Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Hadn't thought it in those terms, but generally I agree. What about AD?

December 16, 2017 04:06AM
Really, this weak link/ strong link theory plays into exactly what my (rather unpopular) viewpoint is about Aaron Donald: NO DT is worth the kind of money that Suh earns, and Donald is bound to want more... and his hold out provides evidence of this. The position of DT doesn't it lend itself to the game impact that a QB or CB does, for example, nor that of an LT.

I've stuck with my position that the Rams insist that Donald play out his rookie contract, pick up his option year, then Franchise him at least once. Then.....good bye Donald. Or......trade him after this off season provided we get at least a first round pick, or better a very good player plus a 2nd round pick.

Why? Because a good penetrating DT can be had for less, even if he's not AS good as Donald. It reminds me of the Cell Phone commercial that says that their company has service rated only 1% less than At&t, but why would you pay double to gain that 1% difference? I have no idea how to quantify the difference between Donald and merely a very good 3 technique. But the principle remains the same.

That extra money that you don't pay to make Donald higher paid than Suh could be used elsewhere to bolster other positions. About the only good reason to keep Donald and pay him insane money is to keep fans happy. But in the end, what keeps fans happy is wins, playoff visits, and the occassional SuperBowl appearance......not keeping a spectacular DT in the fold.

Which positions are the "weak link" or where the money saving should be spend? Secondary depth, maybe even a starting CB who will make more difference to a team's success than any DT. I'm also not happy with our TEs. Higbee is at best a mediocre blocker and mediocre receiver. A very good blocking and receiving TE along the lines of Rudolph would make the Rams offense nearly unstoppable.

The basic football squad is 53 guys so apart from QB, you are best to have a team full of very good football players instead of a couple of superstars and a bunch of good to OK players. Those final 7 or 8 on the roster DO matter because over the course of a year injuries do happen. So using money to gain better players at several spots (upgrading a few positions) is likely better than spending money on one superstar.....although the one superstar that it is always worth attaining is a QB.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

  Malcolm Gladwell, Stong Link-Weak Link Theory and the Rams

PeoriaRa767December 15, 2017 09:32AM

  team-building

wv ram574December 15, 2017 09:46AM

  Agree with the entire analysis

waterfield167December 15, 2017 09:58AM

  Agree completely

LMU93121December 15, 2017 02:23PM

  Re: Malcolm Gladwell, Stong Link-Weak Link Theory and the Rams

CraigMatson308December 15, 2017 10:16AM

  Re: Malcolm Gladwell and paying star players

XXXIVwin176December 15, 2017 01:24PM

  Hadn't thought it in those terms, but generally I agree. What about AD?

RockRam143December 16, 2017 04:06AM

  Re: Hadn't thought it in those terms, but generally I agree. What about AD?

Rams43131December 16, 2017 06:33AM

  Re: Hadn't thought it in those terms, but generally I agree. What about AD?

dzrams204December 16, 2017 01:48PM