It's our recievers - including the tight ends and running backs. I don't know if they changed the footballs this year to make them less "sticky", or if the gloves are different, or what. All I know is that last season, with many of the same guys, Sam was firing the ball a heck of a lot faster and it seems like there was more balls that were caught.
This is kind of a little off the main subject, but I noticed something peculiar...last season, every time Sam threw a pass, you could hear the sonic boom as the ball left his hand. This year, it seems as if the ball is thrown a tiny bit slower...could this be the result of being more comfortable in his second year, or is this due to a concious effort to make the balls more catchable for the recievers?
OK, back to the main subject...
Bradford has it in him to be a great QB. Right now, he's good. Dang good. If he had Faulk, Proehl, Holt, and Bruce to throw to, he would make everyone think Kurt Warner had a clone. It is RARE that I praise anyone so much...Avenger can verify this, as he heard me complain about everyone and everything during the Rams/Eagles game. My problem is the recievers. I don't think there are, in all honesty, more than ten current wide recievers in the NFL that are as good as Bruce and/or Holt were back in '99-'04.
There's not that many that I know of that will be coming up for the draft next April that look like true #1 recievers, either.
If we were to sign a FA or trade for a current player, the cost may be too high for the return. We don't really have any "good" players that we can afford to trade. No one wants to get rid of Jackson or Long or Bradford or Laurainitis. That means we would have to likely trade multiple players to get a true #1 WR. This may sound OK, getting rid of 2 or 3 of our "lessers" for one good one, but there is the "what if" factor: for instance, what if our "#1" was injured, and we had traded Amendola and DX to get him? We'd be up that famous creek without a propulsion device. Even if we signed a FA, where would the money come from? We'd have to either cut player salaries or just cut players to get there...and trust me, if you are working for someone who cuts your pay and expects the same work out of you, they aren't going to get it. So, there's that negative aspect, too.
So, that really leaves the draft as the only clear option. I'm one who believes that the Rams should draft according to need IF there is a player worthy of the draft position. In other words, if we need a shutdown corner (and we do) and the best one in the draft is at best a second round player, then we don't draft him until that round. Instead, we look at the best player available in the first round, compare the draftee's position and talents against our needs, and then make a concious decision that is best for the team.
Since we still have many glaring...
-09-20-2011, 04:16 PM
Comment