Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Rams with the 1st pick in 2012 draft


Mania

Recommended Posts

Fair enough....I was banking on Landrys trade value, but I totally understand that coming off an injury and likely with the tag on him, he wont be as attractice as I may think. Gaffney has had a big yr, and I was hoping to capitalize on that saying the Rams would be keeping a top 10 pick, getting a 2nd next yr plus 2 potential starters, 1 whom has the talent to be a mega playmaker. I would love to be able to keep our 2nd this yr though, if not then maybe we include it and target Nate Potter later in the draft. How about this one:

Landry, Gaffney, (2011) 1st, 2nd (2012) 2nd? Is that enough or do we have to include the 2012 1st rounder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Landry, Gaffney, (2011) 1st, 2nd (2012) 2nd? Is that enough or do we have to include the 2012 1st rounder?

Do you know what year it is? ;)

---------- Post added December-31st-2011 at 03:29 PM ----------

Landry, Gaffney, (2011) 1st, 2nd (2012) 2nd? Is that enough or do we have to include the 2012 1st rounder?

To answer your question, there's no way we make this trade without giving up at least our 2012 first rounder and 2013 first rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not be surprised if it took three firsts and someone like Trent Williams. If it happens, it is going to have to be a blockbuster, because too many teams will be in the bidding war. I for one am in favor of trading to number one or two if that is the guy the organization believes can lead the team for the next dozen years or so. Many of you are going to say we overpaid if this goes down, but I am sick of losing seasons. My ten year old is losing faith. I need a decent year to keep him on board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an idea

Let's trade the best picks in our next three drafts, plus the guys we've chosen first in two of the last three drafts, and in return we'll get a question mark at QB!

Who cares if we weaken the overall team considerably and cripple our ability to recoup the lost players with anything resembling their current talent level, we'll have a QB!

This is building through the draft! Finally we're getting it right!

Instead of wasting a ton of money and crippling our team for the future by purchasing free agents that underachieve because their cap hits won't allow for additional talent to go with them, now we'll waste all of our draft picks (both future and past) and throw away talent we've already grown in order to put one guy on the team, who will underachive because we've gotten rid of quality pieces already in place, and crippled our ability to replace them!

~ES Nation

Not to mention that most of the winning teams recently seem to get their QBs outside the first 5 picks so its only logical that we dive in for all the marbles.

Here's a question to the ES statistic detectives or anyone who knows this off the top of their head. Which players/teams have traded the house for a draft pick and how have they done? The only one coming up for me is Ricky Williams, and that was a giant fail for Ditka and the Saints. Eli Manning also comes to mind, but Rivers was ultimately the trade bait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think it's a dumb idea and scoff at the idea that this thread was even started.

We aren't giving up enough for Bradford. ;)

Is Bradford still a good QB or is it lack of picks (ol, wr) around him bringing his game down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Bradford still a good QB or is it lack of picks (ol, wr) around him bringing his game down?

Although we as Redskins fans would like to think differently, we are just as bad as the Rams. Bradford hasn't turned the Rams into a great football team. Why should we give up a pick in hopes that Bradford would perform better for our team?

Either way... if I were the Rams, I'd hold onto Bradford and trade that first overall pick for a laundry list of picks to improve the rest of the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although we as Redskins fans would like to think differently, we are just as bad as the Rams. Bradford hasn't turned the Rams into a great football team. Why should we give up a pick in hopes that Bradford would perform better for our team?

Either way... if I were the Rams, I'd hold onto Bradford and trade that first overall pick for a laundry list of picks to improve the rest of the team.

Oh i would as well, the Rams are in a decent position once they decide which route to go.

If they do decide to part with Bradford pending a regime change in St Louis i'd be interested to know what it would take to get SB. Gotta be a helluva lot cheaper than modern tradeups for the first overall pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although we as Redskins fans would like to think differently, we are just as bad as the Rams. Bradford hasn't turned the Rams into a great football team. Why should we give up a pick in hopes that Bradford would perform better for our team?

Either way... if I were the Rams, I'd hold onto Bradford and trade that first overall pick for a laundry list of picks to improve the rest of the team.

We aren't nearly as bad as the Rams, they severely lack direction and depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We aren't nearly as bad as the Rams, they severely lack direction and depth.

But they have a franchise QB.

I would gladly trade places with them. Especially if they have the number 1 pick. One trade back would give them a huge improvement in depth over the next two drafts.

---------- Post added January-1st-2012 at 01:03 AM ----------

If i were the Rams GM, I would trade Bradford ... not Luck!

Just sayin.

They really can't because of his contract. Bradford signed a 60 million dollar deal. Not many teams can take that kind of.cap hit right now. Not without restructuring it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they have a franchise QB.

I would gladly trade places with them. Especially if they have the number 1 pick. One trade back would give them a huge improvement in depth over the next two drafts.

---------- Post added January-1st-2012 at 01:03 AM ----------

They really can't because of his contract. Bradford signed a 60 million dollar deal. Not many teams can take that kind of.cap hit right now. Not without restructuring it.

I would never trade places with the Rams, whats the point of having a franchise Qb if your defense is horrible, and he is playing behind a horrible O-line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Bradford still a good QB or is it lack of picks (ol, wr) around him bringing his game down?

He is still a good QB but he desperately needs some help at the other positions. When I see Bradford & the Rams , I see Terry Bradshaw & the Steelers.

It took Bradshaw a few years to get going, but in the beginning the team was awful and so was Bradshaw. The Steelers finally drafted guys like Harris, Swann, Webster, Lambert etc. and the rest is history.

The Rams need to trade the pick and get as many picks as they can. They would be foolish to give up on Bradford for a shiny new toy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would never trade places with the Rams, whats the point of having a franchise Qb if your defense is horrible, and he is playing behind a horrible O-line.

I agree. I think the way that Allen and Shanahan are building this team makes a ton of sense. Get some pieces, some depth, and don't over-reach for one position. Once you have enough pieces in place, then go after the QB. Why waste 2-4 years of a young QB while you try and build the roster? It's going to take the Rams 2-3 more years to get enough talent to compete, and then you've blown the first 5 years of your #1 overall pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. I think the way that Allen and Shanahan are building this team makes a ton of sense. Get some pieces, some depth, and don't over-reach for one position. Once you have enough pieces in place, then go after the QB. Why waste 2-4 years of a young QB while you try and build the roster? It's going to take the Rams 2-3 more years to get enough talent to compete, and then you've blown the first 5 years of your #1 overall pick.

I guess the same argument can be made for Trent Williams. Why draft him when his shelf life (10 years probably) is half used up by the time you're a decent team.

To me you start with QB because 1. it takes the longest for them to develop, 2. they tend to play longer than other positions because it's lower rate of contact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...