Any remaining doubters that QB is our biggest draft need?

[nighttrain]

Yeah all in on QB this year unless Mannion lights it up. But Mannion won't get a chance unless Foles and Keenum both go down.
I don't see the Rams win another game so they should be in position with their 1st or with a trade up.
Don't care the cost.

If Mannion doesnt start our remaining games fisher deserves to go/ Kid completed 7 of 9 with no ints. 0
train

 

[-X-]

The problem with the plan this year is Foles is playing a completely different system and style of ball. Philadelphia is all about fast pace, no huddle. He it's about eating clock. He was also in shotgun a ton. I really didn't see a QB in the 2015 draft that would have been ready, so I can't fault them there. In the 2014 draft Carr was picked well before we did. Maybe Garappolo would have been a good pick, he hasn't played though so who knows. Your point about drafting is a good one. I wish they would have moved up in 2014 for Murray or McCarron. Who knows if they are any good though.

Another problem, and the main problem in the 2015 offensive plan is the reliance on rookies in the offensive line. We currently are on our third string depth, so I can't fault the coaches now, and in the long run drafting offensive line help is a great thing. My problem is they didn't use their bounty of picks earlier in their tenure to build the line. It has come to bite them this year. What sucks is the injuries. The hope was at this point of the schedule the rookie linemen would have their feet under them and would be starting to gel. Injuries suck, but at least next year our backups will have game experience.

Agree that there was/is a completely different style of offense, but that's more commonplace around the league than not. Whether the QB changes teams or coordinators, there's always some adjustment that comes with it. They likely saw how productive Foles was with a strong run game and running the play-action that they conceivably could have been blind to the adjustment period that was sure to follow. All-in-all, it was a smart gamble because we couldn't afford to put all of our chips on Bradford anymore. NOW it looks like a stupid move, but at the time it was a solid move that came with the perk of an additional 2nd rounder (which should be pretty high now).

I, personally, don't think it's a *problem" that they addressed the line in such a huge way this year, because what other choice did they have? Who could have known that a line consisting of Jake Long, Greg Robinson, Scott Wells, Rodger Saffold and Joe Barksdale would be bad? Or get demolished by injuries? Or that they would lose their QB again? (well, that carried a higher probability, TBH) Maybe people can say that banking on players with an injury history is a risk, but isn't the injury rate in the NFL 100% anyway? And aren't there just as many success stories about injury rehab as there are stories about a player never being the same again? Further, the Rams picked up 8 rookie linemen over the past 2 years and now 7 of them are injured. Who saw that coming? Sometimes your hand gets forced, and all you can do is play it the best way you can.

Appreciate the conversation too, btw. I'd much rather have these kinds of discussions than wade through the "fire everyone and start over" scenarios.

 

[nighttrain]

We have to start Mannion the rest of the way to see what he has. Maybe he shows promise, then I would be willing to roll with him and a good vet and draft WRs, TE, and linemen. If he sucks then you have 2 guys in the first you can get.

I'll probably get killed for this, but I wouldn't mind getting Bradford back to go along with a rookie. He is injury prone, but at least he is an NFL starting caliber QB.

No to Bradford, but i really like the rest of your post
train

 

[nighttrain]

I don't know that anyone is looking for a "rookie savior" just a competent game manager type that may grow into being a difference maker similar to the few examples I listed. Mannion may well be that player so the focus of next draft could be OL or WR or BPA.

I'd like to see if Mannion can be the guy, i thot he did ok
train

 

[dieterbrock]

Play Sean, see if we really need a QB
train

I want to agree with this and do want to see Mannion play. The problem I have is that with this offensive stratagy, I dont see any QB truly showing much.
That said, 6/7 passing tells me that he's at least "ready" to accomplish what the other 2 have done

 

[FRO]

Agree that there was/is a completely different style of offense, but that's more commonplace around the league than not. Whether the QB changes teams or coordinators, there's always some adjustment that comes with it. They likely saw how productive Foles was with a strong run game and running the play-action that they conceivably could have been blind to the adjustment period that was sure to follow. All-in-all, it was a smart gamble because we couldn't afford to put all of our chips on Bradford anymore. NOW it looks like a stupid move, but at the time it was a solid move that came with the perk of an additional 2nd rounder (which should be pretty high now).

I, personally, don't think it's a *problem" that they addressed the line in such a huge way this year, because what other choice did they have? Who could have known that a line consisting of Jake Long, Greg Robinson, Scott Wells, Rodger Saffold and Joe Barksdale would be bad? Or get demolished by injuries? Or that they would lose their QB again? (well, that carried a higher probability, TBH) Maybe people can say that banking on players with an injury history is a risk, but isn't the injury rate in the NFL 100% anyway? And aren't there just as many success stories about injury rehab as there are stories about a player never being the same again? Further, the Rams picked up 8 rookie linemen over the past 2 years and now 7 of them are injured. Who saw that coming? Sometimes your hand gets forced, and all you can do is play it the best way you can.

Appreciate the conversation too, btw. I'd much rather have these kinds of discussions than wade through the "fire everyone and start over" scenarios.

As far as the Foles/Bradford trade, it was a good trade for us. As a Bradford guy I hated it, but I totally understood it. I'm not going to beat up the trade. The problem was extending Foles without him playing. Had he tore up the league, we would simply open the checkbook and pay him accordingly. If he sucked, we wash our hands clean and high five over obtaining a second round pick for Bradford. I think they thought they would save money by doing it immediately, but if Foles put up another 2013 season I think he would have asked for a raise anyways.

As far as the line, I totally agree that it was the only approach. Bite the bullet and just draft linemen. My gripe is that we didn't pick linemen earlier in the tenure when our line has always been bad (minus a stretch in 2013). I think as fans we probably should have really tempered our expectations because we were so inexperienced up front.

 

[Athos]

the 2014 draft Carr was picked well before we did. Maybe Garappolo would have been a good pick, he hasn't played though so who knows. Your point about drafting is a good one. I wish they would have moved up in 2014 for Murray or McCarron. Who knows if they are any good though.

True. In my world of shitty hindsight tho, we trade out of the 2 overall for likely a few picks. Maybe a lot of picks if we trade down to the bottom. You get Carr with that pick. Then you consider again between Martin and DONALD.

If we keep Donald we still have ability to get a Justin Britt, Morgan Moses, Gabe Jackson, and frankly, several other O options.

That ship has sadly sailed. And a competent offense is still a word away seemingly.

Anyway. If we have a shot at Lynch, we go in. Not sure about Goff. But Lynch for a future 1st, and two other picks.... Do it.

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

I'd like to see Mannion start the rest of this season, then make a qb decision
train

This

Tho I would consider waiting 2 more games

 

[FRO]

True. In my world of crappy hindsight tho, we trade out of the 2 overall for likely a few picks. Maybe a lot of picks if we trade down to the bottom. You get Carr with that pick. Then you consider again between Martin and DONALD.

If we keep Donald we still have ability to get a Justin Britt, Morgan Moses, Gabe Jackson, and frankly, several other O options.

That ship has sadly sailed. And a competent offense is still a word away seemingly.

Anyway. If we have a shot at Lynch, we go in. Not sure about Goff. But Lynch for a future 1st, and two other picks.... Do it.

Well if I were the GM in 2014 we would have picked Watkins at 2 and Donald at 13. I would have went line in the second round and probably third. So you guys would have been killing me for picking Watkins over Beckham.

 

[FRO]

True. In my world of crappy hindsight tho, we trade out of the 2 overall for likely a few picks. Maybe a lot of picks if we trade down to the bottom. You get Carr with that pick. Then you consider again between Martin and DONALD.

If we keep Donald we still have ability to get a Justin Britt, Morgan Moses, Gabe Jackson, and frankly, several other O options.

That ship has sadly sailed. And a competent offense is still a word away seemingly.

Anyway. If we have a shot at Lynch, we go in. Not sure about Goff. But Lynch for a future 1st, and two other picks.... Do it.

Also I take Goff over Lynch.

 

[TexasRam]

I'm not going to sit here and say Foles hasn't looked like Ass. He has.

He has proven what he is capable of doing with the right cast and system and frankly he has put out the type of season that few others have. He has nothing to prove.

What Foles doesn't have is the ability to catch the ball or to block.

When a Qb is unable to look down the field with confidence because he is constantly harassed he goes into a shorter internal clock that causes a lot of bad stuff which include bad mechanics, forcing balls, and a lot of what Foles is showing.

Let's not pretend Bradford saw the whole field. Jrry posted several games from coaches view documenting all the missed wide open Wr's. It became a common complaint in this board that Bradford doesn't go through his reads. I said no shit Sherlock, he has no confidence in the pocket.

Foles is limited. He can't make things happen like an Aaron Rodgers or Russel Wilson when lacking protection and Wr's. But with consistent pass protection for deep routes and run blocking Foles can be a pro bowl Qb. He already has.

We need First off a healthy oline. Foles lead us to wins over Seattle and Arizona when he had our line at full strength, but as the pieces fell apart on the oline so did Foles. Imagine an oline healthy and without Grob. Add a AJ Green and Eifert to the WR core. WR's that you know.... Get open and then actually catch the ball when they are hit. There's a reason Britt and Cook have been cast always. That's on fisher.

 

[-X-]

As far as the Foles/Bradford trade, it was a good trade for us. As a Bradford guy I hated it, but I totally understood it. I'm not going to beat up the trade. The problem was extending Foles without him playing. Had he tore up the league, we would simply open the checkbook and pay him accordingly. If he sucked, we wash our hands clean and high five over obtaining a second round pick for Bradford. I think they thought they would save money by doing it immediately, but if Foles put up another 2013 season I think he would have asked for a raise anyways.

As far as the line, I totally agree that it was the only approach. Bite the bullet and just draft linemen. My gripe is that we didn't pick linemen earlier in the tenure when our line has always been bad (minus a stretch in 2013). I think as fans we probably should have really tempered our expectations because we were so inexperienced up front.

I wasn't a fan of letting Bradford go either, but everyone knew it was the smart play. I agree that extending Foles was premature. But then again, if he did tear it up, it would have cost a whole lot more. As it stands, his 2017 season is totally voidable. All that said, I wouldn't have extended him that early either.

Kinda agree about the line, but that 2011 roster was going, and they needed players all over the field. Saffold, Turner, Wells, Barksdale and Dahl was a pretty good foundation for 2012, but everyone else turned out to be a hot mess. It just made sense to get veteran linemen when you were going to have so many other young and inexperienced players on offense. But it also turns out (now) that the 2012 draft wasn't as magnificent as it could have been (50% of that class is gone from here), so that only magnifies the problem of not taking highly rated linemen early.

Oh to have a tardis.

 

[nighttrain]

This

Tho I would consider waiting 2 more games

I'm sure Mannion can hand off to Gurley as well as Foles, and he might hit (probably would) hit on some passes over the middle
train

 

[Rmfnlt]

This OL is an offense killer in the state it's in. Fix that before tossing another highly drafted QB back there or we'll just be sitting here in 3-4 years talking about needing another.

Agree... I guess I'll go to my grave repeating... the game is won and lost in the trenches.

We need a QB for sure but behind the current OL it won't matter.

But, do we even know what we have for an Oline? So many changes (injuries, musical chairs, etc.) In my view, we could be sitting on a good line... or a bad one... who knows?
But, regardless, we have to continue to build it out with quality depth... just like Fisher did with the Dline.

The Rams answer is not at QB. It is time for an enema. Let's clean this up!

Again, got to start with the Oline... continue to bolster it up... I seem to recall a cliche... something like "you can never have too many quality offensive linemen" (not just warm bodies... but actual quality)..
I may be wrong about the cliche... but I firmly believe it it.

We need major line and wr help.

Oline... and better coaching. I think you can still do OK with the WR corps we have... the problem is further up the line.

Foles isn't the problem folks. Mark My Words.
And he may not be... give him some protection and some imaginative, successful play calls and you might be surprised. No one... and I mean no one, is going to thrive in this offense... with an Oline like this and play calling like this. Put Tom Brady back there and he'd fail miserably.

[QUOTE}You put any QB especially rookie QB behind the oline and Wr cast and the result is the same.
Shame on those of you looking to draft a QB over impact WR or Olineman.

Nailed it, IMHO

OK, so we draft a top QB,
-who coaches him?
-Whose plays does he run?
Without a new coaching staff, it doesn't matter who we draft.

And now we get to the heart of the matter (to me)..

The coaching staff (at least on offense) needs a complete and total overhaul.
You can fix the Oline, but if the plays are totally predictable, the offense will struggle.
You can bring in a top flight QB and put him behind a good Oline, but if you try to run the plays we are, the offense will struggle.

My suggestion:
1] Rebuild your offensive coaching staff (I'd prefer Fisher be gone, but if it could be managed that he has no, zero, zilch say in the offense I'd be OK with keeping him).
2] With a top notch Oline coach, re-assess what the hell we have. Jettison the dead weight and build it back up through free agency and the draft.
3] The new OC must clean house.. Boudreau (both of them)... gone... Boras... gone... Sherman... gone... Sirmans... gone... Smith... gone... Weinke... gone... Garcia... gone... all of them. I've seen enough to believe these men can't coach... and many of the problems (like dropped passes, for example) may be more about their inability to coach fundamentals than execution. So, they've got to go.

Do those things and you just might be surprised how the Rams are able to make do.. (be average) on offense with what they have at QB, TE and WR).

I think Fisher is wrong... it's not about the execution... if you are not being well coached, execution suffers. They need to overhaul the offensive coaching staff. And Jeff Fisher needs to stay out of it (or be gone).

My biggest worry? Who in the organization is capable of rebuilding the offensive coaching staff?

If Fisher stays... do you rely on Kroenke, Snead and Fisher to do it? (hint: we are where we are because of those men)...

Fisher was given immense power within the organization... if he stays but is stripped of a lot of that power... how do you fill the void (and keep Fisher on board)?

I don't see it working smoothly.

 

[Yamahopper]

Well if I were the GM in 2014 we would have picked Watkins at 2 and Donald at 13. I would have went line in the second round and probably third. So you guys would have been killing me for picking Watkins over Beckham.

Read on a Texan board where they were hindsighting Donald over Clowney.

 

[RamBall]

Man, I hate to say it, but it's looking like our 1st rounder will have to be a QB.

I was hoping that it could be a stud WR, DE, or MLB.

But we aren't even functional without a decent QB. We see the evidence every single week, don't we? Our O seems so helpless and it's getting worse each week.

It's starting to look like we may have a top 5 pick.

I know. I can barely type those words, much less accept them. But it doesn't make them less true.

Heck, we may have to think about an OT in the 2nd, as well.

Then again, can Fisher or his crack O coaching staff properly develop a talented QB? I dunno...

Man, I am so depressed. This is starting to feel like those Frontiere years before the GSOT...

The Rams have the draft picks to make a trade up if need be, but as you said the O coaching staff.

I keep praying that Kroenke forces Fisher to bring in an OC that is more qualified than the present and to also leave his hands out of the O. Just as Vermiel was forced to bring in Martzin 99.

 

[FrantikRam]

I don't trust Fisher with anything on offense, and what's worse, is that we can't even trust him to get out of the way.

Either way, Fisher should be gone IMO.

You have to have some foresight when thinking team needs....we need a C, WR, TE and QB.

On defense we will need depth at DE and IMO, a better starting MLB.

The poster that said we have no depth - I disagree. This team has depth. It needs better players in front of that depth at key positions on offense. That would be 5 new starters, which is probably too much for one off season. If we get lucky we'd get 2 or 3 from the draft, but that's if we're lucky. If we have to trade up for a QB, we're looking at not being competitive until 2017 IMO.

Oh and a new coaching staff.

 

[jrry32]

Why was it the wrong call to believe in Foles? The plan, I imagine, was to have him hand the ball off and build off of play-action where he was actually quite deadly in Philly. In 2013, Philly had the best rushing offense in the league and had the second most play action passes. Obviously a lot of that success was predicated on that pseudo-zone-read where defenses would wonder if Foles would hand off to McCoy or keep the ball to throw deep, or roll out, but there were TONS of big plays in that offense because of the rushing attack and the talents in the receiving game. When Foles was healthy for the last 8 games, they used play-action 39% of the time and Foles averaged 10.2 yards per attempt and threw 12 touchdowns on play-action passes. That's got Jeff Fisher written all over it.

Then they brought in a feisty back-up with the ability to make plays in Keenum and drafted a 3rd round prospect to be their future. Why would they need to draft a guy who could start right away when there really wasn't any kind of urgency? In hindsight it looks bad, but I don't recall anybody (at the time) saying that they needed to do that after they signed Foles and brought Keenum back. Remember, Bradford was only injured 1 time for 6 games before Fisher got here, and Bradford played the whole season for him in Fisher's first year. 2013 was viewed as a fluke injury by them, because Bradford was poised to have a pretty good year in 2014. *Maybe* they could have drafted a QB in 2014 (and did), but they probably really didn't need to draft a QB to start right away until this year. BUT they only would have needed to do that if they didn't make the moves they did in Foles and Keenum.

Because we have the gift of hindsight.

And frankly, they should have drafted a QB in 2014.

 

[-X-]

Because we have the gift of hindsight.

 

[jrry32]

It's the truth. They brought in the wrong guy at QB. Plus, it's not like every person here was gung ho for Foles.