i don't know it doesn't seem like we did all that much, then again i didn't know we signed iupati until he was practically doing his presser so maybe i'm not the right guy to ask
i hated seeing seattle sign jimmy graham. we couldn't cover scrub tight ends now we got to see him 2 maybe 3 times a year
and the rams defense scares the hell out of me we lost both our quarterbacks last year when we played them
only san fran seems like they have taken some steps backwards
but i trust BASK knows what they're doing, i know we had a great start last year and barely missed the playoffs the year before but all these years of perennial losing has me gun shy on getting my hopes up,
i would love for arians to be the next belechek, in that we would always be considered contenders of favorites for the west and beyond..but we need to win a damn superbowl or two first
wouldn't it be awesome to look back a few years from now and to have been the first nfl franchise in history to threepeat?
damn when i dream i dream big!
You make a valid point. However, it depends on how you look at it really. Seattle made a splash, the Rams may, MAY, have improved their team, when you just look at the FA talent acquired, on its own, but not how it relates to the team.
If you look at these FA moves based on need at positions though I think the Cards have increased their team more than anyone else in the division.
We grabbed several dudes at positions of need. Especially, IMO, on the offensive line and linebacker, and that's assuming we don't sign AP, which I believe we will.
Seattle signed Graham, I agree that's huge, but they gave up an awesome linemen in Unger. Maybe people think you don't need a great line with RW back there, but that's gotta hurt. They still have no threat at receiver, so at best, to me, what they lost and gained cancel each other out. I will say this though, with RW's play style, they were smart to get a good/great TE rather than a Mike Wallace type player. Graham can flow to the same side RW is scrambling and will definitely get open, whereas a deep threat receiver has much more difficulty breaking off his routes and flowing back to his QB on scrambles and broken plays. It's a win for them, but I'm not convinced that alone is better than the moves we've made.
The Rams keep being the Rams. They stockpile talent and lose because... I know people are going to say it's coaching, but that's not my belief... I think they have the same issue Whiz did post Warner. No QB. Can't win without a QB. Their FA was okay but their big move was on the DLine. They already had a crushing DLine. Probably the best in the NFL. I don't know how this helps, frankly, even accounting for rotation and late season weariness and injury. Makes no sense. Chip Kelly stockpiles RB's, but that makes sense to me because he wants to go faster and his players faded late in the season, so he needs like 20 RB's and 4 QB's. But this for the Rams makes no sense.
I think we did fine, and better than fine so far. What we did was improve our weaknesses, not improve already strong areas. Seattle did some of that, but not as much as we did IMO, and the Rams just built on their strength, which I don't think is winning football. You have to plug holes in the NFL, because every team and coach knows what you're good at and suck at.
I think we've done a better job at plugging holes than anyone else in our division.
We've turned weaknesses into strengths. That's how you win at football.
