Snead on NFL AM

[Cullen Bryant]

What I took from that interview is that Bradford is the man and we're taking Robinson at #2 and Donald at #13.

 

[scifiman]

It's just a dense offense. Like Martz's. Gigantic playbook. I'd argue that it's much too complex. He uses a lot of similar plays and personnel packages with minor adjustments that make things overly complex. IMO, it's a lot like micromanaging.

And all the motion only makes things more dense and complex.

I totally agree with them that players like Tavon and Stedman likely struggled to learn the offense last year which is why Stedman didn't play until late and Tavon was more or less benched for a few weeks during the middle of the season. Tavon seemed to be thinking rather than reacting which is a tell-tale sign of him not being up to speed...plus there were a couple very obvious moments where he didn't know what call Sam had made at the LOS.

The sight adjustments were likely a minor part of a more major problem...the very complicated verbage, routes, understanding of coverage(option routes), and understanding of the playbook necessary to play WR in the NFL. A sight adjustment is a call the QB makes at the LOS. It's more or less letting the WR know that he's the hot read so he needs to adjust when he sights in on the QB during his route.

So on a typical slant or curl, the WR doesn't get his head around to the QB until after he makes his break. If Sam reads a blitz coming off that WR's side, he'd call a sight adjustment to let the WR know that he needs to sight in on him almost immediately after his release because the ball will be coming out hot if there's a blitz.(which is why it's called the hot read) It's different from a hot route because a hot route is a route adjustment(changing a post to a hitch for example) when the blitz is read. A sight adjustment is keeping the WR on the same route but telling him to get his head around sooner than he normally would and expect the ball to come out more quickly.

I stumbled across a site that can really increase your football IQ. Check out http://smartfootball.com/passing/attacking-coverages-in-the-passing-game#sthash.kx6WfniG.dpbs I have no affiliation at all and there is some cool info that is a must read with your post on coverages and such.

 

[jjab360]

What I took from that interview is that Bradford is the man and we're taking Robinson at #2 and Donald at #13.

 

[paceram]

What I took from that interview is that Bradford is the man and we're taking Robinson at #2 and Donald at #13.

I will be one Thrilled Rams Fan if the Rams can draft either Clowney, Robinson or Watkins with their #2 pick and Donald with their #13 pick!!!

 

[SteveBrown]

I misspelled and I forgot to add 'nt. My bad. Yet, I might shed tears if Bradford was traded. I shed tears at the most unexpected times.

I guess the SAT changed (the old was 1600)--now it is 2400 (So, now Manzeal genius).....I am so hopelessly out of sync....I just taught the writing course for the SAT last week! Hope I die before I grow old.... Dig the respell on Johnny?

 

[fearsomefour]

Don't confuse my prediction with my desire. I would HATE!!!! to take Mack and I don't really like Dennard, either. I just fully expect it because the Rams' M.O. is to take players in the first or second round that I don't want because it's way too early for them. The only exception was Ogletree.

I think Mack, Clowney, Dennard all fall under BPA. Watkins is debatable as filling a need. If going need Oline is it.

 

[V3]

I think Mack, Clowney, Dennard all fall under BPA. Watkins is debatable as filling a need. If going need Oline is it.

Both of the OT's should be ranked higher than Mack. Not only does he not fit our scheme(I don't want to hear about how Williams would find ways to get him snaps.), he's not a need and he played against crap competition. He only played two good teams and he was mediocre against Baylor and OSU didn't make any adjustments for him. He's undersized for a DE and SLB is not as important in a 4-3. He wouldn't change much for this team. He wouldn't create more wins like an OT, WR, CB, or S would. He's an OLB in a 3-4. And for someone that supposed to be so great at rushing the passer, you'd think he'd be more effective:

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/cfb/46981/349/peshek-edge-rushers-20

 

[fearsomefour]

Both of the OT's should be ranked higher than Mack. Not only does he not fit our scheme(I don't want to hear about how Williams would find ways to get him snaps.), he's not a need and he played against crap competition. He only played two good teams and he was mediocre against Baylor and OSU didn't make any adjustments for him. He's undersized for a DE and SLB is not as important in a 4-3. He wouldn't change much for this team. He wouldn't create more wins like an OT, WR, CB, or S would. He's an OLB in a 3-4. And for someone that supposed to be so great at rushing the passer, you'd think he'd be more effective:

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/cfb/46981/349/peshek-edge-rushers-20

I don't disagree with this really.
I could really see a team like Dallas wanting to trade up for him. A 3/4 team that is desperate for a play maker.