Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

The Sam Bradford Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> St. Louis Rams
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
S-jax39


Joined: 23 Aug 2010
Posts: 6683
Location: [D]MV
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
Welp
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
El ramster


Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 43962
Location: Paul George's Bed.
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________

BBL

mozwanted wrote:
I'm beginning to like the rg3 trade
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DEE RAWL


Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 4536
Location: Southern California
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
2015 QB Rankings:

1. Marcus Mariota
2. Jameis Winston
3. Brett Hundley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
StLunatic88


Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7712
Location: How good is your Good?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
kgarrett12486


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 9774
Location: Busch III
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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...
_________________

IDOG_det on the sig...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jonezy


Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 3187
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


_________________

^Delphi83^ (Sig)
<El Ramster.< (Avatar)
[quote="norcalraider510"]
Rams front 4 is going to be amazing next year[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
DEE RAWL


Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 4536
Location: Southern California
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jonezy wrote:


No
_________________
2015 QB Rankings:

1. Marcus Mariota
2. Jameis Winston
3. Brett Hundley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
El ramster


Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 43962
Location: Paul George's Bed.
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DEE RAWL wrote:
Jonezy wrote:


No



Too much $$$$$$$$ But I wouldn't mind Razz Razz
_________________

BBL

mozwanted wrote:
I'm beginning to like the rg3 trade
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wr80


Joined: 27 Dec 2011
Posts: 492
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
Jonezy


Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 3187
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd rather Bowe then Wallace myself
_________________

^Delphi83^ (Sig)
<El Ramster.< (Avatar)
[quote="norcalraider510"]
Rams front 4 is going to be amazing next year[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 47543
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rAmFan39


Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 956
Location: Japan
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was so close to talking my wife into naming our second son Samuel Jacob.... Until she realized the reasoning behind it Laughing It was worth a try.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MIkeMartZisMyIDLE


Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 733
Location: st louis
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
STLRamsFan99


Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 1349
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 47543
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> St. Louis Rams All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 3 of 12

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group