| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
S-jax39
Joined: 23 Aug 2010
Posts: 5660
Location: [D]MV
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| kgarrett12486 wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | I honestly feel that with a guy like Woods or Allen (I prefer Allen) there will be no such rookie learning year like there is with Quick or IMO a guy like Hunter. And they would come with a muchhhh cheaper price tag as oppose to Wallace. The franchise could then use that money and spend it somewhere else... IE Jake Long! |
While I agree with your initial notion, we don't need to go out and overspend on Mike Wallace. He's a nice weapon, but he's not worth the money that's been rumored around him. Chris Givens has shown that he offers an almost identical threat at a fraction of the cost...
However, I don't understand the Jake Long option. We have a very good LT, the need is at RT. We're not gonna pay him the cash he'll be looking for anyway. Add in the fact that Long has struggled midely this season, I just don't see how he fits in... |
Honestly, I would love to grab someone like Vollmer (sp?) in FA than Wallace the more I think about it. Grab Vollmer, draft an OG, draft a WR and go from there. I think that would work out well.
Basically, I would rather shore up the line than have an elite receiving core. Givens and Quick with a year of experience plus a rookie and amendola would be enough with a good line.
_________________
| SwiftTexan wrote: | | Chris Long has not been a difference maker on defense.......Chris Long is an above average starter and nothing more. |
#Yeezus |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
El ramster
Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 24533
Location: Sam Bradfords Bed!
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I rather pass on Wallace. The man has had a huge case of dropsies.
Jut save our money IMO, Keep building thru the draft. We need a YAC esque WR..
We already have Givens who can take the top off a D. We have been starving for that type of WR..
We can't keep spending or we'll be in cap hell.
_________________
| Dus10 wrote: | | Note to self: Do not lose a sig bet to Rammy. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DEE RAWL
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 2856
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| kgarrett12486 wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | I honestly feel that with a guy like Woods or Allen (I prefer Allen) there will be no such rookie learning year like there is with Quick or IMO a guy like Hunter. And they would come with a muchhhh cheaper price tag as oppose to Wallace. The franchise could then use that money and spend it somewhere else... IE Jake Long! |
While I agree with your initial notion, we don't need to go out and overspend on Mike Wallace. He's a nice weapon, but he's not worth the money that's been rumored around him. Chris Givens has shown that he offers an almost identical threat at a fraction of the cost...
However, I don't understand the Jake Long option. We have a very good LT, the need is at RT. We're not gonna pay him the cash he'll be looking for anyway. Add in the fact that Long has struggled midely this season, I just don't see how he fits in... |
Im assuming you meant you agree with not paying Wallace... As far as the Jake Long comment goes... Saffold is good but has a problem staying healthy and is not nearly as good as Long. I would have Long at LT and have some options with Saffold.
Have Long and potentially Warmack next to eachother is a quarterbacks dream.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7227
Location: How good is your Good?
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DEE RAWL wrote: | | kgarrett12486 wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | I honestly feel that with a guy like Woods or Allen (I prefer Allen) there will be no such rookie learning year like there is with Quick or IMO a guy like Hunter. And they would come with a muchhhh cheaper price tag as oppose to Wallace. The franchise could then use that money and spend it somewhere else... IE Jake Long! |
While I agree with your initial notion, we don't need to go out and overspend on Mike Wallace. He's a nice weapon, but he's not worth the money that's been rumored around him. Chris Givens has shown that he offers an almost identical threat at a fraction of the cost...
However, I don't understand the Jake Long option. We have a very good LT, the need is at RT. We're not gonna pay him the cash he'll be looking for anyway. Add in the fact that Long has struggled midely this season, I just don't see how he fits in... |
Im assuming you meant you agree with not paying Wallace... As far as the Jake Long comment goes... Saffold is good but has a problem staying healthy and is not nearly as good as Long. I would have Long at LT and have some options with Saffold.
Have Long and potentially Warmack next to eachother is a quarterbacks dream. |
TBH Long isnt as good as Long these days. Thats another guy who is going to get massively overpaid bases upon perception versus production |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kgarrett12486
Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 7641
Location: Busch III
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DEE RAWL wrote: | Im assuming you meant you agree with not paying Wallace... As far as the Jake Long comment goes... Saffold is good but has a problem staying healthy and is not nearly as good as Long. I would have Long at LT and have some options with Saffold.
Have Long and potentially Warmack next to eachother is a quarterbacks dream. |
Correct, I was agreeing about passing over Wallace...
Jake Long doesn't look like the guy we've grown accustomed too. I'm not sure he'd be an upgrade. Who knows, could just be a one year thing, but I'm not gonna give him a monster deal coming off his worst season by far...
_________________
TommyC376 on the sig... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jonezy
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 2993
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
_________________
^Delphi83^ (Sig)
<El Ramster.< (Avatar)
| norcalraider510 wrote: |
Rams front 4 is going to be amazing next year |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DEE RAWL
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 2856
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Jonezy wrote: | |
No
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El ramster
Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 24533
Location: Sam Bradfords Bed!
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DEE RAWL wrote: | | Jonezy wrote: | |
No |
Too much $$$$$$$$ But I wouldn't mind 
_________________
| Dus10 wrote: | | Note to self: Do not lose a sig bet to Rammy. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wr80
Joined: 27 Dec 2011
Posts: 477
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DEE RAWL wrote: | | Jonezy wrote: | |
No |
If he would come for a cheap deal, yes. If not, No. Take Allen in the 1st and we'll be fine. We'll get production out of Allen/Quick/Gives/Danny. Boost that line up on the right side and we'll be set for a while. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jonezy
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 2993
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I'd rather Bowe then Wallace myself
_________________
^Delphi83^ (Sig)
<El Ramster.< (Avatar)
| norcalraider510 wrote: |
Rams front 4 is going to be amazing next year |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31526
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| El ramster wrote: | I rather pass on Wallace. The man has had a huge case of dropsies.
Jut save our money IMO, Keep building thru the draft. We need a YAC esque WR..
We already have Givens who can take the top off a D. We have been starving for that type of WR..
We can't keep spending or we'll be in cap hell. |
Lol, we need a YAC esque WR? No, we just need a #1 WR. I don't remember the GSOT not being effective because Holt and Bruce were more speedy route runners than big, strong YAC WRs.
As for Wallace's dropsies, he's been a bit unfocused this year but in the past, he's shown off good hands. I'll bet on him being just fine once he gets a long term deal.
As for us being in cap hell, that's false. We cleared a lot of money off the books over the last few years specifically so we could spend now. We have more than enough cap now and the cap flexibility in the future to make 1 or 2 big FA signings.
But yea, I'm sure relying on a rookie WR is the best idea again.
| DEE RAWL wrote: | | kgarrett12486 wrote: | | DEE RAWL wrote: | | I honestly feel that with a guy like Woods or Allen (I prefer Allen) there will be no such rookie learning year like there is with Quick or IMO a guy like Hunter. And they would come with a muchhhh cheaper price tag as oppose to Wallace. The franchise could then use that money and spend it somewhere else... IE Jake Long! |
While I agree with your initial notion, we don't need to go out and overspend on Mike Wallace. He's a nice weapon, but he's not worth the money that's been rumored around him. Chris Givens has shown that he offers an almost identical threat at a fraction of the cost...
However, I don't understand the Jake Long option. We have a very good LT, the need is at RT. We're not gonna pay him the cash he'll be looking for anyway. Add in the fact that Long has struggled midely this season, I just don't see how he fits in... |
Im assuming you meant you agree with not paying Wallace... As far as the Jake Long comment goes... Saffold is good but has a problem staying healthy and is not nearly as good as Long. I would have Long at LT and have some options with Saffold.
Have Long and potentially Warmack next to eachother is a quarterbacks dream. |
Givens is having a nice year but he's not approaching Wallace yet. Has a lot of improving to go. And I don't really remember the GSOT saying, oh well, we don't need Torry Holt because he's a similar WR to Isaac Bruce. It's terrible logic.
As far as Jake Long, he's been outplayed by Saffold this year when Saffold has been healthy. Long is miscast in a ZBS but even last year in a PBS, he wasn't as great as he used to be. Has had some issues with nagging injuries of late.
| Jonezy wrote: | | I'd rather Bowe then Wallace myself |
I'd rather have the younger WR who presents a bigger mismatch.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rAmFan39
Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I was so close to talking my wife into naming our second son Samuel Jacob.... Until she realized the reasoning behind it  It was worth a try.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MIkeMartZisMyIDLE
Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 732
Location: st louis
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I have seen this argument over and over again. I just wanted to reply to the shotgun vs under center dilemma. I don't have stats like yourself, but it seems your drawing at an old presumption made pre draft and trying to validate it for no reason.
On the contrary, Sam Bradford's best throws have typically come off the play action which is innately an under center play. In the case of the Rams this season, it might appear to you that they run more deep routes out of shotgun because they had to for a while. Remember, this team has had an injury torn year at the OL again. I'm not making excuses or assuming anything, I am just pointing out that If you can't hold up the rush in time to let long plays develop, naturally you will run shotgun so everything is in front of the QB.
On the contrary we know for a fact that he is top 10 in the league, being 10th, for deep passes over 20 yards. I believe the OL has done a tremendous job holding up with only 1 player playing his position for the past 8 weeks.
just some Food for thought.
_________________
RAMS = SUPERBOWL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
STLRamsFan99
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 866
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Jonezy wrote: | | I'd rather Bowe then Wallace myself |
I agree with you. Bowe is a complete receiver, Wallace is used as a deep threat mainly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31526
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| STLRamsFan99 wrote: | | Jonezy wrote: | | I'd rather Bowe then Wallace myself |
I agree with you. Bowe is a complete receiver, Wallace is used as a deep threat mainly. |
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000090196/Wallace-51-yd-TD
Here are their 2011 numbers in a few categories:
Wallace:
64% catch rate
35% short routes
38% intermediate routes
8% deep routes
19% bomb routes
6.5 YAC(#7 in the NFL)
Bowe:
57% catch rate
26% short routes
46% intermediate routes
21% deep routes
7% bomb routes
4.4 YAC(#44 in the NFL)
The belief that Wallace is just some deep threat is outdated.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
