Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SOUL-SKINS;667559]Has anyone heard or is there any rumors of the Skins trading up to #1 to draft Braford? I'm not crazy about that idea but i have a huge man crush on him.[/quote]

I like Bradford a lot, too. But to trade up, following the draft value chart, would cost us the equivalent of the 12th overall pick in the first round. I think the price is too dear.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=Lotus;667562]I'm with you. If we can't get our favorite OT or our favorite QB, we should scoop up the elite DT who is left over. If we play our cards right, such a choice would smooth our transition to a 3-4 as well as providing greater value for the #4 pick.[/quote]

Generally speaking, i'm in favor of taking BPA, regardless of position in the first round, especially at the top. Hopefully, we wont have a pick this high for a long time. we need to make the most of it and ensure that whomever we pick is a bonafide stud who will be a consistent pro-bowler. If we're looking at things long-term, you realy can't go wrong selecting BPA.

I understand we added Haynesworth, Orakpo, and Jarmon last year, and our OL is in shambles, but Haynesworth is only going to be here 3 more years. Orakpo, Carter, and Jarmon are going to be LBs in the 3-4. Other than Haynesworth (who'll only be on the field about 60% of the time), we don't have anyone of note on our DL. Drafting McCoy or Suh won't provide the quick fix our OL needs, but it certainly would fill a need on our team AND be good for our team in the long-term.

If Bradford and Okung are off the board, it would require a really sweet deal from another team for me to elect to trade down instead of drafting Suh or McCoy. Hopefully, we can upgrade OT and OG in free agency and give ourselves some more flexibility in the draft.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;667575]Generally speaking, i'm in favor of taking BPA, regardless of position in the first round, especially at the top. Hopefully, we wont have a pick this high for a long time. we need to make the most of it and ensure that whomever we pick is a bonafide stud who will be a consistent pro-bowler. If we're looking at things long-term, you realy can't go wrong selecting BPA.

I understand we added Haynesworth, Orakpo, and Jarmon last year, and our OL is in shambles, but Haynesworth is only going to be here 3 more years. Orakpo, Carter, and Jarmon are going to be LBs in the 3-4. Other than Haynesworth (who'll only be on the field about 60% of the time), we don't have anyone of note on our DL. Drafting McCoy or Suh won't provide the quick fix our OL needs, but it certainly would fill a need on our team AND be good for our team in the long-term.

If Bradford and Okung are off the board, it would require a really sweet deal from another team for me to elect to trade down instead of drafting Suh or McCoy. Hopefully, we can upgrade OT and OG in free agency and give ourselves some more flexibility in the draft.[/quote]

Well put. If you want to reach a bit with the 4th pick in the 4th round to meet a need, fine. But to reach with the 4th overall pick is foolish. At #4 overall you make sure to bring home the best stud you can find, regardless of need.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

If Bradford (i dont want him) and Russell Okung (would like him) are off the board when the #4 pick comes around, how in THE SAM HELL do some ppl say no to even lookin at Eric Berry? i think #4 is TOO HIGH to reach for a different OT. @ #4 you wanted to draft the BEST player you can. He might have the overall #1 talent in this whole draft. He said so himself and did it in the most humble of ways. Just came off sounding confident not cocky.

Look what Ed Reed has done for the Ravens defense all these years. Not saying he'll duplicate that production but its feasible. Remember how excited we all were to pair up Sean Taylor and Laron Landry? AREA 51. Well we could put Laron back at SS where he belongs and bring our safeties back to a NO FLY ZONE. And the Saints proved this year that a defense can give up yards but be more effective getting takeaways.

Someone said you can draft berry and move him to CB, forget that. Leave him @ FS and let him be the ball hawk he is. If you're considered a Top 5 pick then why would you be drafted to change position. Thats ludacris.

So say Bradford goes 1, Suh/McCoy goes two, Okung goes 3, that leaves us with Suh/McCoy and Berry as the top prospects on the board. Suh/McCoy are good, but we're transitioning to a 3-4. DL in 3-4 are space eaters. YOU WANT TO WASTE A #4 PICK ON A SPACE EATER? i dont.

Then Hopefully we get Montario Hardesty in the 4th to compliment Clinton Portis. I aint even a Vols fan at all but i would be happy to see the new 2010 Tennesskins! LMAO

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=PHazard;667687]If Bradford (i dont want him) and Russell Okung (would like him) are off the board when the #4 pick comes around, how in THE SAM HELL do some ppl say no to even lookin at Eric Berry? i think #4 is TOO HIGH to reach for a different OT. @ #4 you wanted to draft the BEST player you can. He might have the overall #1 talent in this whole draft. He said so himself and did it in the most humble of ways. Just came off sounding confident not cocky.

Look what Ed Reed has done for the Ravens defense all these years. Not saying he'll duplicate that production but its feasible. Remember how excited we all were to pair up Sean Taylor and Laron Landry? AREA 51. Well we could put Laron back at SS where he belongs and bring our safeties back to a NO FLY ZONE. And the Saints proved this year that a defense can give up yards but be more effective getting takeaways.

Someone said you can draft berry and move him to CB, forget that. Leave him @ FS and let him be the ball hawk he is. If you're considered a Top 5 pick then why would you be drafted to change position. Thats ludacris.

So say Bradford goes 1, Suh/McCoy goes two, Okung goes 3, that leaves us with Suh/McCoy and Berry as the top prospects on the board. Suh/McCoy are good, but we're transitioning to a 3-4. DL in 3-4 are space eaters. YOU WANT TO WASTE A #4 PICK ON A SPACE EATER? i dont.

Then Hopefully we get Montario Hardesty in the 4th to compliment Clinton Portis. I aint even a Vols fan at all but i would be happy to see the new 2010 Tennesskins! LMAO[/quote]

Ummmm....Alright if Bradford and Okung are off the board you'd have to take Suh or Berry if both were avail. You gotta go with Suh first. Safety is a need but not that big of need to take 4th overall. If we didn't have Laundry (not that he's playing well) i'd say yes, def. take Berry. I still have faith in the Dirty 30.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SOUL-SKINS;667706]Ummmm....Alright if Bradford and Okung are off the board you'd have to take Suh or Berry if both were avail. You gotta go with Suh first. Safety is a need but not that big of need to take 4th overall. If we didn't have Laundry (not that he's playing well) i'd say yes, def. take Berry. I still have faith in the Dirty 30.[/quote]

Did you read what i wrote? I have faith in Landry as well. But my faith in him jumps a good 85% if playing at SS. Berry is a natural FS who makes excellent reads and knows how to play the ball. If we have a secondary that has Landry close to the Line delivering hits/run support, AND Eric Berry AND DeAngelo Hall bein ballhawks that would improve our defense/takeaways immediately. in a 3-4 Suh would be a DE, n in a 3-4, the DL take up as many blocks as they can so the LB can make plays. Its not an impact position. Berry would benefit us more so than Suh in our new Defense.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

^ in the situation where the #1 QB and #1 OT are gone at pick #4,

1) Berry is a good choice. It seems that he will make an excellent safety. As you describe he is tempting to pick.

2) Nonetheless Suh or McCoy might, that is might, give the best value for the pick. In our new 3-4 front, one could argue that AH would make a disruptive big end and might be happier there anyway. Jarmon could beef up a bit and play the other end. McCoy or Suh would be left the nose tackle slot. Certainly neither one of those guys is a classic big clogger like Wilfork, but that's ok. Instead the drafted nose tackle could play a quick, disruptive, one-gap style like Jay Ratliff. Suh is 300 lbs.; McCoy is 297 lbs.; Ratliff is 302 lbs. Our new nose tackle could end up being a super-Ratliff. If we are to switch to a 3-4, wouldn't it be awesome to have a Ratliff (or better) working disruptive magic in our middle?

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=Lotus;667716]
2) Nonetheless Suh or McCoy might, that is might, give the best value for the pick. In our new 3-4 front, one could argue that AH would make a disruptive big end and might be happier there anyway. Jarmon could beef up a bit and play the other end. [/quote]
I think it's a lock the Phillip Daniels is going to man that LDE spot. Monty and/or Golston may be shipped out and they will look for another big DE/DT to put behind him.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

IF Okung is gone and Suh or McCoy are steill there you take one of them. No question.
Bradford is over rated.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;667721][B]I think it's a lock the Phillip Daniels is going to man that LDE spot.[/B] Monty and/or Golston may be shipped out and they will look for another big DE/DT to put behind him.[/quote]

I think that that is the plan and I have no opposition...but for how long? Daniels is in his twilight.

There are whispers of Jarmon's being tried as a LB. If so, I hope that he fails badly at LB. Then they'll keep him at end where he belongs. He just needs some more weight and he can be a fine young 3-4 end.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=Lotus;667725]I think that that is the plan and I have no opposition...but for how long? Daniels is in his twilight.

There are whispers of Jarmon's being tried as a LB. If so, I hope that he fails badly at LB. Then they'll keep him at end where he belongs. He just needs some more weight and he can be a fine young 3-4 end.[/quote]

I really hope Jarmon comes back strong from his injury. I was very impressed with him. He can have a great career at DE.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

Heck I'd be tempted to take CJ Spiller. Would hate to be the team that passes on the next Chris Johnson

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=Lotus;667725]I think that that is the plan and I have no opposition...but for how long? Daniels is in his twilight.

There are whispers of Jarmon's being tried as a LB. If so, I hope that he fails badly at LB. Then they'll keep him at end where he belongs. He just needs some more weight and he can be a fine young 3-4 end.[/quote]I dunno if he's got the strength to do that, although if he has proper training, he could be adequate. Olshansky, for example, did a 505 lb bench press, which set a record for his college and he did 43 bench press reps at the combine, and we all know Daniels is a big-time weightlifter.

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SmootSmack;667729]Heck I'd be tempted to take CJ Spiller. Would hate to be the team that passes on the next Chris Johnson[/quote]

If it was between Berry, Suh, and McCoy...who would you take SS?

Re: Schefter: "There's no way" the Rams won't pick Sam Bradford at No. 1
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;667733]I dunno if he's got the strength to do that, although if he has proper training, he could be adequate. Olshansky, for example, did a 505 lb bench press, which set a record for his college and he did 43 bench press reps at the combine, and we all know Daniels is a big-time weightlifter.[/quote]

Good points.