| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
DerekBrink
Joined: 16 Nov 2012
Posts: 378
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2012 11:39 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| DEE RAWL wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | holt_bruce81 wrote: | | Would you guys wants a Tavon Austin on this team? Idk I REALLY like him. |
I wouldnt mind it one bit thats for sure, dude is like a damn rabbit. I would still prefer a bit bigger true #1 but wouldnt be mad at it. |
Tavon Austin is not a #1 WR. As I said before, he could be an amazing weapon out of the slot or as a Scat HB/Slot WR hybrid but with Danny here, I don't see how we can take a niche player who also plays out of the slot. |
Sorry for the confusion but i never meant Austin is a #1 WR, definitely a just a versatile weapon. |
yeah but with amendola in the slot and the smallish Givens on the outside what role would Austin play?
The Rams need an outside the lines receiver not another smallish slot receiver. If we are going to get a gadget type receiver I'd rather take Cordarelle Patterson who is just as good an athlete as Austin, with far more upside and is 6 inches taller and 30-40 pounds heavier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 51878
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DerekBrink wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | holt_bruce81 wrote: | | Would you guys wants a Tavon Austin on this team? Idk I REALLY like him. |
I wouldnt mind it one bit thats for sure, dude is like a damn rabbit. I would still prefer a bit bigger true #1 but wouldnt be mad at it. |
Tavon Austin is not a #1 WR. As I said before, he could be an amazing weapon out of the slot or as a Scat HB/Slot WR hybrid but with Danny here, I don't see how we can take a niche player who also plays out of the slot. |
Sorry for the confusion but i never meant Austin is a #1 WR, definitely a just a versatile weapon. |
yeah but with amendola in the slot and the smallish Givens on the outside what role would Austin play?
The Rams need an outside the lines receiver not another smallish slot receiver. If we are going to get a gadget type receiver I'd rather take Cordarelle Patterson who is just as good an athlete as Austin, with far more upside and is 6 inches taller and 30-40 pounds heavier. |
Agreed.
_________________
| KingBishop wrote: | | JammerHammer21 wrote: | | Jarvis looked like a slug on and off the field. |
Off the field? Like when he is grocery shopping, does he block the freezer aisle with his sluggish selection of which hungry man to buy? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7821
Location: How good is your Good?
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| chris00cm wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | chris00cm wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | Im not a fan of taking LBs in the first but he might be an exception in my mind. |
I personally think Te'O is the only exception.
But like always, regardless of the player, non-rush linebackers in the 1st is never a good idea. |
Perhaps but what good would a rush linebacker do in a 4-3 scheme? |
Unless you put him in a Von Miller type of role, not much unless you put him at DE obviously.
I'm perfectly content with Laurinaitis and Dunbar at LB. If Dunbar is not re-signed, I'm sure we can find a replacement in free agency or later in the draft. I think a first round pick would be better spent somewhere else. |
not sure I agree with the whole "only rush LBs in the 1st". There are plenty of really good LBs that are absolute worth 1st round picks. And Mosely is surely one of them. He is the complete package at LB and is very underrated.
He is the type of LB that is needed in this scheme and would be a great fit at SLB next to JL. He has range all over the field, his pass coverage is very good already (would be a huge help to our safety problem) and he is an effective blitzed when his number is dialed up.
Just so some of you are aware, Dunbar signed a 2 year contract, so he isn't going anywhere as of yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris00cm
Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Posts: 17235
Location: St. Charles, Missouri
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| StLunatic88 wrote: | | Just so some of you are aware, Dunbar signed a 2 year contract, so he isn't going anywhere as of yet. |
Good call. I didn't even bother to look. It seems like everyone assumed he was a FA.
_________________
Xbox Live Gamertag: Chris Sanity |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DerekBrink
Joined: 16 Nov 2012
Posts: 378
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| StLunatic88 wrote: | | chris00cm wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | chris00cm wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | Im not a fan of taking LBs in the first but he might be an exception in my mind. |
I personally think Te'O is the only exception.
But like always, regardless of the player, non-rush linebackers in the 1st is never a good idea. |
Perhaps but what good would a rush linebacker do in a 4-3 scheme? |
Unless you put him in a Von Miller type of role, not much unless you put him at DE obviously.
I'm perfectly content with Laurinaitis and Dunbar at LB. If Dunbar is not re-signed, I'm sure we can find a replacement in free agency or later in the draft. I think a first round pick would be better spent somewhere else. |
not sure I agree with the whole "only rush LBs in the 1st". There are plenty of really good LBs that are absolute worth 1st round picks. And Mosely is surely one of them. He is the complete package at LB and is very underrated.
He is the type of LB that is needed in this scheme and would be a great fit at SLB next to JL. He has range all over the field, his pass coverage is very good already (would be a huge help to our safety problem) and he is an effective blitzed when his number is dialed up.
Just so some of you are aware, Dunbar signed a 2 year contract, so he isn't going anywhere as of yet. |
Mosley would be a great pick and would make sense(as we'll likely have two mid first rounders). Honestly I'd be happy with two of Warmack, Mosley, Eifert, Matthews, or Allen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
STLRamsFan99
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 1481
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
What do you guys think our biggest needs in the draft and free agency are now?
My opinion is FS, SS, and RT are the biggest priority. Then the rest depends on who we resign or don't resign. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ramsfan55
Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Posts: 1388
Location: albuquerque, NM
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| STLRamsFan99 wrote: | What do you guys think our biggest needs in the draft and free agency are now?
My opinion is FS, SS, and RT are the biggest priority. Then the rest depends on who we resign or don't resign. |
Gotta throw WR and LG in there.
_________________
Tavon (Awesome) Austin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wr80
Joined: 27 Dec 2011
Posts: 494
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ramsfan55 wrote: | | STLRamsFan99 wrote: | What do you guys think our biggest needs in the draft and free agency are now?
My opinion is FS, SS, and RT are the biggest priority. Then the rest depends on who we resign or don't resign. |
Gotta throw WR and LG in there. |
They might save LG for next year to see how Rok plays it, if he comes back from his injury/off season and starts to play well then why'd you pick up another guard? I think our biggest need is RT, followed by Safeties but coach did say Stewart is coming along with recovery. I could see him taking a spot in safety. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
STLRamsFan99
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 1481
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ramsfan55 wrote: | | STLRamsFan99 wrote: | What do you guys think our biggest needs in the draft and free agency are now?
My opinion is FS, SS, and RT are the biggest priority. Then the rest depends on who we resign or don't resign. |
Gotta throw WR and LG in there. |
I consider them lesser needs especially at LG if we resign Turner. He would at minimum be great depth for the line next year if not start at LG. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ajhicks11
Joined: 15 Jan 2010
Posts: 736
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Although Mikell played a great game this past week why isn't safety addressed more often in our defense. Why not try Trumaine there-who by the way has made Fletcher sit on the sidelines(not sure why cause Fletch was playing great)? Also we have Mccloud who is young but at the same time With Dahl back there why not give some guys experience.
I think Dahl is starting for one reason and I didn't realize it until this week. He wants him for that Finnegan sense. He wants another guy back there that won't only get in for a tackle but will finish it with aggression. I don't know how many times I saw both Fin and Dahl tackle the player by their head.
_________________
GO RAMS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 51878
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ajhicks11 wrote: | Although Mikell played a great game this past week why isn't safety addressed more often in our defense. Why not try Trumaine there-who by the way has made Fletcher sit on the sidelines(not sure why cause Fletch was playing great)? Also we have Mccloud who is young but at the same time With Dahl back there why not give some guys experience.
I think Dahl is starting for one reason and I didn't realize it until this week. He wants him for that Finnegan sense. He wants another guy back there that won't only get in for a tackle but will finish it with aggression. I don't know how many times I saw both Fin and Dahl tackle the player by their head. |
My question is, why waste Fletcher's talent? Dahl is not getting it done. Get Fletcher some practice time at FS and see if he can get it done.
_________________
| KingBishop wrote: | | JammerHammer21 wrote: | | Jarvis looked like a slug on and off the field. |
Off the field? Like when he is grocery shopping, does he block the freezer aisle with his sluggish selection of which hungry man to buy? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BEASToftheEAST4
Joined: 01 Nov 2007
Posts: 2738
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | ajhicks11 wrote: | Although Mikell played a great game this past week why isn't safety addressed more often in our defense. Why not try Trumaine there-who by the way has made Fletcher sit on the sidelines(not sure why cause Fletch was playing great)? Also we have Mccloud who is young but at the same time With Dahl back there why not give some guys experience.
I think Dahl is starting for one reason and I didn't realize it until this week. He wants him for that Finnegan sense. He wants another guy back there that won't only get in for a tackle but will finish it with aggression. I don't know how many times I saw both Fin and Dahl tackle the player by their head. |
My question is, why waste Fletcher's talent? Dahl is not getting it done. Get Fletcher some practice time at FS and see if he can get it done. |
Agreed.. I don't see why neither Fletcher OR Trumaine Johnson isn't getting any looks at safety. Neither could be worse than Dahl, and I have a feeling that at least one of the two could really excel as a S
_________________
^El Ramster^ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 51878
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BEASToftheEAST4 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | | ajhicks11 wrote: | Although Mikell played a great game this past week why isn't safety addressed more often in our defense. Why not try Trumaine there-who by the way has made Fletcher sit on the sidelines(not sure why cause Fletch was playing great)? Also we have Mccloud who is young but at the same time With Dahl back there why not give some guys experience.
I think Dahl is starting for one reason and I didn't realize it until this week. He wants him for that Finnegan sense. He wants another guy back there that won't only get in for a tackle but will finish it with aggression. I don't know how many times I saw both Fin and Dahl tackle the player by their head. |
My question is, why waste Fletcher's talent? Dahl is not getting it done. Get Fletcher some practice time at FS and see if he can get it done. |
Agreed.. I don't see why neither Fletcher OR Trumaine Johnson isn't getting any looks at safety. Neither could be worse than Dahl, and I have a feeling that at least one of the two could really excel as a S |
I understand why with Trumaine, they see him as an important long term player at CB. But with Fletcher being in the last year, why not? If he plays extremely well, it gives us a reason to bring him back.
_________________
| KingBishop wrote: | | JammerHammer21 wrote: | | Jarvis looked like a slug on and off the field. |
Off the field? Like when he is grocery shopping, does he block the freezer aisle with his sluggish selection of which hungry man to buy? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RamsFan24
Joined: 20 Mar 2009
Posts: 515
Location: St. Louis
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | BEASToftheEAST4 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | | ajhicks11 wrote: | Although Mikell played a great game this past week why isn't safety addressed more often in our defense. Why not try Trumaine there-who by the way has made Fletcher sit on the sidelines(not sure why cause Fletch was playing great)? Also we have Mccloud who is young but at the same time With Dahl back there why not give some guys experience.
I think Dahl is starting for one reason and I didn't realize it until this week. He wants him for that Finnegan sense. He wants another guy back there that won't only get in for a tackle but will finish it with aggression. I don't know how many times I saw both Fin and Dahl tackle the player by their head. |
My question is, why waste Fletcher's talent? Dahl is not getting it done. Get Fletcher some practice time at FS and see if he can get it done. |
Agreed.. I don't see why neither Fletcher OR Trumaine Johnson isn't getting any looks at safety. Neither could be worse than Dahl, and I have a feeling that at least one of the two could really excel as a S |
I understand why with Trumaine, they see him as an important long term player at CB. But with Fletcher being in the last year, why not? If he plays extremely well, it gives us a reason to bring him back. |
Now that's what I've been screaming, I just don't understand why Fletcher is just sitting.
_________________
DIE HARD RAMS FAN
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The J.R.S.
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 4084
Location: Next to Waldo
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | BEASToftheEAST4 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | | ajhicks11 wrote: | Although Mikell played a great game this past week why isn't safety addressed more often in our defense. Why not try Trumaine there-who by the way has made Fletcher sit on the sidelines(not sure why cause Fletch was playing great)? Also we have Mccloud who is young but at the same time With Dahl back there why not give some guys experience.
I think Dahl is starting for one reason and I didn't realize it until this week. He wants him for that Finnegan sense. He wants another guy back there that won't only get in for a tackle but will finish it with aggression. I don't know how many times I saw both Fin and Dahl tackle the player by their head. |
My question is, why waste Fletcher's talent? Dahl is not getting it done. Get Fletcher some practice time at FS and see if he can get it done. |
Agreed.. I don't see why neither Fletcher OR Trumaine Johnson isn't getting any looks at safety. Neither could be worse than Dahl, and I have a feeling that at least one of the two could really excel as a S |
I understand why with Trumaine, they see him as an important long term player at CB. But with Fletcher being in the last year, why not? If he plays extremely well, it gives us a reason to bring him back. |
I don't see Fletcher's game translating very well to FS. I don't think he is fast enough, and his ball skills are far from ideal. Then again, Craig Dahl brings almost nothing to the table so.....
_________________
Real sports fans do not condone ESPN. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
