 ON SOME PRESENT CHANGES & FUTURE
POSSIBILITIES, BY RAM-BLE (Feb 25) |
||
| Back
to the Main Page FEATURES- The E-Zine's Quarterback Watch- -Front Office Debate- Ram-ble's Offseason Analyses Zack Neruda's FOD Analysis "E-ZINE" Fan Profiles- GRITS Ram Fan Smack Chick The HERD's home- RAMS Message Board Add yourself to The HERD's Official Roster (guestbook), if you think you are man enough! The HERD's ULTIMATE link page-add your favorite here! |
I.
THE FRONT OFFICE 1. FREE AGENCY SO FAR. I trust Armey and Zygmunt. This is a game of the cap. So, we need to look at the value of every move. A subtle thing that's going on that's VERY smart is our signing the RFA's. The Nutten's, the Conwell's. We got them inked at very reasonable prices and have them now for a number of years. Nutten's the same as Gruttadauria IMO. So, why pay big bucks for one when you can get the other cheap? The strategy of focussing on our RFA's is important. Next year, we won't have UFA's and we'll have a team locked up to a large extent. 2. THE TUCKER FIASCO? Zack has stated and many have believed that we made a mistake with not tendering Tucker the $1mil level. The full argument makes that conclusion not so certain. Let's go thru it. If we tendered the $1mil, other teams would've had to give a #1 pick to sign Tucker. Clearly, they wouldn't and so we'd have Tucker at $1mil. But, it would only be for one year. Then, he'd be unrestricted and we'd be in a real bidding war. So, that route has glass in the road too. If, on the other hand, we did what we did and tendered $500k or so, any other team would have to give a #4 pick to sign Ryan. Now, Armey it seems thought, and it seems very reasonable, that Tucker was a $1-$1.5mil ballplayer. See, if Conwell and Nutten are $1-$1.3mil players, then a backup like Tucker should be in that range. And, if so, no team would likely be willing to give up a #4 pick for that level player. A backup. And a 3rd year guy, who still can't start. Plus, even if they offer say $1.5mil, we match and pay a little more than the $1mil tender would've cost. PLUS, we'd get to match a long-term contract, and therefore actually outsmart the other team and Tucker by getting Tucker locked in at a great long-term deal. See, $1.5mil long-term is great. But, a $1mil tender stinks, because he's then unrestricted in a year. So, we win if no one risks that 4th round pick. We win if they do, but strike a long-term contact at around $1.5mil. Great strategy! One problem. As Armey said, somebody in Miami knew Tucker was a starter, not a backup. And they knew he was worth $2.6mil per. So, we had to fork up that extra $$$. But, we got him long-term. Also, think if Miami had written that contact for something rediculous. We could've simply taken the 4th rounder then. And liked it. Let me say, tho, that it does seem that we need to study each one of these restricteds better. And not always offer the minimum. (Altho, with Tucker, the minimum makes sense) For example, Billy Jenkins or Charlie Clemons. If we offered either $1mil and linked a #1 pick to them, no one would touch either. And, we'd have both for another year. The way it was handled, we get nothing if they sign elsewhere. And, nothing is what we do get. No pick. No player. II. THE DRAFT 1. TRADING DOWN. Trading down can be a goldmine. Bill Walsh built the Niners that way. He would trade down, and then trade down again. Accumulating picks. And, when he'd finally make all those picks, he'd hit most of them. Jimmy Johnson played that card well too. It does seem that trading down is a mistake in these circumstances: * Trading down from a top pick in round #1. Unless you get A LOT. * Trading down when it's motivated by indecisiveness. Some teams don't know what to do when they're on the clock. So, they drop down, and still make a lousy pick. We did that when we traded with the Niners, where they got Bryant Young at #7 in round 1. And, we got Wayne (the Dandy) Gandy at #16 in round 1. Look, if you know value. And, know that you probably can get "Mr. Right" a little later in the round, trade down. Get the extra pick or two and take "Mr. Right". It takes knowledge of talent, the perceived value of "Mr. Right", and a gambler's instinct. Sometimes, you lose and "Mr. Right" is gone. But, not often. So, you have your cake. And eat it too. 2. SPEAKING OF WHICH---THE TRADE BETWEEN SF & WASHINGTON. Look for Bill Walsh to trade down again and again and again. Out of the first round for sure. He'll accumulate a zillion picks. And he used to hit in the old days all but about 2. So, he'll have a rebuilt team at cheap salaries. Let's hope and trust history no repeat itself. 3. THE RAMS NEXT 6th ROUND PICK. Steve Vagedes will be our 6th round pick. Who's Steve Vagedes? He's a sleeper who fills not one but two needs. He's from tiny Division 3 Ohio Northern. Vagedes is a WR, who caught 52 passes and averaged almost 20 yards per at 19.4 yds per catch. AND he's 6'3", clearly a big receiver. Clearly a big Rams need. AND as a special bonus Steve Vagedes is a punter. And he averaged more than 46 yards per punt in 1999. Armey is armed and dangerous and hunting another tiny school sleeper. III. THE COACHES. 1. AGGRESSIVE.....an understatement! Want an insight as to just how aggressive Mike Martz is? >From Sporting News lead story's leadin comes this: "It gathered dust in the playbook. Not only had the Rams not ATTEMPTED IT all season, they hadn't even PRACTICED IT since training camp, more than 5 months ago. But with score tied and 2:05 left in the biggest game of his life, offensive coordinator Mike Martz called a mouthful of a play. Twins right, ace right, 999, halfback balloon. The Rams had tried a variation of the play-two recivers on each side-regularly this season, but this was the first time they tried it with a trey to one side. The objective was to get one-on-one coverage for Bruce, who almost is impossible to defend with just one player. A couple of series earlier(using another play), when we threw it to Holt, Bruce got behind his corner and we saw it." Mike Martz is aggressive. 2. HANIFAN.......pure football coach! From The Sporting News, look at what Jim Hanifan said right after the 73 yard bomb to Bruce to win the damn Super Bowl: "Everyone was celebrating on the Rams sideline, except salty Jim Hanifan, who had some choice words for Fred Miller. Their exchange went like this: Hanifan: `Damn it, Freddy, he bulled you!' Miller: `But we scored.' Hanifan: `I don't give a damn! I'm thinking we may have to go into overtime.' The anger subsided as the clock wound down. Shortly after the game, Hanifan was expressing how `very proud' he was of Miller. `A warrior,' he called him." 3. GANSZ. Everyone wants to bash Frank Gansz. Me too. But, think about it. He said he wanted to be with his family. And that living the way he did was no life. Well, while it's true, he'll still be "living the life", there is a difference. Jacksonville is close to Atlanta. So, he can get home more often and more easily. H#ll, he can almost commute as Jacksonville is 300 miles from Atlanta. It seems like the ideal job for him. Yes, he should've been clearer on what he meant about the Rams job, but he wasn't. Frank Gansz is now almost "home" and doing what he loves. Can't blame him. He just shudda been clearer. IV. SOME PLAYERS 1. THE OL. Was just now watching the Super Bowl pre-game show. Never saw it, since I went to the game. Two or three analysts said they pick the Titans BECAUSE they are stronger and tougher up front on O and D. I agree, especially after having seen that game. Don't know how it came across on TV, but they WERE STRONGER. So, we no get better by feeding Miller and Gruttadauria, and maybe even McCollum and Tucker big bucks. Need better. 2. REPLACING FRED MILLER. There was LOTS of talk and belief that Ryan Tucker will be a fine replacement for Fred Miller. And that Todd Frohbieter might be an even better Fred Miller replacement. If Tucker was signed or not. Even Armey implied that. And I believe Frohbieter's a very good prospect. BUT on both of these fine gentlemen....lookawhat Feb 16th's INSIDE SLANT said: "The 6-6 328 lb Frohbeiter has quick enough feet to play both OT spots, but he needs A LOT OF WORK IN THE WEIGHT ROOM. Tucker played well in his brief playing time in place of Miller last season, but NOBODY IN THE RAMS ORGANIZATION IS SOLD on the idea of having him replace Miller on a full-time basis." We can believe what we choose, but this is worrisome. INSIDE SLANT is one of the major, regular publications. Like Sporting News on the net. Never seen Fro. Seen Tucker. Haven't studied him enough. I BELIEVE like we all probably believe (read hope) that Tucker will be fine and Fro will be even better some day. Here's the counterpoint on Fro. Randy Karraker said the following: "Armey had Frohbieter rated the BEST tackle in college football his (Fro's not Charley's) junior year. The Rams love him, and in fact they think that if they had signed Miller, Frohbieter would have replaced him by the end of the '00 season anyway." 3. RUNNING GAME PROBLEMS. Runnning effectiveness is NOT just the responsibility of the OL. The RB also is to be looked at. Seems to me Peyton, Brown, Taylor, Barry and more did great no matter the OL. 4. HODGINS: All-Pro pick up.....down the road. He blocks better than the best. He can catch. AND, he's 270 lbs. Who else is that at FB? Plus, he's a position switch from LB. So, he's just learning. Bottom-line, when a guy's an unusual physical speciman AND he can do the most important thing at the position excellently, ie. block, you have an All-Pro in the making! |
|