PDA

View Full Version : Sanchez to Rams Rumor


RWills
04-22-2009, 12:09 AM
Not sure who it was on NFL radio but claimed that he will not be suprised id Sanchez goes to the Rams (I highly doubt that)

MooshooGawd
04-22-2009, 12:20 AM
Why wouldn't it? I suggested that St. Louis should look at Stafford and Sanchez last month and everyone disregarded it because they just had to have an OT.

But it makes sense. Bulger was bench how many times in the last few years? On top of that he now has even less weapons. This is a team clearly in a rebuilding mode, so why not get your franchise QB?

Mr.Regular
04-22-2009, 12:25 AM
I doubt it.
Its been made to seem that to get Sanchez you'll have to move ahead of Seattle to get him and everyone and their mother knows that Kansas City desperately wants to move down... so St.Louis is attempting to make it look like that if you want to get Sanchez that you'll have to trade up to #2, not #3.

That'd be my guess, but who knows.

holt_bruce81
04-22-2009, 12:25 AM
Sanchez is probably a smokescreen but hey, Marc Bulger has played terrible the last two seasons.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/

If the run-up to the draft weren’t crazy enough, word is now emerging that the St. Louis Rams are considering two candidates with the second overall pick: tackle Eugene Monroe, and quarterback Mark Sanchez.

The shocker is Sanchez. The Rams have Marc Bulger under contract. (Then again, I’ve recently suggested that now might be the time to trade him.)

It could be that the Rams are merely hoping to cajole one of the teams in the teens who supposedly are interested in Sanchez (Broncos, Redskins, Jets) into believing that the only way to be sure that they’ll get the former USC signal-caller is to move all the way to No. 2.

That's the latest news.

The Legend
04-22-2009, 12:29 AM
Marc Bulger sucks and they need a future QB, but I don't see him going to the Rams. I also don't see him making it out of the top 5. I've been saying he was going to be Seahawk for sometime now and I believe thats where he will end up.

yodabear
04-22-2009, 12:31 AM
I don't think Bulger sucks, he would be affective with an OL ahead of him. A good quarterback cannot be very good throwing passes from his back. Where is Mark Schlereth when u need him. We draft Smith or Monroe NOW!

TACKLE
04-22-2009, 12:33 AM
'Sanchez to Rams'

Stop selling it because I'm not buying it.

Texas Homer
04-22-2009, 12:36 AM
I don't see it.

Menardo75
04-22-2009, 12:37 AM
I really think they should take Sanchez if they don't plan on going back to that quick read system. I don't think they will though.

As I remember it was about this time exactly that reports came out of St. Louis that they were interested in Darren McFadden.

Geo
04-22-2009, 12:37 AM
This is so obvious, it's pathetic. They're just saying Sanchez now in hopes that a team will trade up for him.

Flyboy
04-22-2009, 12:37 AM
Need a question mark at the end of the thread title imo

yodabear
04-22-2009, 12:37 AM
Need a question mark at the end of the thread title imo

It does, scared the epic fail out of me.

TACKLE
04-22-2009, 12:39 AM
St.Louis is usually very safe and predictable come draft day. Their last three picks Chris Long, Adam Carriker and Tye Hill all fall into that category.

FrankGore
04-22-2009, 01:14 AM
Every team is puffing Sanchez smoke in desperate hopes of kickstarting some trade talks. It started with Jacksonville at #8, then moved to Cleveland at #5, Seattle at #4, now St. Louis at #2...tomorrow we will probably hear about Detroit suddenly bringing in Sanchez's agent for negotiations.

I bet you anything he at least gets to #8.

Addict
04-22-2009, 03:21 AM
It does, scared the epic fail out of me.

no, it's still there, yoda ;)

Crickett
04-22-2009, 03:24 AM
I don't think Bulger sucks, he would be affective with an OL ahead of him.

TRUE FRANCHISE QUARTERBACKS don't need an OL ahead of them. They conjure pass protection with the power of their MINDS!!!!

D-Unit
04-22-2009, 03:49 AM
This is so obvious, it's pathetic. They're just saying Sanchez now in hopes that a team will trade up for him.
Glad I'm not the only one sees through the smoke.

Paranoidmoonduck
04-22-2009, 04:09 AM
This is so obvious, it's pathetic. They're just saying Sanchez now in hopes that a team will trade up for him.

Well, umm, yes. I don't really think they're trying to fool anyone with this. A team would have no reason to honestly announce/hint/leak anything at this point, especially it effectively cuts down their options to two.

St. Louis does a few things with this though (in theory, anyway). They implicate that they are willing to trade and if a team is looking to move ahead of Seattle for Sanchez, they would be as worth a call at #2 as Kansas City would be at #3.

As for the Monroe thing, I'm guessing that this is an attempt to counteract the attempt by some teams to drive his value down as much as possible. Whether they like Monroe more than Smith or not is hard to tell, and they could well be looking more seriously at Monroe, but if their intent is to instigate trade talks, keeping Monroe's stock higher is a smart move.

jnew76
04-22-2009, 04:14 AM
If the Rams had any sense they would have begun this whole charade 2 weeks ago. They should have invited Sanchez in and then sent everyone including the towel boy to SC to see him in person.

Bulger has played bad enough to warrant consideration for both Stafford and Sanchez. They could have played this so much better than they have. They have no imagination when it comes to the draft.

If I am the Rams I would even seriously consider taking him at 2 and then shopping him... Similar to the San Diego situation with Eli. If I cannot get value for him, I keep him and rebuild around him. You could do worse than being stuck with Sanchez at 2.

I think the Rams have done a pathetic job of even trying to play the game.

Sveen
04-22-2009, 04:20 AM
I think the Rams spread this rumor themselves as an effort to create some interest for the #2 pick. They would probably don't mind trading down some picks.

Matthew Jones
04-22-2009, 09:15 AM
This is so obvious, it's pathetic. They're just saying Sanchez now in hopes that a team will trade up for him.

This. They've been talking about Jason Smith and Eugene Monroe for a while, they're not just going to reverse course and take Sanchez.

killxswitch
04-22-2009, 09:22 AM
I'll eat my own ass cheeks if they draft Sanchez. If anything that team needs to build more around the running game while Jackson is still young. Bulger is good enough, if overpaid.

initial_flo
04-22-2009, 09:31 AM
I'm just surprised this rumor didn't come sooner.

Brent
04-22-2009, 09:51 AM
If the Rams had any sense they would have begun this whole charade 2 weeks ago. They should have invited Sanchez in and then sent everyone including the towel boy to SC to see him in person.

Bulger has played bad enough to warrant consideration for both Stafford and Sanchez. They could have played this so much better than they have. They have no imagination when it comes to the draft.

If I am the Rams I would even seriously consider taking him at 2 and then shopping him... Similar to the San Diego situation with Eli. If I cannot get value for him, I keep him and rebuild around him. You could do worse than being stuck with Sanchez at 2.

I think the Rams have done a pathetic job of even trying to play the game.
This is pretty much exactly how I feel.

I'll eat my own ass cheeks if they draft Sanchez.
I hope they do take him just to see you attempt this.

espnhatesthe49ers
04-22-2009, 09:51 AM
Trading a top four pick is barely a possibility anymore. Every year they try to drum up interest and the other teams just laugh them off.

I think it goes deeper than that. St Louis sees Seattle at 4 looking seriously at Sanchez. Having a potential great QB fall into a division rivals lap is scary stuff especially if you passed the guy up. I'm not surprised that they're taking a bigger look at Sanchez. Do they end up taking him? Of course not.

killxswitch
04-22-2009, 09:53 AM
I hope they do take him just to see you attempt this.

I'll post it up on youtube if I can find someone to hold the camera.

bored of education
04-22-2009, 09:53 AM
I'll post it up on youtube if I can find someone to hold the camera.

you aren't that skilled? get practicing pal

Flyboy
04-22-2009, 09:55 AM
I hope they do take him just to see you attempt this.

I'm with you. Talk about entertaining.

triggernome
04-22-2009, 10:03 AM
I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the Rams took Sanchez. Bulger hasn't been a picture of health or consistency for the last few years, and usually a new regime likes to put its own quarterback in place ASAP. I do think they'll take an OT at #2, but Sanchez still makes a lot of sense.

LLoyd Floyd-Boyd
04-22-2009, 10:14 AM
If the Rams had any sense they would have begun this whole charade 2 weeks ago. They should have invited Sanchez in and then sent everyone including the towel boy to SC to see him in person.



They did.

I still think it will be Monroe or Smith though.

picklefork
04-22-2009, 11:26 AM
As a person who lives in STL, eats/sleeps/craps Rams football, I can honestly tell you Sanchez is in play in STL.

Bulger has not been good or healthy, he is 32, has play a full season 1 time and the Rams can actually get out from under his contract after this seasons, a contract that will almost surely be sent packing.

So if you have a new GM, a new HC and a whole new offensive coaching staff, all with a window of 2 to 3 years...why is taking a QB so far fetched?

Are the Rams and Seahawks really that different in terms of situation and needs? Yet its totally plausible that they take Sanchez even know they have a more established and productive QB on the roster.

To me if they arent sold 100% of either of the LT's, then they take Sanchez.

Chris Long was the pick last year b/c they fell in love with his personality, same could happen with Sanchez.

I still believe Monroe is the pick, but this "it will never happen stuff" might look quite foolish in a couple of days.

3pac
04-22-2009, 11:28 AM
I agree with the previous poster. They need a QB for the same reasons that Detroit says they need one. If they like the guy, why not get him?

killxswitch
04-22-2009, 11:39 AM
As a person who lives in STL, eats/sleeps/craps Rams football, I can honestly tell you Sanchez is in play in STL.

Bulger has not been good or healthy, he is 32, has play a full season 1 time and the Rams can actually get out from under his contract after this seasons, a contract that will almost surely be sent packing.

So if you have a new GM, a new HC and a whole new offensive coaching staff, all with a window of 2 to 3 years...why is taking a QB so far fetched?

Are the Rams and Seahawks really that different in terms of situation and needs? Yet its totally plausible that they take Sanchez even know they have a more established and productive QB on the roster.

To me if they arent sold 100% of either of the LT's, then they take Sanchez.

Chris Long was the pick last year b/c they fell in love with his personality, same could happen with Sanchez.

I still believe Monroe is the pick, but this "it will never happen stuff" might look quite foolish in a couple of days.

IMO neither the Rams nor the Hawks will take a QB. You obviously will know more about your team than an outsider like me (though I was born in StL so I keep tabs on the Rams and Cards). But sometimes an outsider is not burdened with the frustration that goes along with being a hometown fan in a bad situation.

Bulger has obviously been a disappointment, and I'm sure watching Warner's success in AZ is galling. But last I heard the team was set to give the ball to Jackson as much as possible, right? Isn't a top OL pick (which at #2 you'll obviously have) a better option in light of that?

edit: also, it's good to hear Bulger's cap hit goes down after this season. Though considering this is the last capped year under the current CBA who knows what will happen. Hopefully the Rams can unload him.

picklefork
04-22-2009, 12:07 PM
I still think it will be a LT at #2, but if the Rams coaches dont believe Bulger is the answer and you know your likely going to cut him after the year, you might want to get the QB process started.

I guess the thinking is..you need a LT and a QB for the future...you might, might being the key word, be able to get a LT at pick #35..you wont have that chance of taking a QB.

But the Rams do contradict themselves a bit, saying Sanchez and his potential and upside make them really want him and then the next day Billy Devaney talks about his mentor Bethard's choice of Ryan Leaf which basically tainted a great career. He went to say that taking a safe choice is vital.

Taking an underclassman QB at #2 is anything but safe...so again, what to believe

To me its not a question if the Rams need or can take a QB at #2...I think its is Sanchez that good or worthy of the pick?

Rams QB situation is bad, even when Bulger was at his best he still never posted a 25 TD season and cant stay healthy.

HawkeyeFan
04-22-2009, 12:08 PM
I'd rather the Rams draft Stafford than Sanchez, but I hope we end up with Curry.

Having two Quarterbacks tied up in over $100 million?

Why the Bengals
04-22-2009, 12:25 PM
I think they are full fledge rebuild mode and will be picking in the Top 15 again next year. If they were smart they would look at the future QB's for next years draft and if they see no franchise QB than Stafford or Sanchez has to be an option. It's the same debate for many teams possible franchise QB with no one to block for him or franchise LT with no qb.

yodabear
04-23-2009, 05:21 PM
TRUE FRANCHISE QUARTERBACKS don't need an OL ahead of them. They conjure pass protection with the power of their MINDS!!!!

Meh, I would prolly agree with that, but really I don't see Sanchez or Stafford being franchise QBs, so I want us to take a OT. They will prolly be solid pros, but not like Peyton Manning or Tom Brady or anything like that.

Dark Knight01
04-23-2009, 05:39 PM
I doubt it.
Its been made to seem that to get Sanchez you'll have to move ahead of Seattle to get him and everyone and their mother knows that Kansas City desperately wants to move down... so St.Louis is attempting to make it look like that if you want to get Sanchez that you'll have to trade up to #2, not #3.

That'd be my guess, but who knows.





Exactly! All smokescreens!

Except I really think the Hawks might take him.

ramsfan308
04-23-2009, 09:27 PM
Why is it necessary to spend a top five pick on a left tackle to have a good offensive line? Several championship teams in the past have had offensive lines without any first rounders on it.


From Bermie Miklasz...
"New England won three Super Bowls and went 16-0 in another season with Matt Light at LT, and he was a 2nd round draft choice, No. 48 overall. The starters at RT during the Patriots' run included Brendan Gorin.

Same is true of the entire O-line ... better load up with premium draft picks.

The Patriots won three Super Bowls with a slightly different cast each time (except for Light).... there were 8 primary starters over those three seasons.

1 guy drafted in the 1st round (C-G D. Woody).
1 guy drafted in the 2nd round
1 guy drafted in the 3rd round
1 guy drafted in the 4th round
1 guy drafted in the 5th round
2 guys who weren't drafted at all.

Somehow, 3 Super Bowl rings came out of that cobbled together O-line."

So...it can be done.

MidSouthRam
04-23-2009, 09:41 PM
I strongly disagreed with a poster on this board regarding the Rams selecting Stafford with the #2 pick about a month or two ago. Didn't think there was any chance of them taking a QB. But, from what I'm gathering it appears that where there is "smoke" there is fire.

Rams are starting over and are switching to a WCO with a power run game. Gone are Holt and Pace and Bulger could be next in 2010. Sanchez is supposed to be a good fit for the WCO and the best fit at OT for a power run game is Andre Smith, whom they are not high on due to his offseason antics.

BTW, the Rams did send a large contingent to USC to see Sanchez. And they did bring him into Rams Park. And Bulger has been struggling and doesn't come close to showing the leadership traits (if any) of Sanchez.

In the end, I still think the Rams go with Eugene Monroe or even Aaron Curry, but the Sanchez lovefest appears to be real.

rockio42
04-23-2009, 09:44 PM
Smokescreen, Smokescreen, Smokescreen...

Spags and Deveaney have already stated that they want a power-running offense that runs through SJax and they do that by drafting a...QB??? I'm not saying it's impossible, cause anything can happen, but I'm just saying that it seems that the offense requires a couple things...overall beast RB (Steven Jackson), power-blocking FB (Mike Karney, a FA), game-managing QB (Bulger), big, physical, run-blocking OL (Jason Brown, a FA) and with the reports that the Rams love Jason Smith's tenacity and overall demeanor it seems as though Sanchez just doesn't make much sense...but in the draft, what does...

ramsfan308
04-23-2009, 10:07 PM
Smokescreen, Smokescreen, Smokescreen...

Spags and Deveaney have already stated that they want a power-running offense that runs through SJax and they do that by drafting a...QB??? I'm not saying it's impossible, cause anything can happen, but I'm just saying that it seems that the offense requires a couple things...overall beast RB (Steven Jackson), power-blocking FB (Mike Karney, a FA), game-managing QB (Bulger), big, physical, run-blocking OL (Jason Brown, a FA) and with the reports that the Rams love Jason Smith's tenacity and overall demeanor it seems as though Sanchez just doesn't make much sense...but in the draft, what does...

Even power running teams only run the ball about 60% of the time...so you still need a good quarterback.

rockio42
04-24-2009, 07:58 AM
Even power running teams only run the ball about 60% of the time...so you still need a good quarterback.

And behind a better and more cohesive OL I have full confidence that Bulger can maage the game and get back to 2006 form...

MidSouthRam
04-24-2009, 04:24 PM
And behind a better and more cohesive OL I have full confidence that Bulger can maage the game and get back to 2006 form...


But do the Rams?

According to one of the local columnist (Bernie Mikalaz or something), the Rams have made and are taking calls on moving Bulger. Jets are said to be interested.

yodabear
04-24-2009, 05:34 PM
Some dude on NFL Network just said the Rams have Mark Sanchez scheduled to come to St. Louis on Sunday.....

Nalej
04-24-2009, 05:36 PM
Some dude on NFL Network just said the Rams have Mark Sanchez scheduled to come to St. Louis on Sunday.....

Uhhh... as the 2nd pick taken
or is that guy that reported it a dumb---?

yodabear
04-24-2009, 05:38 PM
Uhhh... as the 2nd pick taken
or is that guy that reported it a dumb---?

I am defntly going with the guy is a dumbass. As one dude said, we are one of the safest teams on draft day, we will take Jason Smith tomorrow.