Rams Don't Want to Follow KC Football Model
 

“Do we want to be the Chiefs, Texans or Jets?” That’s a question that bounced around the Rams’ hierarchy over the past three months, as they decided whether to break the bank to move up to No. 1. In other words, three franchises trying to go deep into the playoffs with strong defenses and questionable quarterback situations (though I’d argue Kansas City is better than that, but I’m not the one asking the question). The quest for the quarterback gained momentum as the off-season went on, got very serious at the Ole Miss Pro Day on March 28, and was consummated because it made too much sense for the needs of both teams.

- MMQB

So they are going full Redskins/Browns. Dumb****s. The same Redskin team they openly mocked for doing just what they did. Dumb****s.

That's gonna leave a mark

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QGGvR2JBqMY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

WE WANT TO BE THE REDSKINS!!! Can't wait for the Tits to bring all those guys out to midfield.

Except the Redskins aren't any worse off for it, so why not?

Ouch.

Well the Chiefs probably win 12-13 this year so...

Their method has netted 1 playoff win in 20+ years. What would the Chiefs have missed out on if they had gone "all in" on a qb somewhere during that span?

They have a 1-1 drafted QB :)

Nobody is gonna try and say Alex Smith is the best QB in the league. There is really no one available in FA that is a Smith equivalent right now though. The Rams had fewer options. That said, it was pretty stupid to trade all those draft picks to get the 1.1. First thing I thought of was the way they mocked the Redskins, and how that is going to get thrown in their face.

Well, there might have been a period where they only would have won 2-4 games per year. How could we live with the shame?

Shit dude...16 games in the regular.

We have to trade for a veteran QB so we don't suffer those type of seasons. Only drafted n00bs have those seasons.

Dorsey/Reid haven't been here the last 20 years. They've had 3 winning seasons in their first 3 years and are a super bowl contender. Any team that picked #1 3 seasons ago would love to have that kind of success.

Also, I gotta laugh that the Rams are the franchise that fell ass over tea kettle into Kurt Warner. They basically followed the Chiefs blueprint- acquire veterans and try to get lucky with your random backups


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Chiefs have had a mostly parallel record to Washington since he start of the 2005 season. Both are 1-4 in playoff games in that span. Only difference between them beside overall win-loss record (.414 for D.C. .448 for KC) is Washingotn's one division title.

Beyond the Jason Campbell experiment and selling the farm for RG3 but then opting for Kirk Cousins due to Griffin's injuries and ineffectiveness, the 'skins have trotted out journeymen QBs for the better part of a decade -just the same as the Chiefs have.

The Chiefs have been a little better at it though grabbing guys like Montanna green and smith

If the Rams don't follow the Chiefs' model, they won't have the Chiefs' success.

Going back to the 1993 season and onward the Redskins have one fewer playoff win than KC and is worse on overall win and loss.

Or how about this: Since the beginning of the 2011 season, KC has nine extra regular seasons wins and one playoff victory in an extra playoff game over the 'skins even though Washington had the worst possible outcome in RG3 failing after they sold the farm to draft him.

You can't compare the Chiefs pre-2013 to now. Yes they are using a similar plan, but the difference is the GM, and it's a gigantic difference.

King Carl couldn't put together a balanced roster like this one. The 90's were pretty damn close, but this Chiefs team is younger and better constructed with talent compared to those teams, and you need that if you're using this plan.

I'm all for drafting a QB, but let's not get carried away here. The Rams may not want to follow the Chiefs' model, but that doesn't mean they're doing it the smart way.

**** kroenke. Would make me very happy to see this draft pick fail because with as much as they're giving up, it's going to be a kick in the face to him.

Who gives a shit? Honestly.

Good for them...if this pans out, they could be perennial contender.

If not, hey....they'll be the Rams still.....

I gotta admire teams who are willing to swing the bat....Risky Risky move though....

This is truly amazing irony.

What a stupid statement by the Rams brass.

They might of well have said, "we should try to follow the New England model of lucking into a 6th round pick gem of a QB who will dominate the game for 12-15 years".

That holds as much value as to what they are implying here.

Sam Bradford says hello. They have been down this road before and failed miserably.....

There have been tons of different ways to become a SuperBowl winner: If there was only one sure-fire way, everyone would be attempting it (though admittedly not everyone could).

"We want to model our organization after the Kansas City Chiefs"
/said no one sane ever

How are they not like us?

They're going to go into this season with a strong defense and a questionable QB. I highly doubt that Goff or Wentz come in and become Peyton Manning in his prime in their first season.

They're going to play defense, run the ball and limit their QB's mistakes.....just like we ****ing do.

They left Denver out. Another team with mediocre QB play and a strong defense.

they didn't give up near what the skins did

Rams = lean on Todd Gurley

Chiefs = lean on their 25 starting caliber RBs

so, the same formula basically in a "passing era." Both are doing it wrong.

burn
http://cdn.niketalk.com/b/b8/350x700...812_aaaaa.jpeg

I'd argue that formula in a "passing era" is doing it right.

Defenses are built to stop the pass, so in theory the running game heavy teams should have an advantage.

Yeah....as long as they have an offense that can win games when it needs to.

Which has been when, exactly?

Well maybe they are hoping that they won't stay reliant on the defense long term. I absolutely think youre correct short term, but maybe they are hoping their 1.1 will have a higher ceiling than one of the best game managers in the league....maybe they are hoping we will break out into a guy who can take the game over etc...

Its a YUGE gamble....but if they hit it will be worth it, IMO. If not....same old sorry ass rams.

Well, they can use whatever ever kind of excuse they want (we don't want to be like the Jets, Texans, or Chiefs)...but they didn't have any choice. If they didn't make the trade their spot in the unemployment line was coming soon...it may still come, but they had to take the risk. The comments they made here are purely an attempt to cover what they were really doing.

But can the running game heavy teams score as quick as the pass heavy teams if they need a quick score? i.e. 2 minute offense?

I don't know the answer to that I'm asking, like is the Vikings 2 minute offense better than the Patriots, which one would you rather have? Teddy and AP or Tom Brady and whatever toy box of WRs/TEs he has?

Look at who has beaten the Chiefs the last 3 years should give you an idea, what you need under center.

Too many of you are focused on your hurt feelings from a perceived slight, while ignoring the point that was being made.

The Rams made a conscious decision this year to build the team around what they feel is a franchise QB. To the degree that they are sacrificing other players (picks) to lay that foundation. That's simply a very different approach than the Chiefs have taken. It's not an insult, it's fact.

As for the chance of success versus falling on their face... there's not much evidence that failing has any negative effects that go beyond what the Chiefs have experienced doing it the safe way. KC has had a pretty stellar run on 1st round picks going all the way back to Tamba Hali. And what did all those picks result in? Varying degrees of success and failure, including the worst season in franchise history. Even the success the team has had in the last 3 years has to be partially credited to finally getting a qb.

The Rams just came out and said they believe draft picks and/or good players aren't worth much without a franchise qb. KC is a perfect example of that reality.

How in the **** do the Rams even have a strong defense? They were 13th in points and 23rd in yards. Chiefs were 3rd in points and 7th in yards. How the hell is it even a comparison?

And I guess they missed the Broncos winning the superbowl with literally one of the 3 worst QBs in the league last year. Or Russell Wilson game managing his way to a superbowl ring.

Alex Smith is no questionable. We pretty much know what we're going to get game in and game out. Thats far from what you can expect from a rookie.

Didn't lose either playoff game because of Smith.

Thats a fair take IMO, theres no reason to be butthurt about their comments... I've done a 180 on this move, considering the Bradford freebie and comp picks they had, what they gave up doesnt seem so terrible

1) they have a big, jaded new market they want to make an impression on

2) they also have a team thats made some big noise even with bad QB play

If they choose right, and dont **** him up with terrible coaching and too many expectations, they'll be set for the next 10 years, its actually the best move they've made in forever... too bad they didnt give the same commitment and effort to St Louis

Now about that coaching...

Well said.

This is a concept that the average football fan cannot appreciate.

And another point to soothe those hurt feelings...

The Rams happen to be in an extremely unique situation, for 2 reasons.

1. The perfect storm of a QB worth trading up for and a team holding that pick that just drafted their franchise qb the year before. How often does that happen? There's obviously the subjective nature of when a qb prospect is worth it, but the teams that typically have that top pick need a qb. How many times in the last 25 years has there been a qb worthy of #1 overall in the same year that the worst team in the league doesn't need a qb?

2. Being the shiny new toy in town. The Rams are were just handed a fanbase and ticket buyers that don't have the previous 10 years of failure on their mind. When a franchise has just made their fans sit through an Edwards/Haley/Crennel era, it's not as easy to play fast and loose with the product you trot out onto the field. Fans may say "superbowl or bust" on message boards, but they start talking with their wallets and banners in the sky after too many years of "bust". The Rams don't have to worry about that for a number of years.


So yeah, the Rams can talk about how they're going to do it different, but it's not like every team has passed up an opportunity to do it that way.

Hey! Back off, shithead!

This is a good post. Bunch of weak ass bitches in here getting their feelings hurt for no reason..

But I will say it was kind of odd for them to say this in the first place. They've poured a ton of resources into defense, OL and RB in recent years. Although they're now aggressively trying to get a stud under center, they're not too different from us circa 2012.

Some people equate drafting a qb to success and signing a fa qb to failure

Some people think taking a chance on drafting a qb is too risky. Washington is a great example of how wrong that is. They gave up too much to get a guy that busted, and they're still no worse off for it than the "play it safe" Chiefs.

But they're in California now... All will be better.

To be fair, there is some Class A poon in that place...

http://www.rantplaces.com/wp-content...age-Flickr.jpg

If the Rams are run by draft tabulators, their franchise will go nowhere.

Maybe Vernon Gholston, Geno Smith, and Taylor Mays will find new homes there.

They've been run by True Fans since Mike Martz left.

I don't wanna follow the Rams model. They haven't been relevant since Warner was there

Len Dawson says hi.

If Vermeil had stayed there and kept Martz in check, the Bulger years could've been very good IMO... Marc had a very accurate whip arm

Faulk, Bruce, Holt and Pace all still had a decent year or three left during the Bulger (just go with it) Era... Martz killed them with his ego

Dawson combined with Blackledge are the two biggest reasons KC never tries to acquire and develop a highly sought after QB in the draft.

I wonder who the next "established vet" will be? Didn't I read not too long ago in some fluff piece about a freshly drafted ( by another team ) QB that he had a hidden boner for?

Damn, who was that?