Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, NVRamsFan said:

There's a lot of those cheering for that team honestly. 

Yeah, I live in the Midwest so there's a lot of Pack fans. Tbh, no hard feelings to GB. I'd root for them over Brady or the Saints. Just don't like to see someone jump in when they haven't discussed the game at all until final zeroes. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The positives for next year are we no we are set at RB and go 3 deep at WR (why was Jefferson not featured more this year is major mystery). Hopefully Hopkins allows 2 deep at TE. So we are looking at EDGE, OL, ILB, and a return man. Even with losing JJIII, I like Fuller, Burgess, Rapp, and Scott. 

Edited by LeotheLion
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LeotheLion said:

The positives for next year are we no we are set at RB and go 3 deep at WR. Hopefully Hopkins allows 2 deep at TE. So we are looking at EDGE, OL, ILB, and a return man. Even with losing JJIII, I like Fuller, Burgess, Rapp, and Scott. 

Let's make that return man also a deep threat and I'm good. Our offense really needs it.

For the record, I think Van can be that threat, but he wasn't used that way this year (at least after the first couple weeks).

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Ty Nsekhe is already 35 years old. Havenstein is an above average RT (at worst). He wasn't the issue today. He wasn't the issue this year. We only save $5 million cutting him. There's no reason to create another hole on the OL when Havenstein isn't a weak link.

He's not a weak link, but I think what's been made fairly apparent is that given the differing expectations of what we ask of our OT's and our OG's - as well, and probably more importantly, as what Goff needs from his OL - the idea of deputizing an eventual replacement to Whitworth at one of the guard spots isn't going to be a viable strategy.  So, if we are going to get that guy (whoever he may be) any meaningful minutes before he'd be thrust into protecting Goff's blind-side, it would come at the expense of Havenstein, almost certainly.  I'm not trying to push Rob out the door, per say, and honestly his current contract may be a sunk-cost at this point, but his level of play would need to improve if he's not going to be deemed replaceable once said contract runs out - there's little case outside of continuity to be made for him to have earned a further extension at this point.

We aid Goff the most, IMO, by doing what the Chargers pretty much never managed to do with Philip Rivers (they tried... kind of... once, but failed to keep those guys healthy): Putting an IOL in front of him that will actually push the point of the pocket versus conceding it almost immediately and allowing it to be collapsed from the inside out.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

You know I’m with you on the Bolton love, and anything can happen, but it’s hard to see a LB like him falling to #57. But anything can happen to anyone who isn’t a Top 10 lock come draft time. Id be surprised if he’s isn’t one of the first few picks of the second round at worst

We're going to have the benefit of scouting that was led by Holmes for at least this upcoming draft; yes, Holmes himself won't be here but the majority of the scouts that worked underneath him should remain (and their reports with them).  Where this will be interesting again is that with Covid - and the NFL's apparent inability to contingency plan for beans despite having 10 months to do so - we're looking at another non-traditional combine, which will affect the way the draft plays out... and will reward the teams whose scouting departments lean most heavily on dissecting tape and in-person scouting of live games (and in many cases, I expect to see a number of prospects drafted as much off their 2019 tape as their 2020 tape).  This bodes well for us in the OL category.  I have mixed feelings about how it will affect the EDGE and LB class because we're so used to seeing variances from season-to-season that A LOT of teams' boards could be really, really different (not all that different from what we saw last year).

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The LBC said:

He's not a weak link, but I think what's been made fairly apparent is that given the differing expectations of what we ask of our OT's and our OG's - as well, and probably more importantly, as what Goff needs from his OL - the idea of deputizing an eventual replacement to Whitworth at one of the guard spots isn't going to be a viable strategy.  So, if we are going to get that guy (whoever he may be) any meaningful minutes before he'd be thrust into protecting Goff's blind-side, it would come at the expense of Havenstein, almost certainly.  I'm not trying to push Rob out the door, per say, and honestly his current contract may be a sunk-cost at this point, but his level of play would need to improve if he's not going to be deemed replaceable once said contract runs out - there's little case outside of continuity to be made for him to have earned a further extension at this point.

We aid Goff the most, IMO, by doing what the Chargers pretty much never managed to do with Philip Rivers (they tried... kind of... once, but failed to keep those guys healthy): Putting an IOL in front of him that will actually push the point of the pocket versus conceding it almost immediately and allowing it to be collapsed from the inside out.

Here's my issue, Kromer and McVay seem to hate starting rookie OLs. I think the reality with Whit's replacement is that he'll probably sit next year unless Whit or Hav suffer an injury. I'm okay with that. I agree that we need a stouter IOL. I simply think getting rid of Havenstein doesn't help us towards that goal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Here's my issue, Kromer and McVay seem to hate starting rookie OLs. I think the reality with Whit's replacement is that he'll probably sit next year unless Whit or Hav suffer an injury. I'm okay with that. I agree that we need a stouter IOL. I simply think getting rid of Havenstein doesn't help us towards that goal.

Fair enough.  I'm more making the case that, at the moment, I don't see Havenstein as a long-term solution.  It's similar to how I feel about, until shown otherwise, Corbett at center, and how I felt about Blythe as center going into this season.  They're options who are under-contract and serviceable (less the case with Blythe, though he's the soonest out-of-contract), so I'm not going out of my way to replace them, but I'm also not overlooking good-to-plus value if it presents itself to me at his position just because he's there and under-contract.

I mean, at the very least, the league has shown us that at OT if you are at least 3-deep with start-able players, you're not deep enough.

Edited by The LBC
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams need a legit deep threat, continue to build the OL, and make sure to bring back JJIII. Franchise tag him or just flat out pay the man. I think getting a stud inside linebacker would be nice but its not a must. If Floyd contract is up make sure he comes back too. So I feel the draft can be for the OL and deep threat. Bring back JJIII and Floyd and the Rams are set. Hopefully Staley can come back as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The LBC said:

Fair enough.  I'm more making the case that, at the moment, I don't see Havenstein as a long-term solution.  It's similar to how I feel about, until shown otherwise, Corbett at center, and how I felt about Blythe as center going into this season.  They're options who are under-contract and serviceable (less the case with Blythe, though he's the soonest out-of-contract), so I'm not going out of my way to replace them, but I'm also not overlooking good-to-plus value if it presents itself to me at his position just because he's there and under-contract.

I mean, at the very least, the league has shown us that at OT if you are at least 3-deep with start-able players, you're not deep enough.

Hav isn't a long-term solution. He has two years remaining on the contract. I don't see him being here past that point. I could see him being let go after 2021 if a young OL shows something. But I think now isn't the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What the heck. You guys want to get rid of Hav? Did I miss the memo? He was better this year than last... The move I would like to make is to not bring back Whit and get younger. I think Noteboom is ready and played well.. Unpopular opinion but man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The LBC said:

We aid Goff the most, IMO, by doing what the Chargers pretty much never managed to do with Philip Rivers (they tried... kind of... once, but failed to keep those guys healthy): Putting an IOL in front of him that will actually push the point of the pocket versus conceding it almost immediately and allowing it to be collapsed from the inside out.

This is why I posed the question just a while ago, I wonder if Whit still has the flexibility to slide in and play that LG spot?

Seems weird to say, but there might be a better chance that we find a Tackle this off season that can sufficiently do what is needed in this offense for Goff to succeed than it would be to find that Guard (given our Cap restraints)

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, El Ramster said:

The move I would like to make is to not bring back Whit and get younger. I think Noteboom is ready and played well.. Unpopular opinion but man.

Can’t say I agree with this, even in the slightest 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...