Jadeveon Clowney: Didn't we already draft him?

[BOSS429Mustang]

No way dude, I'm sorry but I have to stop you there. Yes, there was a good amount of 'buzz' on Clowney before the combine and pro day. But after he finished his pro day everyone one and their mom got a boner over him and started saying he's the player of a decade. Did you know they say that about one or two players every other draft right? You know half of them end up average players or busting out of the NFL.

To add to your "Never forget" slogan. Are you one of those people that blames our FO for not getting every player in the draft that succeeds in the NFL? Because we've missed a lot. Pead and Quick come to mind. There are other picks that have done far better that would have helped out the Rams tremendously. My point is shit happens bro. I don't care whether or not Clowney does well in the NFL. I care about who the Rams pick at that spot. And we don't need DE. DE is the LEAST needed position on the team other than Punter and Place kicker. Even if Clowney falls to us. Trade him away. I hope the best for him, I hope he has a 21 sack season his rookie year. Guess what, I don't care dude. I really don't. I hope we pick up Watkins and he has a 1000 yard rookie season. I hope we pick up Mathews and he becomes the next Orlando Pace. I hope we pick up Dix and he becomes the Troy Polamalu. Why? Because those are the type of players we need to succeed in our Division if we want to make it to the playoffs and eventually the SB.

Cheers.

All I can say is you must OWN your own rib joint. Because otherwise you'll be selling your house to pay off all your debts.

 

[Caynine29]

Another thing to consider is that Chris Long usually gets his sacks when QBs hold the ball. So when the Rams have a good secondary, Long puts up good numbers. When the Rams have swiss cheese in the back, Long cant get there in time.

Hmm. Well, I haven't seen any evidence to indicate there's any truth to that. But, if you have, I'd be interested to see it. Doesn't really make much sense, though. I mean, first of all... if speed is the issue and the QB is holding the ball that long when Long is getting his sacks, why isn't Quinn getting there, instead?

Also... unless you believe that Justin King, Josh Gordy, Darian Stewart and Quintin Mikell made for a "good secondary", the theory really doesn't really hold any water, since those guys were our last line of defense in 2011. Which, incidentally, was Chris Long's best season (13 sacks). And that was without the help of a decent bookend pass rusher to take the heat off. Since that entire secondary was replaced the following year, I'd be hesitant to say it was very good.

I think the more plausible explanation is simply that Quinn is a better pass rusher than Long. And, I'm fine with 8-10 sacks from one side, if we're getting 18-20 from the other.

 

[jacobarch]

All I can say is you must OWN your own rib joint. Because otherwise you'll be selling your house to pay off all your debts.

haha thanks for only emphasizing certain parts of my statement. It's important to digest the entirety of my statement not just the parts that caught your eye

 

[Clayton]

I think the more plausible explanation is simply that Quinn is a better pass rusher than Long.

I'm fine with that explanation. All I know is that Long is known for getting hurries more than sacks. It stands to reason that a guy that gets a lot of hurries will get more sacks if the QBs he plays against hold on to the ball more. But its football so there are a million variables involved. According to the stat nerds at PFF, William Hayes is a better pass rusher than Long. I dont buy that for a second but the inconsistency in Long's sack production over his career has been curious. There are times where he looks like one of the best in the league and other times where he is just another guy.

 

[jacobarch]

I'm fine with that explanation. All I know is that Long is known for getting hurries more than sacks. It stands to reason that a guy that gets a lot of hurries will get more sacks if the QBs he plays against hold on to the ball more. But its football so there are a million variables involved. According to the stat nerds at PFF, William Hayes is a better pass rusher than Long. I dont buy that for a second but the inconsistency in Long's sack production over his career has been curious. There are times where he looks like one of the best in the league and other times where he is just another guy.

It's also well known that LDE aren't the speed rushers that RDE's are supposed to be. Long is exactly what you want at LDE. A high motor guy that's an iron man. Lots of production against the pass and run. Lucky for us Quinn was #1 against the pass and Run last year. He's just a stud.

 

[Clayton]

Quinn was #1 against the pass and Run last year. He's just a stud.

Quinn is Superman. He was far and away our best player last year and Im sure playing against Jake Long and alongside Chris Long helped him mature a lot. Clowney is not going to be a superstar right away....he'll need those same kind of guys to bring him up.

 

[mutigers1fan]

haha thanks for only emphasizing certain parts of my statement. It's important to digest the entirety of my statement not just the parts that caught your eye

Digest, ribs...I see what you did there.

 

[zeke2829]

No way dude, I'm sorry but I have to stop you there. Yes, there was a good amount of 'buzz' on Clowney before the combine and pro day. But after he finished his pro day everyone one and their mom got a boner over him and started saying he's the player of a decade. Did you know they say that about one or two players every other draft right? You know half of them end up average players or busting out of the NFL.

To add to your "Never forget" slogan. Are you one of those people that blames our FO for not getting every player in the draft that succeeds in the NFL? Because we've missed a lot. Pead and Quick come to mind. There are other picks that have done far better that would have helped out the Rams tremendously. My point is shit happens bro. I don't care whether or not Clowney does well in the NFL. I care about who the Rams pick at that spot. And we don't need DE. DE is the LEAST needed position on the team other than Punter and Place kicker. Even if Clowney falls to us. Trade him away. I hope the best for him, I hope he has a 21 sack season his rookie year. Guess what, I don't care dude. I really don't. I hope we pick up Watkins and he has a 1000 yard rookie season. I hope we pick up Mathews and he becomes the next Orlando Pace. I hope we pick up Dix and he becomes the Troy Polamalu. Why? Because those are the type of players we need to succeed in our Division if we want to make it to the playoffs and eventually the SB.

Cheers.

Can you tell its draft time??.....I actually love disagreeing with you, and when the hell have I ever complained about Pead or Quick?

DE is the least needed position, other than a punter, place kicker and WR?? Well then...why in the hell do you think wr is a need?? We already have 6 under contract and have already burned 5 picks in the last 3 years on wrs. I find this comical to say the least. I find your idea as wanting a wr(Watkins) just as useless as me wanting a de(Clowney). But that's ok... huh Jacob. Whether you realize it or not we need another wr like we need a hole in the head. Oh but in your eyes this is a NEED? WTF???

 

[jacobarch]

Can you tell its draft time??.....I actually love disagreeing with you, and when the hell have I ever complained about Pead or Quick?

DE is the least needed position, other than a punter, place kicker and WR?? Well then...why in the hell do you think wr is a need?? We already have 6 under contract and have already burned 5 picks in the last 3 years on wrs. I find this comical to say the least. I find your idea as wanting a wr(Watkins) just as useless as me wanting a de(Clowney). But that's ok... huh Jacob. Whether you realize it or not we need another wr like we need a hole in the head. Oh but in your eyes this is a NEED? WTF???

haha, i know you love to disagree with me, and I always love a good debate.
Actually I said 3 different positions. WR, LT, and Safety. You're not gonna get away with it that easily dude.
And when did I throw WR in there with place kicker and Punter? I think you misread my post.
Point is we haven't gotten the WR position right yet. You draft players until you do get it right, it's the way the draft works. My point is we don't have a need for DE and we do at WR,Oline, and safety. As far as Clowney and Watkins are concerned IMO they are both equally ranked at their positions. How long has it been since we've had a legit #1 WR? Torry Holt was the last one. You do the math.

 

[zeke2829]

haha, i know you love to disagree with me, and I always love a good debate.
Actually I said 3 different positions. WR, LT, and Safety. You're not gonna get away with it that easily dude.
And when did I throw WR in there with place kicker and Punter? I think you misread my post.
Point is we haven't gotten the WR position right yet. You draft players until you do get it right, it's the way the draft works. My point is we don't have a need for DE and we do at WR,Oline, and safety. As far as Clowney and Watkins are concerned IMO they are both equally ranked at their positions. How long has it been since we've had a legit #1 WR? Torry Holt was the last one. You do the math.

I didnt misread your post, I just changed it a little to prove my point!

Jacob
All of this arguing is pointless, but its fun.

In all honesty, I really dont beleive they will select either of these 2.(Clowney or Watkins) If I were to bet my life savings, I really beleive they will go o-line @#2. This is not what I want, but in my heart that is what I beleive they will do. Even if we trade down, I really dont think neither of these 2 will there when we pick. Your point that DE is not a great need makes sense, but with 6 wrs under contract, you gotta admit that wr is not a great need as well. So with half of this board wanting a de and the other half wanting a wr IMO the whole GD board could be wrong and just have to settle with ROBINSON!!! yep you heard it here first from>>>>>>>>ZEKE

 

[ANGELAKERAMS]

If they draft Robinson, I am going to scream.

A project LT is less useful that Clowney or Watkins.

And don't say, "well, he can play guard" because you don't spend #2 picks on guards when you are a sub .500 team.

As for Clowney, what Zeke said regarding the cap and Long's contract is legit, and would be an excellent reason to draft Clowney.

As for Watkins, he may be great in this league, but I have a hard time seeing him as #1 WR material. To me, he's Austin plus 4" ( they both do the same things very well ). And many analysts are saying Evans will be the better WR even though Watkins is rated higher.

The Rams have their slot WR's ( Austin and Bailey ) and they have their deep guy ( Givens ). What they need is a tall, red zone threat to play opposite Givens ( that's why they drafted Pettis and Quick and just picked up Britt ). One of those guys is going to fill that roll.

Where does Watkins fit? Does he replace Givens? Are we really going to give up on him already? Are we really going to give up on Quick already? Because, if you draft Watkins to play opposite Givens, when is Quick supposed to get enough PT to develop?

And, if you do give up on Quick to take Watkins, where is the redzone threat? Givens is 5'10", Austin 5'9", Bailey 5'10" and Watkins is 6'1". Is Watkins really going to out jump Sherman? Chancellor? Etc. And if you say they can play Quick, Pettis and Britt in the redzone plays, then Watkins isn't a #1 WR because your #1 guy doesn't come off the field in crunch time.

I am hoping for the following: 1) trade down 2) Clowney 3) Matthews

To me, nobody else makes sense for the Rams at #2. If they trade down, then obviously other players would make sense, but not at #2.

JMO of course. Feel free to blast away.

 

[shopson67]

If Watkins is Austin +4", where is the downside? Not that I agree with that sentiment.

Watkins gets that reputation from the way Clemson used him (which was partly a reaction to the defenses playing WAYYY off of him in fear of him blowing by, and partly to create easy throws for Boyd, who sometimes struggles with his accuracy). Watching him in drills is impressive. He has excellent hands from what I've seen and is a very impressive prospect.

That said, I would be OK with Clowney, Watkins, or Mack if they stay at #2. Where is the immediate need at OT? Long should be back at LT, and Barksdale was very effective at RT. Are we to use the #2 pick on an injury fill-in just in case Long isn't ready? Rams need vast improvement at LG, but I can't see them doing so in the first round. First round to me would be one of those three with the first pick, then best available CB/FS at #13, with an exception made for Donald if they choose to go that way.

 

[zeke2829]

And don't say, "well, he can play guard" because you don't spend #2 picks on guards when you are a sub .500 team.

Its funny you should mention this. Les Snead already stated this in an interview. He used the Baltimore Ravens as an example. Them drafting Micheal Oher and starting him out at guard as a temporary fix and then moving him to tackle later. He said this is good for helping to develop a future tackle.

I'll bet the house, that they take Robinson!

 

[BOSS429Mustang]

I'm on record for the Rams drafting Clowney if he's available. But if he isn't and they are staying put at #2, my second choice would probably be Bortles (I know, not going to happen). So since that isn't happening I'd have to go with Wadkins. He's probably the 2nd most dynamic player in the draft, and will have a huge impact for the team that drafts him. I can't imagine the Lions offense with him on one side and Megatron on the other and Bush coming out of the backfield. Reminiscent of the GSOT. Remember, Torry Holt was a rookie when the Rams won the SB.

If they draft Robinson or Matthews at #2, Snead and Fisher should be put in front of a firing squad. Robinson is a guard. You don't draft a guard at 2. Matthews is a good tackle, not great. You don't draft good at #2 either. If they are drafting Robinson to groom him as a tackle, don't we have enough projects on this team right now?? Quick, Pead, Austin, how many projects do we need going at one time?

 

[Retroram52]

It wouldn't be the first time we screwed-the-pooch on draft day, Boss.

 

[Caynine29]

And don't say, "well, he can play guard" because you don't spend #2 picks on guards when you are a sub .500 team.

Its funny you should mention this. Les Snead already stated this in an interview. He used the Baltimore Ravens as an example. Them drafting Micheal Oher and starting him out at guard as a temporary fix and then moving him to tackle later. He said this is good for helping to develop a future tackle.

I'll bet the house, that they take Robinson!

I agree. To be honest, there are good reasons for the Rams to not draft ANY of the top 5 prospects this year. Understanding that... by process of elimination, Robinson seems like the most "logical/practical" choice, at the moment.

 

[Caynine29]

I'm on record for the Rams drafting Clowney if he's available. But if he isn't and they are staying put at #2, my second choice would probably be Bortles (I know, not going to happen). So since that isn't happening I'd have to go with Wadkins. He's probably the 2nd most dynamic player in the draft, and will have a huge impact for the team that drafts him. I can't imagine the Lions offense with him on one side and Megatron on the other and Bush coming out of the backfield. Reminiscent of the GSOT. Remember, Torry Holt was a rookie when the Rams won the SB.

If they draft Robinson or Matthews at #2, Snead and Fisher should be put in front of a firing squad. Robinson is a guard. You don't draft a guard at 2. Matthews is a good tackle, not great. You don't draft good at #2 either. If they are drafting Robinson to groom him as a tackle, don't we have enough projects on this team right now?? Quick, Pead, Austin, how many projects do we need going at one time?

That's just the conundrum the #2 overall pick presents us this year. As deep as the draft is this year, there IS no one great standout player. They're ALL "good". And the closest thing to great (if you believe the hype), plays a position at which we're already very deep and talented.

The one good thing about that is that honestly... we really can't go wrong. Reason being, the only thing that makes this spot so tough is the predetermined value of the selection itself. Not the player. The players themselves are good.

Truth be told... it's really not possible to fully "screw the pooch" with this pick. Well... unless we draft a QB, that is.

 

[shopson67]

Well, truth be told there was supposed to be one standout player, but Clowney hurt his position with some mediocre effort this year. It just so happens that DE is already a strength of a Rams team with enough holes elsewhere.

 

[ksudodger]

Truth be told... it's really not possible to fully "screw the pooch" with this pick. Well... unless we draft a QB, that is.

You nailed it Caynine. I mean we could stay at #2 and draft Clowney,Watkins,Mack,Robinson or Matthews. We could trade down with Atlanta,Oakland or Tampa and still end up with Matthews or Robinson.
Then same goes with #13. We could stay there and pick Dix,Pryor,Gilbert,Dennard or Donald or we could trade down and probably still get Pryor,Roby or Fuller.

Either way, the Rams are in a great position.

 

[Caynine29]

It's also well known that LDE aren't the speed rushers that RDE's are supposed to be. Long is exactly what you want at LDE. A high motor guy that's an iron man. Lots of production against the pass and run. Lucky for us Quinn was #1 against the pass and Run last year. He's just a stud.