Re: Here's the bigger question...

Quote
Rams43

Quote
zn

Quote
Rams43
Why did the Rams use their 90th roster spot on a DT? Hmmmmm?

Is that an indication of some dissatisfaction with their DT corps?

Were they simply in love with this kids potential and think he might be a gem?

Are they really pleased with their depth at every single other position group?

I don't think that they needed him for a camp body at that position, did they?

Kinda curious when one really thinks about it, huh?

I mean, weren't there any promising players out there at the following positions:

A serious competitor for GZ as PK.
A potential backup C.
Maybe a CB candidate.
A promising deep Safety that they've had their eye on.

But no, they added a DT. Makes me wonder just what's below the surface that I'm not seeing. Not losing sleep over it, of course. But S&F always have a reason for personnel moves, sooooo...

How about this instead. They had a spot available and signed guys according to how they were ranked, regardless of position. For all we know at this point that's as valid a view as any darkly suspicious one. Notice they didn't cut anyone. They were just bringing the roster up to 90.

.

That's a possible explanation, zn.

I don't think I was being "darkly suspicious", btw. Just kinda puzzled.

Sooooo...

You think that they maybe preferred another DT prospect to a possible backup C prospect?

Or serious competition for GZ?

Just to name two more obvious apparently pressing needs?

Ummmmm... Okay.....

Well puzzlement is in the eye of the beholder 43. And some eyes just see trouble sometimes, even when there is none. My view is this. If we genuinely don't know why they did something (as in this case), when you speculate (generic you, not you personally), you have to come up with as many possible positive reasons as possible negative reasons, or else you're just indulging one view.

Objectively, there are as many possible positive and neutral reasons as negative ones.

Each of us then asks himself, which ones am I personally more prone to.

For example, who said they have ANY needs? Or that the best players available match needs? Why wasn't this just a case where they had an open spot, already signed some other players, and so just added the best player available according to their own rankings?

That's as---if not more---likely than the "Rams fail to understand their own roster" approach.




.



...



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2016 09:03AM by zn.