Carl: Dear J.T.,
Who are the starting defensive tackles on the defensive line for the St. Louis Rams this year? Some reports say that Glover will start at 3-technique defensive tackle, and Carriker will start at nose tackle. However, other reports say Carriker will start at 3-technique defensive tackle, and Clifton Ryan will start at nose tackle. Which report is the truth?

Jim Thomas: Glover will start at the "3-technique" with Carriker at the nose. But Carriker will rotate over to the "3" when Ryan is in at nose. They will all play a lot.

ncdc: Hey Jim,

Well, it looks like it will come down to this: Dane Looker or Derek Stanley.
Holt, Bennett, Avery, Burton, and Hall seem to be in.

Here's what scares me: FOSL. If Linehan goes with Looker, it will be for two reasons; 1) Looker is a FOSL, and 2) because Linehan is on the hot seat this year, he will take a player that might give him the best chance to win now and save his job. That's called selfishness.

What the Rams need to do is build for the future. You don't do that with a 30-year old WR; you do that with a 24-year old receiver who has made great strides as a receiver AND can return kicks as well. Hall, like Looker, won't be around much longer. That's just the reality of the NFL. Stanley actually replaces both Looker and Hall IF you look at this objectively.

So why put the organization's future at risk?

Jim Thomas: But if you're Linehan, you're trying to win NOW. Even the best and most highly touted young wide receivers have an adjustment process in the NFL. Even the great Torry Holt did not have a 1,000-yard season as a rookie, and No. 6 overall pick.
So if you're Linehan (and Al Saunders) do you really want three of your six wide receivers to be rookies or near rookies (Avery, Burton, Stanley)? You could probably get by with Stanley on the practice squad again this year.

Fearsome: Hi Jim,

Can you give us an update on Becht's hamstring injury? He hasn't practiced in awhile.

Also, do you know if Haslett plans to blitz Witherspoon as much as last year, or was that out of necessity because of the DL injuries last year? Maybe Magro is closing in on that "buck end" spot?

Thanks

Jim Thomas: Becht Not much to say except he's still not practicing.
Witherspoon: I've seen him used a lot as a blitzer in camp. But if Long and Little or right, Haslett may not be forced to use Witherspoon as much in a blitzing role. Magro remains a longshot for the final 53.

franklin: jim, how is eric bassey looking in his transition to safety? Also, which UDFAs do you see as having the best shot at making the team or even the PS? Too early to tell?

Jim Thomas: Bassey looks pretty good. Remember, he's playing safety now. Had a nice pass breakup in Tuesday morning's practice during "team." I think Bassey has a better than even chance to beat out Jerome Carter for the fourth safety spot at this point.
As for undrafted rookies to keep an eye on, I'd say FB Russ Weil (especially if Dan Kreider stays injured) RB Lance Ball (as a practice squad guy); and LB-DE Marc Magro (if the Rams keep 7 LBs, or practice squad); and DT Willie Williams (practice squad).
Again, it IS early, and none of these guys have even played a preseason game yet.

thirteen28: Jim,

There seems to be a conflict between your reporting on Steven Jackson's free agency eligibility and that of Mike Florio of profootballtalk.com. Florio is reporting (in this post: http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/08/05/no-progress-on-jackson/#comments) that Jackson merely needs to show up by week 10 in order to get credit for this year and become an unrestricted free agent in 2009. Please clarify, as we would all like to know where both parties have leverage in the ongoing stalemate.

Thanks.

Jim Thomas: There is no conflict. What I'm talking about is credit for an "accrued" season (which disappears today). What Florio is talking about is credit for a "credited" season, which doesn't disappear until Week 10.
If Jackson merely shows up by Week 10, he will get credit for playing in 2008 in terms of playing out the last year of his contract. If that happens, his current contract indeed will be expired, and he will in fact be a free agent. But I guarantee you, the Rams will franchise him after this season under that scenario.
But since Jackson has not reported today _ he's already missed the day's only practice _ this season will not count towards his seniority in terms of free agency. In other words, even if he shows up Wednesday _ much less by Week 10 _ he will still have only four years of seniority according the NFL. Not five. And after he gets franchised for '09, he will still have only five years of seniority after the '09 season. And if the owners opt out of the final year of the current CBA, that would make him a restricted free agent entering the 2010 offseason. (Because under that scenario, players would not be eligible for free agency until they have 6 "accrued" seasons in the league.)
This would be a disaster scenario for Jackson. This is a guy who wants guaranteed money, and a long-term deal. Under the scenario spelled out above, the Rams could string him out for three years without the money and long-term security he wants _ all because he hasn't reported by today.
Will all this happen this way? Probably not. But Jackson has at least opened the door to that possibility by his continued absence.