August 11, 2016 08:38AM
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. cool smiley




.



...



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

  Rams sign DT

CROMWELL211408August 10, 2016 07:56PM

  6'3", 301 lbs

AlbaNY_Ram681August 11, 2016 02:43AM

  Re: 6'3", 301 lbs

SoCalRAMatic569August 11, 2016 05:42AM

  Re: 6'3", 301 lbs

SoCalRAMatic532August 11, 2016 07:26AM

  Re: 6'3", 301 lbs

Rams43409August 11, 2016 07:45AM

  Liked this kid ...

alyoshamucci608August 11, 2016 07:38AM

  Here's the bigger question...

Rams43498August 11, 2016 07:58AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

zn491August 11, 2016 08:09AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

Rams43456August 11, 2016 08:18AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

zn549August 11, 2016 08:38AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

Rams43443August 11, 2016 09:16AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

SoCalRAMatic464August 11, 2016 09:51AM

  if you read write-ups on Kush he has promise

zn426August 11, 2016 09:55AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

oldmanram410August 11, 2016 09:59AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

zn385August 11, 2016 10:08AM

  I doubt it.

RustyRay568August 11, 2016 11:21AM

  Re: Here's the bigger question...

The_Zone443August 11, 2016 06:55PM

  Re I don't mind this

RamsFanSince69417August 11, 2016 06:44PM