags knows his defensive line. He knows it. If he's satisfied with who he has there, then I trust him to get the most from his players there. He obviously didn't see Carriker as salvageable, but since he brought back the rookies from LAST year, they must have some promise.

I think our pass defense was more of a critical need this year, as that is how we got into holes that led into our run defense problems. Our run defense wasn't bad last year, until we were down by 14 points.

[Bralidore(RAMMODE)]

Peoria i have to ask, how do you know the guys we already have on ther roster aren't long term solutions to the tackle problem. How do you figure drafting another rookie defensive lineman will be that long term solution? We have more at defensive tackle than we had at other positions, so we drafted for quality rather than just for another sloppy joe.

I support this FO because they are making solid moves and great moves that i like and understand. Not drafting a 3-4 defensive end to play defensive tackle in a 4-3. Or drafting a 5-8 corner with blazing speed that can't cover my grandma.

[PeoriaRam]

Peoria i have to ask, how do you know the guys we already have on ther roster aren't long term solutions to the tackle problem. How do you figure drafting another rookie defensive lineman will be that long term solution? We have more at defensive tackle than we had at other positions, so we drafted for quality rather than just for another sloppy joe.

I support this FO because they are making solid moves and great moves that i like and understand. Not drafting a 3-4 defensive end to play defensive tackle in a 4-3. Or drafting a 5-8 corner with blazing speed that can't cover my grandma.

Because you aren't going to out-talent anybody based on the rounds where those players were taken. Maybe you can develop them with time and effort, but there is less of a guarantee than if you had talent to start with. We have a lot of projects out there, and based on our dismal record with projects over multiple coaching staffs, I'd rather we tried to get more talent instead. Talent is the ultimate fail-safe for a team.

[tomahawk247]

What projects do we have at DT?

[ManofGod]

What projects do we have at DT?

Well I think these guys fit the bill as "projects":
Dorrel Scott
Gary Gibson
Leger Douzable
Chris Bradwell

[MauiRam]

Spags knows his defensive line. He knows it. If he's satisfied with who he has there, then I trust him to get the most from his players there.

Good observation Teke. It is also likely Spags will be looking for talented vets who get cut in the coming weeks due to the emergence of younger players for salary related reasons. I'd imagine he and Billy have a short list in that area. Coupled with that, (correct me if I'm wrong here), is the fact that we get first dibs on anything that hits the waiver wire. That big ole fat sloppy guy may be out there yet ..

[thermobee]

gee... And i thought that robbins was a guy who played quite a bit for a super bowl winning team just a few years back.

Dude, give it a a rest. You've become a parody of yourself at this point.

that!!!!!!

[Bar-bq]

Because you aren't going to out-talent anybody based on the rounds where those players were taken. Maybe you can develop them with time and effort, but there is less of a guarantee than if you had talent to start with. We have a lot of projects out there, and based on our dismal record with projects over multiple coaching staffs, I'd rather we tried to get more talent instead. Talent is the ultimate fail-safe for a team.

So: We're taking this hypothetical back in time to the beginning of this offseason. You're in charge. What would you have done differently given the resources available?

[RebelYell]

Because you aren't going to out-talent anybody based on the rounds where those players were taken.

Wow. Players are now only as good as where they were drafted. Kurt Warner must have been a horrible QB.

I guess we can just go ahead and cut Scott because he wasn't drafted in the first two rounds.

[PeoriaRam]

So: We're taking this hypothetical back in time to the beginning of this offseason. You're in charge. What would you have done differently given the resources available?

1. Rather than trade for picks, look around to see what picks we can offer up for player trades; the CBA will not be renewed so much needed veteran upgrades and leadership will have to come elsewhere. (No, this is not "hindsight is 20/20"...just about every other front office besides the St. Louis one anticipated this and acted accordingly.)
2. This is a defense-heavy draft...exploit it. Save the long term offensive upgrades for 2011 when there is a better selection of players available. Instruct the offensive coaching staff that they are to pull out all the stops, at the pain of their termination following the season to get the existing skill position players trained and competent. Any picks that are burned go to the offensive line (midround pick) or backup running back (mid-to-late).
3. Regarding the QB position: Two alternate approaches; in both cases DT in draft first, then burn 2nd rounder on your choice of Clausen and McCoy, or recognize that the team will blow chunks regardless of what you do this offseason, there are 4 or 5 good QBs just sitting there available next year at the top of the draft and take the back then. (Note: this strategy is being employed by several teams who project to finish better than us) The team will be in much better shape for the QB to take over from Day 1. In the latter case keep Bulger; the fans aren't coming anyway. Perhaps in the former case keeping Bulger and forgoing the signing of Feeley is also possible.
4. Play the odds on your late round draft picks, please. Swinging for the fences can get you a home run, but you also strike out a lot. Additionally, even the home runs require quite a lot of developmental work.

[shower beers]

3. Regarding the QB position: Two alternate approaches; in both cases DT in draft first, then burn 2nd rounder on your choice of Clausen and McCoy, or recognize that the team will blow chunks regardless of what you do this offseason, there are 4 or 5 good QBs just sitting there available next year at the top of the draft and take the back then. (Note: this strategy is being employed by several teams who project to finish better than us) The team will be in much better shape for the QB to take over from Day 1. In the latter case keep Bulger; the fans aren't coming anyway. Perhaps in the former case keeping Bulger and forgoing the signing of Feeley is also possible.

So, you're in charge of a football team, and you're supposed to just recognize that your team will "blow chunks" and burn a draft pick on a quarterback who you admit will not be successfull? Am I reading this right?! You also suggest that we base our draft next year on a prediction of how we will end up, essentially not knowing anything at all, in the hopes that we'll land in a spot to take a quarterback? Oh, also to keep Bulger because "the fans aren't coming anyway".

Sorry, but I fail to see how anyone would take that seriously, let alone think it would be a successful approach to running any organization, let alone a football team. You're giving up before you even start.

[PeoriaRam]

So, you're in charge of a football team, and you're supposed to just recognize that your team will "blow chunks" and burn a draft pick on a quarterback who you admit will not be successfull? Am I reading this right?! You also suggest that we base our draft next year on a prediction of how we will end up, essentially not knowing anything at all, in the hopes that we'll land in a spot to take a quarterback? Oh, also to keep Bulger because "the fans aren't coming anyway".

Sorry, but I fail to see how anyone would take that seriously, let alone think it would be a successful approach to running any organization, let alone a football team. You're giving up before you even start.

I gave you two options. The take McCoy or Clausen is not my preference, but some folks demand a bloody QB bone to be thrown to them, so I choose the option that represents the least financial burden to the franchise relative to expectations.

Part of the justification for drafting Bradford was to "excite the fans". My read on the St. Louis fanbase, or any fanbase of a bad team, is that fans will only show up if the team wins. To support, please note how Detroit, complete with new "GLORIOUS FRANCHISE QB!!!!!!!11111one" had half of their games blacked out. We aren't going to win this season, therefore the fans will not come. By the same token, keeping local antichrist and punching bag Bulger won't further negatively affect the box office, because it's about as far down as it can go.

I'm giving up on next year because, as everyone pointed out, it is impossible for us to build out of the hole in one offseason. Rather than trying to completely overhaul an offense that is behind the defense in a bad year for offensive players, I will focus on fixing he defense, and leave the offense for next year's draft which is deep on that side of he ball.

As for expecting where we end up....Last season we were a trick play away from 0-16. We had quite possibly the least-talented team in franchise history. The last team to go 0-16 in the NFL won a grand total of 2 games the next season, and they took great pains to try to build a decent team. It is a reasonable and very accurate prediction to say that your team will be drafting in the Top 10 (6 wins got you a Top 10 pick this past season), and there is a borderline chance you will be drafting in the Top 5.

Yes, there are examples of teams with dramatic record turnarounds. However, a close examination of those organizations reveals that they had either actually spent several (bad) years rebuilding prior to the "jump" or snapped up a bunch of veterans in a "win now" mode.

Additionally, given the financial costs of the position, you will only take a "franchise" QB if you truly need one that early. Given that the bottom tier of the NFL tends to be a fairly predictable band of "usual suspects," most of whom have taken care of their "franchise" QB concerns over the last year or two, it is even more reasonable to expect that one member of the QB-rich class of 2011 will be there for the taking.

-------------------------------------

This will of course be lampooned by Avenger in his usually impolitic manner of squashing dissent, but I will offer the following Avatar bet to any takers.

1. The St. Louis Rams will, barring a trade, be selecting in the Top 10 of the first round of the 2011 NFL entry draft.
2. There will be a possible 1st Round "franchise" quarterback (as determined by the vast and overpaid band of NFL draftniks) available when the Rams select.

Any takers?

[Fat Pang]

There was an article published just before the draft which stated that the performance of DT's taken at premium positions in the first Rnd was spotty. It was well-written and supported by a wealth of evidence and anecdote.

There was an article published just before the draft which stated that the performance of QB's taken at premium positions in the first Rnd was spotty. It was well-written and supported by a wealth of evidence and anecdote.

So I don't find arguments based on the assessment that Suh was a certified home-run and Bradford undoubtedly isn't convincing. In the event that Suh is actually a Dorsey and McCoy/Clasuen are Couch, the alternative to taking Bradford would be viewed as being a catastrophic, franchise-defining error.

So Ill point to this:

you will only take a "franchise" QB if you truly need one that early

We took a 'franchise QB' because we really do need one.There's no guarantee anywhere in the draft and so building a case on Suh being a certainty , along with a QB certainty being available in the 2nd rnd this year or 1st next year doesn't have a lot to recommend it.

Ultimately, its all opinion and that's why I tend to fundamentally disagree with hypotheses that cover themselves with the blanket of certainty.

Bradford may or may not have the career that we all hope he has but that doesn't make Suh any more of a sure bet. We took the most highly-regarded player available at the most important position on our football team.

[AvengerRam]

I think people should keep an eye on Scott. He came on towards the end of last season, and Devaney has reportedly identified him as a player that the Rams have high hopes for.

[Ramblin` Ram]

I think people should keep an eye on Scott. He came on towards the end of last season, and Devaney has reportedly identified him as a player that the Rams have high hopes for.

nah, he was taken in the 4th round..so he can`t be any good..nobody taken after the 3rd round has ever been any good..