The Giants would do it, you keep them fresh and on passing downs you rush all 3!  The D would be scary if they added Clowney.  They could get a OT with their 2nd 1st round pick and a WR in the 2nd.

Do you realize what are saying??? Basically your saying spend a 2nd overall pick for a guy who may be on the field only 55% of the time????

 

They would be better off getting that Minnesota tackle if they want to do that

 

The Giants would not do that 

---

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/po...-sense-but

 

Of course, for all the reasons Matthews to the Rams is logical, there's one big X factor that would stand in the way: a freakish, 6-foot-6, 274-pounder who goes by the name of Jadeveon Clowney. South Carolina's superstar defensive end would be available at No. 2 in McShay's scenario, with Louisville quarterback Teddy Bridgewater going to Houston at No. 1. Having Clowney on the board would present the Rams with a pair of options even more intriguing than Matthews.


The first would be to actually draft Clowney. While the Rams are loaded at defensive end, Fisher abides by the idea that you can never have too many pass-rushers. A line featuring the likes of Robert Quinn, Chris Long, William Hayes and Clowney would be an absolute nightmare for opponents. Would it be a long shot? Maybe, but never say never when it comes to Fisher and premium pass-rushers, especially a difference-maker the caliber of Clowney.

The other, more likely, option would be the Rams using Clowney as trade bait to bring back another haul of draft picks and move down in the draft. Fisher and general manager Les Snead have not been shy about pulling the trigger on trades in their two drafts together.
 

---

Taking BAP helped the Giants win a couple SB's.  Maybe you are smarter and could of won more SB's if you were the GM.

lol whatever dude. i'm not even gonna bother with you

---

What disqualifies Garoppolo, using his checklist?

I haven't seen garappolo much at all but the video I'm about to post makes me say hell no.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://gfycat.com/InsidiousInformalCorydorascatfish'>http://gfycat.com/InsidiousInformalCorydorascatfish</a>

Via @BeauxJaxson

---

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/po...-sense-but

If they know we are going to get Bridgewater, they can trade back with us for a an extra 3rd or 4th and get our 3rd. They would still have Clowney in their back pocket as trade bait yet still have an extra 3rd or 4th from us.

---

lol whatever dude. i'm not even gonna bother with you

I dont think they go Clowney just saying its a possibility

---

If they know we are going to get Bridgewater, they can trade back with us for a an extra 3rd or 4th and get our 3rd. They would still have Clowney in their back pocket as trade bait yet still have an extra 3rd or 4th from us.

How would they know that?  That's exactly what we want them to think!

---

How would they know that?  That's exactly what we want them to think!

It wouldn't matter regardless, Rams don't want a qb or de at that high of pick. 

---

I dont think they go Clowney just saying its a possibility

Of course it's a possibility man, just about anything is in the draft. That's what makes it so much fun. I was just giving my reasons why it doesn't make sense for them to take Clowney. If they are staying with Bradford they better help the kid out.

---

I dunno, Dave wasn't very smoke screeny last year. He said out and out and he thought the OTs were the strength of the class, and singled out Joeckel as being a great prospect several times. We all thought THAT was the smokescreen because no way he would take a RT at 5. Little did we know the grand plans.

---

I dunno, Dave wasn't very smoke screeny last year. He said out and out and he thought the OTs were the strength of the class, and singled out Joeckel as being a great prospect several times. We all thought THAT was the smokescreen because no way he would take a RT at 5. Little did we know the grand plans.

There is nothing to lose, He and Snead seem to be good friends so they may already have something in the works for the "if" scenarios

---

I dunno, Dave wasn't very smoke screeny last year. He said out and out and he thought the OTs were the strength of the class, and singled out Joeckel as being a great prospect several times. We all thought THAT was the smokescreen because no way he would take a RT at 5. Little did we know the grand plans.

Not everybody, there was quite a few of us on here that wanted a OT at 2 and thought we would go that route.  He took a LT at 2 not a RT at 5

---

What disqualifies Garoppolo, using his checklist?

The fact that he DIDN'T mention him makes me think he's targeting him and trying to throw smoke towards the other prospects.





*grabs tinfoil hat*

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

The fact that he DIDN'T mention him makes me think he's targeting him and trying to throw smoke towards the other prospects.




*grabs tinfoil hat*

Caldwell would be a moron lol

---

Not everybody, there was quite a few of us on here that wanted a OT at 2 and thought we would go that route.  He took a LT at 2 not a RT at 5

The point remains, Dave was actually pretty darn honest with us last year. I don't think he's smokescreening this time either. If he has the chance to get Teddy he's gonna jump on it.

---

The idea of trading up to 2 is either a joke or a HUGE what if scenario. It doesn't make any sense because first off the top prospects are all underclassmen and we havent even talked to any of them yet. Secondly, trade up why? To get in front of who? Cleveland who have more ammo to move up than us?

 

Now the only logical explanation is if St Louis really doesn't want the pick and a team wants to trade up for who we are gonna take at three. Then they'll let us know and we'll buy the pick from them.

---

The idea of trading up to 2 is either a joke or a HUGE what if scenario. It doesn't make any sense because first off the top prospects are all underclassmen and we havent even talked to any of them yet. Secondly, trade up why? To get in front of who? Cleveland who have the ammo to move up to one and give Houston two first round picks?

 

Now the only logical explanation is if St Louis really doesn't want the pick and a team wants to trade up for who we are gonna take at three. Then they'll let us know and we'll buy the pick from them.

Your second paragraph should put you at ease. That is only reason why the Rams would trade down to us. And they could still get a kinds ransom for the 3rd

 

Cleveland wants Bortles, apparently they want a guy who can take a beating up in the North. Makes a lot more sense then the BS they were spouting about Manziel

---

It works out perfectly for the Rams

---

Your second paragraph should put you at ease. That is only reason why the Rams would trade down to us. And they could still get a kinds ransom for the 3rd


Cleveland wants Bortles, apparently they want a guy who can take a beating up in the North. Makes a lot more sense then the [BAD WORD REMOVED] they were spouting about Manziel

It's entertaining to watch you twist and turn and formulate opinions on why teams will or won't do certain things all based on the premise of the Jaguars selecting Teddy.


Rams won't do that because..............and then the Jaguars select Teddy.


Houston will do this...................and then the Jaguars select Teddy.


For someone who supposedly makes his living "scouting prospects" (LOL) you sure don't seem to have much of a grasp on smokescreening, and why a team would use such a method.


Your obsession with Bridgewater is a little off-putting, bruh.

---

It's entertaining to watch you twist and turn and formulate opinions on why teams will or won't do certain things all based on the premise of the Jaguars selecting Teddy.


Rams won't do that because..............and then the Jaguars select Teddy.


Houston will do this...................and then the Jaguars select Teddy.


For someone who supposedly makes his living "scouting prospects" (LOL) you sure don't seem to have much of a grasp on smokescreening, and why a team would use such a method.


Your obsession with Bridgewater is a little off-putting, bruh.

You seem obsessed with not facing the logic, BRUH

---