When you go to a game, if you go to games, are you rooting for the owner or the team on the field?
Barron is only under contract for one more year, so I think if the Rams feel OLB is a need, they probably should draft one.
Well, expansion currently isn't on the NFL's agenda, so don't see that happening.
To my knowledge he has not answered questions from St. Louis media since Fisher hiring in January 2012.
That's certainly a possibility. He didn't get much work even on the practice field at FS as a rookie.
I wouldn't necessarily call 45% high. As long as the Peacock-Blitz plan is alive and well, St. Louis has a chance.
Well, I'm not going to pretend I know what Kroenke thinks. I do know Kroenke's m.o. is not to go rogue. I also know the league has some leverage with Kroenke because he's currently not in compliance with cross-ownership rules. And I also know, as I wrote in an article last week, there are financial penalties now in place in the NFL if an owner moves without owners approval.
Get a starting-caliber QB to truly compete with Bradford; add a starting LG and C, find a No.1 WR. Re-sign Kendricks, Britt, and Barksdale (if the price is right.)
There currently are a couple of prospective free-agent centers available. including Oakland's Stefen Wisniewski. I'd certainly check them out.
I don't think you can call what's happening in St. Louis "negotiation" as far as Kroenke is concerned.
We'll see. They haven't always been good at keeping their own.
Don't you think a healthy amount of that profit would have to go to the actual team owner? I don't think Kroenke would go through all this trouble (and cost) to build a stadium in LA to be a landlord.
If I'm saying it's 45-55 that the team stays here beyond 2015, I guess that means it's 55-45 the team is playing in LA in 2016.
I've mentioned this before. I'm hearing tight ends coach Rob Boras could be an in-house candidate.
Don't think that will happen, especially since they were the Los Angeles Rams for nearly 50 years.
Let's not overreact to Hackett. All I've tweeted is that he's on the Rams radar. The Rams have talked about Hackett. That doesn't mean he's even a serious candidate.
Mason seems pretty durable, at least based on what we've seen in 2014. I think he'd have a good shot at 1,000 if he's the opening day starter. As for Quick, if he comes back healthy and gets in enough training camp and preseason work coming off the shoulder surgery _ I'd day yes.
Interesting question. I don't think he's at that point, particularly with the success of run-oriented Seattle and to a lesser degree San Francisco in his own backyard.
Haven't studied him much at this point. I wonder if he's a better runner than thrower at this point. Would he stay with his progressions in the NFL and hang in the pocket, or take off at the first sign of trouble in the pocket?
I don't think either will be there at 10. (And that's if Mariota comes out.)
Normally, if an "in-house" free agent isn't re-signed before the end of his last season under contract, not much happens until right around NFL Combine time or later. That's what I anticipate from the Rams this time.
Good question. The Rams want that to happen. But they already have the money budgeted for Sam, and will have pretty good cap space. So if they don't have many other strong options at QB (draft, free agent, trade), I guess it's conceivable Bradford could be back at $13 million.