PDA

View Full Version : Is Matt Stafford really out of the question for the Rams?


holt_bruce81
03-19-2009, 07:38 PM
Just thinking about this. Marc Bulger since signing his huge contract has been one of the worst Quarterbacks in the league. He has more Interceptions that he does Touchdowns (22/28) in the past 2 seasons and has a CMP% of less that 60% (57.7) in that span. I don't think the Rams are going to keep throwing Bulger out there just because his contract. One more year for Bulger to prove he's still a top 10 Quarterback in the NFL or In my opinion the Rams are going to send him packing.

If the Rams feel like Stafford is a Franchise Quarterback, I don't see why they wouldn't take him. Can't they make the contract to where Stafford is getting a lot of his money at the back end of it? That way Stafford isn't making 8+ million sitting on the bench next season.

Mr. Hero
03-19-2009, 07:46 PM
I think you have a point, although just to nitpick your post I can't see anyway for Bulger to become a top ten QB.

holt_bruce81
03-19-2009, 07:47 PM
I think you have a point, although just to nitpick your post I can't see anyway for Bulger to become a top ten QB.

After the 2006 season, many people (including me) had him as a top 10 Quarterback.

Crickett
03-19-2009, 07:49 PM
Just thinking about this. Marc Bulger since signing his huge contract has been one of the worst Quarterbacks in the league. He has more Interceptions that he does Touchdowns (22/28) in the past 2 seasons and has a CMP% of less that 60% (57.7) in that span. I don't think the Rams are going to keep throwing Bulger out there just because his contract. One more year for Bulger to prove he's still a top 10 Quarterback in the NFL or In my opinion the Rams are going to send him packing.

If the Rams feel like Stafford is a Franchise Quarterback, I don't see why they wouldn't take him. Can't they make the contract to where Stafford is getting a lot of his money at the back end of it? That way Stafford isn't making 8+ million sitting on the bench next season.

I'm sorry, but I've already seen this episode and I know how it ends.

http://media.scout.com/media/image/53/538424.jpg

holt_bruce81
03-19-2009, 07:50 PM
I'm sorry, but I've already seen this episode and I know how it ends.

http://media.scout.com/media/image/53/538424.jpg

Saying Stafford is the next Carr?

Mr. Hero
03-19-2009, 07:51 PM
Since then a lot of young QBs have started taking up those spots, after 2006 Big Ben, Phillip Rivers, Eli, Jay Cutler, Tony Romo, etc. hadn't really established themselves. I feel like the league has gotten stronger at QB these past few years and that is why I just can't imagine Bulger being a top ten QB.

Crickett
03-19-2009, 07:53 PM
Saying Stafford is the next Carr?

Given the state of St. Louis' offensive line....... he would be. Do the Rams even have two offensive tackles right now?

StorminNorman
03-19-2009, 07:55 PM
I'm sorry, but I've already seen this episode and I know how it ends.

http://media.scout.com/media/image/53/538424.jpg

:rolleyes:

How good would Carr of been if Houston had an offensive line? St. Louis's line right now, as bad as it is, is better than Houston's through Carr's tenure.

Also Carr and Stafford are very different prospects. Stafford has played in an elite conference against NFL defensive schemes against NFL talent.

Crickett
03-19-2009, 07:56 PM
:rolleyes:

How good would Carr of been if Houston had an offensive line? Detroit's line right now, as bad as it is, is better than Houston's through Carr's tenure.


Psst, don't look now but, this title of this thread is "Is Matt Stafford really out of the question for the Rams?"

holt_bruce81
03-19-2009, 07:57 PM
Given the state of St. Louis' offensive line....... he would be. Do the Rams even have two offensive tackles right now?

Bulger kind of makes the Offensive Line look worse than what it really is. He has absolutely no pocket presence. And in the past 3 seasons Bulgers been sacked an average of 3 times per game. Any other Quarterback who has started for the Rams in the span has been sacked an average of 1.5 times per game.

LonghornsLegend
03-19-2009, 08:01 PM
I think that option went flying out of the window when they let Pace go, and they probably want to compete with SJax in his prime and a rookie QB doesn't really do that for you...If you kept Pace he could protect Stafford for a few years and you could develop a LT behind him, but the chances are pretty slim that they opted to let Pace walk and then intend to draft a rookie QB, doesn't make much sense.


They still need WR's too, it's just not the best situation to be drafting a rookie QB into yet, get a stud LT like Jason Smith, get another starting caliber WR opposite Avery, and your ready to take your guy.

Crickett
03-19-2009, 08:10 PM
In the past 3 years, Bulger has failed to start in 5 games. Four in 2007, one in 2008.

Brock Berlin, 1 start, 0 sacks in that start
Trent Green, 1 start, 2 sacks in that start. He played in three games, one where he went 5-10 with no sacks (meaning he didn't drop back to pass very much) and one where he went 16-30 with four sacks (uh huh).
Gus Frerotte, 3 starts, 7 sacks in those starts.

And again. That was with Orlando Pace. They let him go. They let his backup Adam Goldberg go too.

NotRickJames
03-19-2009, 08:15 PM
Maybe they wouldn't draft him because they don't want him leaving the field in a stretcher.....? Quarterback isn't the biggest problem for the Rams, the offensive line is. They should take a good, long hard look at Eugene Monroe, Jason Smith, or Oher with their pick. You build the trenches first, then you go from there.

StorminNorman
03-19-2009, 08:16 PM
Psst, don't look now but, this title of this thread is "Is Matt Stafford really out of the question for the Rams?"

Well then posting a picture of David Carr holding a Houston Texans jersey as the first pick in the draft is as completely out of place as an explanation why the two are not comparable.

EDIT: Lions was a typo.

Halsey
03-19-2009, 08:22 PM
The Rams are one of those teams that many people think are ok at QB, but will look back this time next year and say "yep, they needed a QB". Yeah, they need other positions too, but a QB is never a bad pick when you need one. Some fans will insist that picking a QB in round 1 somehow prevents a team from building an O-line, but that's just nonsense. It doesn't really matter though because Stafford is going #1.

Crickett
03-19-2009, 08:22 PM
Well then posting a picture of David Carr holding a Houston Texans jersey as the first pick in the draft is as completely out of place as an explanation why the two are not comparable.


Well I couldn't find any pictures of quarterbacks drafted second and then going on to break sacked records.

Babylon
03-19-2009, 09:26 PM
More realistic is the Rams trade Bulger and the top pick for Cutler. I think Bulger could be looked at as a viable option for the Broncos(not sure i agree) and with the #2 pick they can draft an Aaron Curry. Just my take.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
03-19-2009, 09:43 PM
The Rams really liked Cutler a few years ago and ironically traded out of the spot where he was drafted.

I would be surprised if they went QB at #2, because of the OT need, but yeah, I don't think Bulger is the long term answer.

Bald_81
03-20-2009, 01:20 AM
He's not out of the question, but the fact that Devaney went to the Virginia Pro Day instead of Georgia's should tell you where the teams intentions lie. Personally, I hate the excuses that Bulger's contract prohibits us from taking him. The Jags at #8 are widely speculated to take him or Sanchez if they are there and they just gave Garrard an identical contract to Bulger's last off season.

Granted, we did have representives at Georgia and they were probably for him. It was most likely just our QBs coach though. If I could get some confirmation on who was there that would be great.

jsa230
03-20-2009, 01:24 AM
Staffor will go to the lions, mark my word it is a lock after his good but not great pro day. If i am wrong stafford wont make it out of the top 5

Paranoidmoonduck
03-20-2009, 01:37 AM
I think it's likely that the Rams look closely at drafting a quarterback in April, but they are guaranteed a shot at either Jason Smith or Eugene Monroe, if not their choice of either, and after cutting Pace I think it would a mistake to not capitalize on that.

MenOfTroy
03-20-2009, 03:04 AM
I don't think Stafford is out of the question for the Rams, but it just isn't very likely.

1) Desperately need a left tackle, and there are really good ones available
2) Too much money invested in Bulger

If anything, I don't think Stafford gets past Seattle if he drops to #4.

Iamcanadian
03-20-2009, 03:12 AM
Unfortunately when your management team stinks and cannot evaluate talent, they make huge mistakes which a team can pay a penalty for and it may be years before it can be corrected. When St. Louis signed Bugler, they made a huge mistake and you may have to wait till his contract is done before they can do much about it.

PACKmanN
03-20-2009, 03:35 AM
yes it is. Your taking a young guy, who needs developing still to this day, doesn't have anything on the offense, other then Jackson, and an above average o-line. Your basically doing the same thing the 49ers did with Smith.

wicket
03-20-2009, 03:46 AM
With the difference that Matthew Stafford has all the experience in the world in playing behind an awfull line. His targets were allright and he had a nice running game but the georgia line was one of the worst in the entire sec.

Cicero
03-20-2009, 09:13 AM
One word. Yes.