Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, glenwo2 said:

 

And?

So we stop looking for a QB because of this?

How are we going to find one if we don't draft one?

It means stop using the same logic on skipping over a HUGE need and waiting for the next year.  Draft one this year not in 2024, no 2025, no 2026....  We should have sucked it up and drafted Fields IMO 2 years ago.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

He will get a bunch for sure and with Rhule here I might agree. But Wilks has them fired up and they are a top 10 unit.  Peppers was here longer before he got discontent.

we didn't look like a top 10 unit on Sunday in Atlanta. 

Beating the Bucs is our signature moment.  But given they have lost 5 of their last 6?  It isn't as impressive of a moment as we would have thought coming in to the season.  The Bucs and Rams also have no ability to run the football.   Atlanta did and the D couldn't stop anything they did as a byproduct of that. 

 Not sure I would say we are a top 10 unit

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Wundrbread33 said:

This thread is both sides saying the same thing over and over. Has anyone changed their stance yet? 😂 

My stance is that I can't decide between the two options. I suppose the determining factor is how much we would pay for Burns if we keep him and whether we have to let other players go because of the salary cap implications. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ImaginaryKev said:

Burns still has upside, is a face of the franchise type of personality, is only 24, amd plays a premium position, and some of you guys are whining about run defense. Man, I can't imagine being that dull

He doesn't produce. On the list of players we've had he's Mike Rucker 2.0

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, glenwo2 said:

 

And?

So we stop looking for a QB because of this?

How are we going to find one if we don't draft one?

The point is we need to go ahead and be prepared to take one instead of kicking the can down the road because “next year’s QBs are better”.  They’re saying we need to draft one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

No what you said is stupid logic.  Who know what happens in 2025? You don't value potential which can vary from a number 1 pick to a number 32 pick the same as a proven commodity. Burns cost us a top 10 pick and has been everything we thought he would be.  He has stayed healthy and is the best DE we have.  Future picks are always valued less than current picks and should be.  While we aren't a player or two away we also don't need a complete rebuild. He is a core of the defense and teams gameplan against him. That is worth more than what we could get years from now.

clarification - Burns was the 16th pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

The point is we need to go ahead and be prepared to take one instead of kicking the can down the road because “next year’s QBs are better”.  They’re saying we need to draft one. 

This year's QB class is looking to be historically bad... Pickett is a turnover machine ala Bortles and Willis can't complete a pass, meanwhile we got one of the best LT in the NFL already....I'd say they made the right decision kicking the can another year

2020... Neither Fields or Mac Jones (or Wilson...or Lance) look to be great QB's. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

Ohhhhhhhh thanks for signaling why you want to keep Burns. Idiot.

Lol what reason is that, clown?

You and Catsfan69 are two peas in an imbecile pod, I'm glad you two have found each other and can compete for worst take imaginable 

Edited by ImaginaryKev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ImaginaryKev said:

Lol what reason is that, clown?

You and Catsfan69 are two peas in an imbecile pod, I'm glad you two have found each other and can compete for worst take imaginable 

By YOU saying "F150s", YOU are saying that people don't want Burns because he is black. That might be the most ignorant take ever.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep him. Two future first rounders? I’ll pass. You’d be insane to think the Rams are not about to build them up a contender during the offseason, meaning late first round picks.

 

Burns was listed right outside the top 75 NFL players and he’s only 24. He hasn’t posted double digit sacks bc teams plan for him. I saw ATL doubling him a lot. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...