- Joined
- Aug 15, 2014
- Messages
- 6,684
Forgot we re-signed him. But Durant is probably ahead of him since he plays the slot. I guess that Ramsey and Williams are the two starting corners.Spoon behind Forbes and Durant?
Forgot we re-signed him. But Durant is probably ahead of him since he plays the slot. I guess that Ramsey and Williams are the two starting corners.Spoon behind Forbes and Durant?
Won't it be a one-year deal, and then they cut him next year?My confusion comes in that the team traded away Ramsey because they no longer wanted to pay a CB HUGE $$ in their team build. So now they are going to trade for an even older Ramsey after he's signed an even bigger contract? Unless he's taking a significant pay cut this doesn't make much sense.
Former Rams DT D'Marco Farr seems to really like the kid, too,Sorry. But I get the feeling this staff likes Kendrick for reasons none of us see. If so, I hope he shines. I’m pretty damned skeptical on that but ????
He seems to be that boom or bust player on any given play. He’ll look great on one play and then piss you off on the next. I think he’s got some tools but he needs to put two and two together.
Is it possible that they needed the cap space and didn’t actually sour on Ramsey’s ability? And, now they still like his game but hope to be able to get him at a reduced rate?My confusion comes in that the team traded away Ramsey because they no longer wanted to pay a CB HUGE $$ in their team build. So now they are going to trade for an even older Ramsey after he's signed an even bigger contract? Unless he's taking a significant pay cut this doesn't make much sense.
It's possible. I just don't remember anyone mentioning souring on his abilities. Or the meager cap savings at the time (about $5 million I think). All I recall reading was in regards to a change in philosophy in the allocation of team resources which made sense after watching KC win with a much cheaper secondary.Is it possible that they needed the cap space and didn’t actually sour on Ramsey’s ability? And, now they still like his game but hope to be able to get him at a reduced rate?
His contract is not a long term investment. Maybe they see him as a piece to a Super Bowl run this year and then release him afterwards.
I don’t think that would be the case at all.Won't it be a one-year deal, and then they cut him next year?
I agreed with your post until this sentence. The first time we traded for Ramsey he was that dude. Now he is not that dude, he is rather that overpaid vet. The rules with an overpaid vet means the price of acquisition and price of salary need to be inline with reality on the Rams side of the ledger. Otherwise we move on without him no worries.Get it done, Les. Easy or hard to do, get it done.
Who else can we get that's better, but also won't cost us draft capital for next year's Rams 10 year QB of the future? I want another Super Bowl win, no matter how much Stan pays for it!I agreed with your post until this sentence. The first time we traded for Ramsey he was that dude. Now he is not that dude, he is rather that overpaid vet. The rules with an overpaid vet means the price of acquisition and price of salary need to be inline with reality on the Rams side of the ledger. Otherwise we move on without him no worries.
If Ramsey was still a lockdown corner he would be worth "get it done Les." But you gotta be practical here and it takes two to tango.Who else can we get that's better, but also won't cost us draft capital for next year's Rams 10 year QB of the future? I want another Super Bowl win, no matter how much Stan pays for it!
I certainly wouldn't put Forbes ahead of Kendricks. His NFL tape has been much worse than Kendricks.Lol yeah probably. Or honestly if he's bad in camp this year. If the Rams trade for Ramsey, you'll have him, Forbes, Durant, Williams as the top 4 probably. And then they have ufdas that they like. He's probably on the outside looking in.
Yes it is possible that it was a cap move because I recall Snead and Demoff specifically stating this.Is it possible that they needed the cap space and didn’t actually sour on Ramsey’s ability? And, now they still like his game but hope to be able to get him at a reduced rate?
His contract is not a long term investment. Maybe they see him as a piece to a Super Bowl run this year and then release him afterwards.
I did a (potentially) dumb thing yesterday. Bought a puppy and proceeded to name him Ramsey (have liked that name for a dog for a long time). Let's hope that brings him home.
I did my part.
I question, you questioning him, with his statement from the question regarding trading for Ramsey. Truly unquestionably a good idea for some, a nightmare of others.I agreed with your post until this sentence. The first time we traded for Ramsey he was that dude. Now he is not that dude, he is rather that overpaid vet. The rules with an overpaid vet means the price of acquisition and price of salary need to be inline with reality on the Rams side of the ledger. Otherwise we move on without him no worries.
Did the same. Went with Deacon. I like names I can yell across the yard easily.I did a (potentially) dumb thing yesterday. Bought a puppy and proceeded to name him Ramsey (have liked that name for a dog for a long time). Let's hope that brings him home.
I did my part.
SHOW US, SHOW US, SHOW USSSSS!!! WE NEED PICS!!!!
I like that name a lot too! Congratz on the puppyDid the same. Went with Deacon. I like names I can yell across the yard easily.![]()
Agree with this. One of the 2 should be in horns. Insane that a young Samuel Jr is still a FA honestly.What about signing Samuel Jr instead of trading for Ramsey? That said we have plenty of draft picks next year and can easily ship one away. Just a thought.