|
On April 18 2016 01:26 AgentW wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2016 11:52 cLutZ wrote:I would be soooo happy if he never re-signed with the colts. They are the Clippers of the NFL. Might they be OKC? Blessed with incredible talent, but surround them with no help by the GM and often abysmal coaching. Also, I know I'm late to the party on this, but shouldn't the Rams know this is a horrible idea to trade for the first pick? Especially when they (allegedly) don't know who they want to take!
i don't think they would have done it if they didn't have the move to LA. I think they want to show fans that they are going all in this year and willing to shape the future of the franchise. The only thing we can really do is wait and see how well that works out.
|
On April 18 2016 01:26 AgentW wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2016 11:52 cLutZ wrote:I would be soooo happy if he never re-signed with the colts. They are the Clippers of the NFL. Also, I know I'm late to the party on this, but shouldn't the Rams know this is a horrible idea to trade for the first pick? Especially when they (allegedly) don't know who they want to take!
I don't think it's a horrible idea. Hindsight is 20/20 so if either Wentz or Goff tanks then yes it was terrible, but who knows right? If I was managing that franchise and had just relocated with nothing to lose, why not yolo it for a couple seasons, see what happens?
|
The Colts are the Pelicans. Lucked into a top pick but can't build a roster around their super star.
|
Help me out here: Which NBA team would be a good comparison for a team with no inclination to play by the rules, poor sportsmanship, and with fans which are a bunch of crybabies who like to act better than everyone else and always complain about being cheated by the refs when they get beaten?
The Pats fan salt is real in this thread and the season hasn't even started. Heck, the draft hasn't even been here yet.
|
Warriors, most dominant team in recent history who've beaten every other team so badly that the other teams fans make up scandals in order to avoid accepting they're just the better franchise.
|
On April 18 2016 07:28 Titusmaster6 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2016 01:26 AgentW wrote:On April 15 2016 11:52 cLutZ wrote:I would be soooo happy if he never re-signed with the colts. They are the Clippers of the NFL. Also, I know I'm late to the party on this, but shouldn't the Rams know this is a horrible idea to trade for the first pick? Especially when they (allegedly) don't know who they want to take! I don't think it's a horrible idea. Hindsight is 20/20 so if either Wentz or Goff tanks then yes it was terrible, but who knows right? If I was managing that franchise and had just relocated with nothing to lose, why not yolo it for a couple seasons, see what happens?
the symmetry of the situation is pretty staggering, considering these are the same Rams that traded away the second overall pick to Washington so they could take RG3. the big difference is that the Skins gave up three first rounders while LA only gave up two. they have a solid roster aside from QB, but they lost a lot in their defensive backfield and still lack a number 1 wideout, weaknesses that will be more difficult to fix without their next two top picks. time will tell, but even if the QB they draft turns out to be reasonable, I think Tennessee will be the winner of this trade
|
On April 18 2016 07:28 Titusmaster6 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2016 01:26 AgentW wrote:On April 15 2016 11:52 cLutZ wrote:I would be soooo happy if he never re-signed with the colts. They are the Clippers of the NFL. Also, I know I'm late to the party on this, but shouldn't the Rams know this is a horrible idea to trade for the first pick? Especially when they (allegedly) don't know who they want to take! I don't think it's a horrible idea. Hindsight is 20/20 so if either Wentz or Goff tanks then yes it was terrible, but who knows right? If I was managing that franchise and had just relocated with nothing to lose, why not yolo it for a couple seasons, see what happens?
The issue I have is that people say this every time something like this happens, and more often than not, it ends horribly. If you're lucky you lose, but not badly (see the Julio Jones trade). There's an "excitement tax" that is paid to do something like this and it usually hurts.
|
|
|
On April 18 2016 10:01 LeeDawg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2016 07:28 Titusmaster6 wrote:On April 18 2016 01:26 AgentW wrote:On April 15 2016 11:52 cLutZ wrote:I would be soooo happy if he never re-signed with the colts. They are the Clippers of the NFL. Also, I know I'm late to the party on this, but shouldn't the Rams know this is a horrible idea to trade for the first pick? Especially when they (allegedly) don't know who they want to take! I don't think it's a horrible idea. Hindsight is 20/20 so if either Wentz or Goff tanks then yes it was terrible, but who knows right? If I was managing that franchise and had just relocated with nothing to lose, why not yolo it for a couple seasons, see what happens? the symmetry of the situation is pretty staggering, considering these are the same Rams that traded away the second overall pick to Washington so they could take RG3. the big difference is that the Skins gave up three first rounders while LA only gave up two. they have a solid roster aside from QB, but they lost a lot in their defensive backfield and still lack a number 1 wideout, weaknesses that will be more difficult to fix without their next two top picks. time will tell, but even if the QB they draft turns out to be reasonable, I think Tennessee will be the winner of this trade
Oh absolutely I believe the Titans are the winner. I'm just trying to rationalize the Rams decision as "not horrible."
|
On April 18 2016 11:08 JimmiC wrote:
That and it all goes back to that OLD Dallas cowboys pick value chart. It is time with the changes in Cap and the game some one updated it. BTW with those old values pretty sure the Rams would win the trade. Which given most peoples reaction to it shows how outdated it is.
If you ask JJ he would laugh at people still using his chart. It was based on data from the 80s and they changed it every year.
The issue with the trade is even if the qb you pick ends up pretty good, like Matt Ryan, you still lost.
|
i was talking to my dad about the rams trade and i loved the way he put it.
"it's a hollywood trade" they gotta play up the drama being where they're at. They could have gotten a QB in other places in the draft but they're playing up to their fan base.
|
|
|
Well, if a team is poor at making draft picks, why would anybody have any confidence that they would be able to select the better of the two top quarterback choices? And if both quaterbacks perform roughly the same, they paid too much of a premium to move up.
|
On April 18 2016 11:01 AgentW wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2016 07:28 Titusmaster6 wrote:On April 18 2016 01:26 AgentW wrote:On April 15 2016 11:52 cLutZ wrote:I would be soooo happy if he never re-signed with the colts. They are the Clippers of the NFL. Also, I know I'm late to the party on this, but shouldn't the Rams know this is a horrible idea to trade for the first pick? Especially when they (allegedly) don't know who they want to take! I don't think it's a horrible idea. Hindsight is 20/20 so if either Wentz or Goff tanks then yes it was terrible, but who knows right? If I was managing that franchise and had just relocated with nothing to lose, why not yolo it for a couple seasons, see what happens? The issue I have is that people say this every time something like this happens, and more often than not, it ends horribly. If you're lucky you lose, but not badly (see the Julio Jones trade). There's an "excitement tax" that is paid to do something like this and it usually hurts.
to be fair, the Julio Jones trade only worked because Cleveland is an abomination of a franchise. not a single player they got through that trade is even on the team anymore. give any other franchise two first round picks, a second and two fourths, and they should find at least one player worth resigning. Cleveland on the other hand, not so much. I doubt this trade will be a trainwreck for either side but the draft is a team's lifeline, and high picks shouldn't be taken for granted.
|
On April 18 2016 09:46 Jaaaaasper wrote:
Warriors, most dominant team in recent history who've beaten every other team so badly that the other teams fans make up scandals in order to avoid accepting they're just the better franchise.
*every other team except Denver
For real though, the victim complex by Pats fans in this thread is real. New England is absolutely the most successful franchise of the last 15 years, but if they wanted to be given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to scandals maybe, you know, don't build a reputation for cheating. You don't have to take it personally, Pats fans aren't the ones responsible.
I like Brady/Belichick. It's a little boring seeing the Pats win all the time so I don't mind when they lose, but sugarcoating Belichick's shady history doesn't do you any favors.
|
Shady history? You mean filming a game from the wrong place? Yeah, we took the lump for that one but the impact of it was way overblown and fanned by ESPN making up the story about them taping the rams before the super bowl. The only other controversy I know he's been in is being railroaded by the NFL for the PSI of balls. If you are a Jets fan, maybe him leaving for NE after signing his contract is shady? But I personally consider it payment for poaching half our staff after the superbowl loss to the Packers.
I bitch about Refs sometimes, but name me a fan base that doesn't. The quality of refereeing is at an all time low imo and that's why people actively debate going to full time refs (although the convolution of things like what is a catch/false start/PI is really where the problem is).
|
I recognized Gene Starararatorerere (sp?) while randomly watching some March Madness this year. I found it amusing.
In terms of TL and the NFL thread, though, the Pats history includes such Pats fans as trio and usedtocare, so you have that too.
|
|
|
On April 20 2016 05:06 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2016 03:12 giftdgecko wrote:
Shady history? You mean filming a game from the wrong place? Yeah, we took the lump for that one but the impact of it was way overblown and fanned by ESPN making up the story about them taping the rams before the super bowl. The only other controversy I know he's been in is being railroaded by the NFL for the PSI of balls. If you are a Jets fan, maybe him leaving for NE after signing his contract is shady? But I personally consider it payment for poaching half our staff after the superbowl loss to the Packers.
I bitch about Refs sometimes, but name me a fan base that doesn't. The quality of refereeing is at an all time low imo and that's why people actively debate going to full time refs (although the convolution of things like what is a catch/false start/PI is really where the problem is). UMMMMMM how about filming a practice you where not allowed to and that being a important walk through at the super bowl so who knows many other times you cheated and filmed teams private practices. Then people just don't like your franchise one the AFC title game and the eventual superbowl based on the stupidest rule no one heard of and feels made up TUCK rule. Then the stupid pointless deflate shit came but was people being amazed that you got off so lightly from spygate and were trying to get there pound of flesh from that.
That never happend tho, hence the point about people making shit up about the Pats and people believing it becuase they hate the pats
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
