[PARAM]

Griffin still has time to make that a check, he was in a bad spot.
Out of that list, Gabbert, Ponder, Sanchez, VY, and Russell were either reach picks of way over drafted.
In fact the drafting of VY is what lead to Fisher leaving the Titans.
The only 2 guys on there who were drafted and didn't cut it are Locker and Leniert IMO

Well too be honest, Russell came with about the same potential and hype as Newton. He just signed the contract, got fat and fleeced the Raiders. The reason I have a hard time counting all the "hits" is it took Alex Smith 7 years to become a decent starter and Bradford missed 31 of this first 80 (almost 40%) and 33 of his first 96 (about 33%). Like I said, it's about a 50/50 anytime, with any position. There are no "sure things". I have never had a problem with drafting a QB......it's the giving up multiple picks to get there that bothers me. If it's a "miss" for any reason.....injury, headcase, over evaluation....you lose out on more than just the pick. And of course if it's a "real hit", who cares what you gave up?

[dieterbrock]

Griffin still has time to make that a check, he was in a bad spot.
Out of that list, Gabbert, Ponder, Sanchez, VY, and Russell were either reach picks of way over drafted.
In fact the drafting of VY is what lead to Fisher leaving the Titans.
The only 2 guys on there who were drafted and didn't cut it are Locker and Leniert IMO

Well too be honest, Russell came with about the same potential and hype as Newton. He just signed the contract, got fat and fleeced the Raiders. The reason I have a hard time counting all the "hits" is it took Alex Smith 7 years to become a decent starter and Bradford missed 31 of this first 80 (almost 40%) and 33 of his first 96 (about 33%). Like I said, it's about a 50/50 anytime, with any position. There are no "sure things". I have never had a problem with drafting a QB......it's the giving up multiple picks to get there that bothers me. If it's a "miss" for any reason.....injury, headcase, over evaluation....you lose out on more than just the pick. And of course if it's a "real hit", who cares what you gave up?

I don't recall Russel being anything like Newton in college. Newton was a dynamic rusher and passer. Russell was a monster and could seemingly throw the ball thru a brick wall but I don't remember him being fleet of foot. Heck I think Matt Flynn was a better rusher than him.
Anyway just because I didn't like him doesn't mean the hype wasn't there, I just don't remember it that way.
On Smith, what's a bigger miss is that they chose him over Rodgers. Iirc it was literally when they announced the 1st pick that we knew who San Fran was taking.
As for trading picks, it's worked for some and not others. But IMO each situation is independent of one another and only shows up in stats. The Rams have had there share of "extra picks" and what has it gotten us? We're still 7-9. If the QB is worth it on their draft board, go for it. Who knows what next year will bring. They could win 8 games and be drafting 20 with no 2nd rounder and the cost for moving up would be even higher.
And surely by looking at Washington, a team can blow the pick, and still recover to make the playoffs

[PARAM]

The Rams have had there share of "extra picks" and what has it gotten us? We're still 7-9. If the QB is worth it on their draft board, go for it. Who knows what next year will bring. They could win 8 games and be drafting 20 with no 2nd rounder and the cost for moving up would be even higher. And surely by looking at Washington, a team can blow the pick, and still recover to make the playoffs

Many Ram fans lean towards believing those RG3 picks were wasted to some degree. The record hasn't changed, averaging 9 losses a season. Some Ram fans suggest the quality of play has improved. Improved significantly over the previous two regimes and also over the span of the current regime. That latter part is debatable. Personally, I believe this regime has almost completely rebuilt an extremely weak roster and filled it with some pretty good players. Case in point being most of our free agents were pursued rigorously. Still some fans suggest Fisher has compromising pictures of Kroenke and that's how he's kept his job. Certainly, a coach can't keep his job very long if he doesn't win sooner or later. The closest example to the contrary is Marvin Lewis with the Bengals. He was 7 games under .500 over his first 8 seasons. Surely plenty of time to build a winner. And they did have two winning seasons in those first 8 (11-5 & 10-6), four years apart, so like I said...Lewis is 'the closest example'. Fisher has yet to accomplish the .500 mark. And many Ram fans believe what has been holding the Rams back over Fisher's tenure is the lack of a quality QB.

So naturally they expect, hope, are practically begging for the Rams to take a QB in the first round. But who knows which way they'll go? We know how the "experts" have the prospects rated but we don't know how the teams have them rated. And we know how they're rated changes from team to team. Could be they believe they need one of the media's top 2 QB and will try to trade up. Could be they like Lynch more than the other two and will see how it unfolds before trying to make a move (or not). Could be Lynch is there and they go in a different direction, which would absolutely befuddle and frustrate most Ram fans. That's one of the most interesting things about the draft, the unknown. I trust them to make quality selections, more than any other Rams regime since Vermeil. I'm not expecting them to trade up high for a QB, though I'm not expecting them to pass on one if he's available when they pick. I could see them trading up a few spots to get one. And I wouldn't be surprised if they pass on a QB and take a WR or a DB. I think the thing is, how would Ramsnation react if they chose somebody other than a QB?

[Hacksaw]

We are a better team now despite scoreboard. Now we need to get better to get over the top. Without a top signal caller I doubt we will do that.

[dieterbrock]

The Rams have had there share of "extra picks" and what has it gotten us? We're still 7-9. If the QB is worth it on their draft board, go for it. Who knows what next year will bring. They could win 8 games and be drafting 20 with no 2nd rounder and the cost for moving up would be even higher. And surely by looking at Washington, a team can blow the pick, and still recover to make the playoffs

Many Ram fans lean towards believing those RG3 picks were wasted to some degree. The record hasn't changed, averaging 9 losses a season. Some Ram fans suggest the quality of play has improved. Improved significantly over the previous two regimes and also over the span of the current regime. That latter part is debatable. Personally, I believe this regime has almost completely rebuilt an extremely weak roster and filled it with some pretty good players. Case in point being most of our free agents were pursued rigorously. Still some fans suggest Fisher has compromising pictures of Kroenke and that's how he's kept his job. Certainly, a coach can't keep his job very long if he doesn't win sooner or later. The closest example to the contrary is Marvin Lewis with the Bengals. He was 7 games under .500 over his first 8 seasons. Surely plenty of time to build a winner. And they did have two winning seasons in those first 8 (11-5 & 10-6), four years apart, so like I said...Lewis is 'the closest example'. Fisher has yet to accomplish the .500 mark. And many Ram fans believe what has been holding the Rams back over Fisher's tenure is the lack of a quality QB.

Like Bill Parcells said, "You are what your record says you are"

[OldSchool]

Parcells is correct but one things for certain. I'll take this current 7-9 team over the 2010 7-9 team.

[/zn/]

I don't buy the Parcells line, though a COACH should say that. A coach should look at his team and say "your record is your verdict."

But a fan/analyst IMO should be cautious about saying that.

Records aren't always verdicts, they're sometimes symptoms. Approached that way a record is something to be interpreted. WHY do they have that record?

So what does the 7-9 say about the 2015 Rams? To me it's simple. It says they lost 2 qbs, one to injury/trade and the other to an unanticipated meltdown. I think if they got decent qb play in 2013, even with the OL issues (young, then young and injured) and even with the defensive injuries (Quinn but not just him), they would have won more games. Heck I think if they just started Keenum all 16 games they would have won 2-3 more of them. And that's not to elevate Keenum to a franchise qb...it's just saying that with EVEN JUST a healthy Keenum starting all season, they would have done better.

So what does the 2015 record say about the Rams? I think it just says they got disrupted at qb.

[ramsman34]

I don't buy the Parcells line, though a COACH should say that. A coach should look at his team and say "your record is your verdict."

But a fan/analyst IMO should be cautious about saying that.

Records aren't always verdicts, they're sometimes symptoms. Approached that way a record is something to be interpreted. WHY do they have that record?

So what does the 7-9 say about the 2015 Rams? To me it's simple. It says they lost 2 qbs, one to injury/trade and the other to an unanticipated meltdown. I think if they got decent qb play in 2013, even with the OL issues (young, then young and injured) and even with the defensive injuries (Quinn but not just him), they would have won more games. Heck I think if they just started Keenum all 16 games they would have won 2-3 more of them. And that's not to elevate Keenum to a franchise qb...it's just saying that with EVEN JUST a healthy Keenum starting all season, they would have done better.

So what does the 2015 record say about the Rams? I think it just says they got disrupted at qb.

Not only do I TOTALLY agree, but, even if we had a top-flight signal caller; that doesn't change the overall run heavy, play great D and STs, stay close, and win it at the end mentality/philosophy of this regime.

That is why I advocate getting as many picks in the top 4 rounds as possible and fill your roster with young, hungry, and comparatively cheap talent.
Yet, if we trade up for Wentz, I won't be upset - they just better know how to use him and build the offense around his, Gurley's, and the o-line's strengths.

[/zn/]

Not only do I TOTALLY agree, but, even if we had a top-flight signal caller; that doesn't change the overall run heavy, play great D and STs, stay close, and win it at the end mentality/philosophy of this regime.
.

Well to a large extent I agree with that, and also think you just described Seattle and Carolina and to a certain extent Denver too.

If you have a play-action offense and a top defense, yes you can get away with a just decent fill-in qb, but you are much better off with a real qb. In fact the deadlier the qb the better the whole thing becomes.

BUT part of the Fisher approach is big plays on offense. Not just running, not just ball control, not just keeping it close. They regularly set up big plays, with play-action and in other ways too. The big strike is part of what they do. They just haven't always been able to execute it consistently, mostly because for the last 2 1/2 years they have had (of course) qb issues.

[RedAlice]

Not only do I TOTALLY agree, but, even if we had a top-flight signal caller; that doesn't change the overall run heavy, play great D and STs, stay close, and win it at the end mentality/philosophy of this regime.
.

Well to a large extent I agree with that, and also think you just described Seattle and Carolina and to a certain extent Denver too.

If you have a play-action offense and a top defense, yes you can get away with a just decent fill-in qb, but you are much better off with a real qb. In fact the deadlier the qb the better the whole thing becomes.

BUT part of the Fisher approach is big plays on offense. Not just running, not just ball control, not just keeping it close. They regularly set up big plays, with play-action and in other ways too. The big strike is part of what they do. They just haven't always been able to execute it consistently, mostly because for the last 2 1/2 years they have had (of course) qb issues.

Excellent and perceptive summary ZN.

I agree we need a QB early in the draft this year. Still reading up on them, but doesn't feel like this is yet another year to just sit still and wait at this position.