Ram Attack - Jenkins a Liability?

[Thordaddy]

I'm not sure if anybody can successfully tell what a player's motivation is, be it selfishness or any other type of motivation . That would require intimate knowledge of said player. I think someone said Jenkins was checking his wrist during the play in question, and that would make sense, because that's where plays are stored.

.

sent via Tapatalk.

Yeah it's kinda like

"Mr. Johnson, you've become a millionaire overnight. Who are you?
Who is Navin Johnson?
Navin is a complex personality, as are most ofthe...
...small breed of modern-day renaissance millionaires"

Janoris Jenkins is complex :tooth:

 

[nighttrain]

Maybe the OP has let his dislike for Jenkins' personality color his assessment of the kid's abilities. Not sure.

Some players can seem obnoxious, or like a diva.

This kid Jenkins has all the tools to be elite. He's a freaking miracle vs what the Rams have had the last 5+ years.

As a rookie.

OP here, personally I think Janoris is the best player on the team...that being said I slightly nervous one wrong aggressive step could cost us a season....but I don't think he's a diva lol

Just trying to draw in some lively discussion via YouTube and Facebook my dood. Controversial topics always do the trick

Best player on team? not so sure about this, but physical tools and pure atheletism ( is this a word) at his, and for his position, 1st and with a rocket
train

 

[LesBaker]

I think Jenkins is going to be a playmaker and a star for as long as he has his speed and moves. He's going to make mistakes but they will decrease over the next year or two.

He's the defensive version of Az Hakim.

 

[albefree69]

X pointing out a truth:
I'm not sure if anybody can successfully tell what a player's motivation is, be it selfishness or any other type of motivation . That would require intimate knowledge of said player. I think someone said Jenkins was checking his wrist during the play in question, and that would make sense, because that's where plays are stored.

True but as long as I'm not saying something is a fact I'm OK. 99% of everything said on this board is pure opinion. As is everything I say. Everyone has an opinion on this and no one knows the truth except Jenkins. Only the passage of time will clear up the larger question that CK posed. I know we're all hoping for the best possible outcome.

 

[CoachO]

The "BPOT" (Best Player On Team) moniker was something Hammer and I anointed Jenkins with last year after watching him throughout training camp. And after watching him this year, I am not taking it back.

While I understand the "concerns", I don't see the "selfish player" tag as it has been applied here. Really don't understand the "adjusting his belt" conspiracy (if that is in fact what this is). Manning, by design, has gotten plays of lots on people before they were "ready". Jenkins wasn't the only player on the field caught off guard.

I just wonder how much of the "liability" label has to do with the "off the field" baggage he showed up with, and its just a carry over effect of people who didn't like the pick because of it.

Watching Jenkins in coverage throughout training camp, he just makes it look so easy. He has a different gear that he plays at, and watching him shut guys down whenever he wanted to was fun to see. The camp battle between he and Givens was incredible. And trust me, Jenkins won MOST of those one on one battles.

His "struggles" last year, IMO, were mostly scheme oriented. What I mean by that, is they played a lot more ZONE than they wanted to, due to the inability of the Safeties to cover TEs in man coverage.

Be design again, DBs are taught to "read the QB" more in zone, and yes, Jenkins bit on plays on occasion when in zone coverage. I anticipate more tight man coverage this year, which is his strong suit. '

What you have seen in Preseason is NOT even close to what you are going to see once they tee it up in Sept.

 

[RamFan503]

Cracks me up that so many people were so high on OJ - many calling him the best player on the team back then. OJ got burned many times going for the ball or trying to strip the ball instead of making the tackle. Yeah, he had exciting plays, but that came at a cost at times - and much more so than I see with JJ. So in talking about JJ and being a possible liability, I think just about any playmaker is a liability at times. Take that away and you have a player with a boatload of skills playing tentative. I almost guarantee no one would like the result of that kind of play.

Fisher wanted JJ for a reason. He wanted playmakers and JJ was the best playmaker at that position - possibly the best in several years. I for one don't believe for a second that Fish thought there would be no bumps with a player like Jenkins.

The notion Alan brought up of trading Jenkins at this juncture is IMO nothing short of ridiculous. If he goes diva on us and turns out to be a hinderance to the team? Yeah - OK. NO ONE can be allowed to act like he is bigger than the team. But I don't think jumping a few routes for this type of player means he is only out there for himself. He is here to make plays - not just tackle a guy once he gets the ball or try to stay with a 6'5" receiver and hope the ball is low enough for him to make a play. JJ is the type of player that HAS to make QBs think when throwing his direction. If he can make QBs hesitate, he can win most of the battles and make them make mistakes.

Granted, he needs to learn when he simply can't jump a route. But if he has coverage behind, he needs to stay unleashed.

 

[LesBaker]

Cracks me up that so many people were so high on OJ - many calling him the best player on the team back then. OJ got burned many times going for the ball or trying to strip the ball instead of making the tackle. Yeah, he had exciting plays, but that came at a cost at times - and much more so than I see with JJ. So in talking about JJ and being a possible liability, I think just about any playmaker is a liability at times. Take that away and you have a player with a boatload of skills playing tentative. I almost guarantee no one would like the result of that kind of play.

Fisher wanted JJ for a reason. He wanted playmakers and JJ was the best playmaker at that position - possibly the best in several years. I for one don't believe for a second that Fish thought there would be no bumps with a player like Jenkins.

The notion Alan brought up of trading Jenkins at this juncture is IMO nothing short of ridiculous. If he goes diva on us and turns out to be a hinderance to the team? Yeah - OK. NO ONE can be allowed to act like he is bigger than the team. But I don't think jumping a few routes for this type of player means he is only out there for himself. He is here to make plays - not just tackle a guy once he gets the ball or try to stay with a 6'5" receiver and hope the ball is low enough for him to make a play. JJ is the type of player that HAS to make QBs think when throwing his direction. If he can make QBs hesitate, he can win most of the battles and make them make mistakes.

Granted, he needs to learn when he simply can't jump a route. But if he has coverage behind, he needs to stay unleashed.

Having some help in back is important to a guy like this for sure and that's a good point. It'll allow him to take risks and I want that in a CB, I want they guy who wants to be a ball hawk. He is a threat to take it deep or all the way when he gets an INT so if he isn't taking the risks he isn't as valuable.

I think my Az Hakim analogy is good. Sometimes Jenkins is going to make you say "oh fuck no!!!" but he'll make you say "Oh fuck yeah!!!" three times as often just like Az did.

 

[albefree69]

RamFan503 having trouble seeing shades of gray:
Cracks me up that so many people were so high on OJ - many calling him the best player on the team back then. OJ got burned many times going for the ball or trying to strip the ball instead of making the tackle. Yeah, he had exciting plays, but that came at a cost at times - and much more so than I see with JJ. So in talking about JJ and being a possible liability, I think just about any playmaker is a liability at times. Take that away and you have a player with a boatload of skills playing tentative. I almost guarantee no one would like the result of that kind of play.

Yeah, I have difficulties with that statement. There is a huge difference between taking the opportunities that manifest themselves and trying to manufacture your own. Nothing is as black and white as your statement seems to make it seem. Possibly I'm reading too much into what you're saying but that's what I'm reading.

A player can try for the interception or make the sure play of batting the ball away. Go for the INT only if it's a high probability. I think coaches even teach that. Sometimes you have to try for the big play but that's a different situation.

Ogletree could expend all his energy in trying to strip the ball because the tackle was already assured. I'm not saying players shouldn't take chances. I just think they should be in conjunction with taking care of their responsibilities and not in lieu of.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

how did typing in crying turn into complaining?

is it this sites' policy that you can't say to another poster that they're crying about a particular subject?

i would classify crying as over the top complaining. very pertinent in this thread. no offense albe.

.

 

[albefree69]

kurtfaulk upset about something:

how did typing in crying turn into complaining?

is it this sites' policy that you can't say to another poster that they're crying about a particular subject?

i would classify crying as over the top complaining. very pertinent in this thread. no offense albe.

No offense taken kurtfaulk but I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you pulling my leg? :lol:

If I've said something that upset you why don't you quote me and we'll discuss it. Is this another one of those blue font things? :what:

 

[-X-]

.

how did typing in crying turn into complaining?

is it this sites' policy that you can't say to another poster that they're crying about a particular subject?

i would classify crying as over the top complaining. very pertinent in this thread. no offense albe.

.

I did that, because I patrol the board to make sure that people get a fair shake at having the posts they direct at another poster answered in a civil manner. Crying is essentially whining through eyes full of tears. I understand the slang meaning, but I still made a judgement call. I wouldn't let anyone tell *you* that *you* are "crying" either. Nothing personal to you, kurt. I just want the discussion to be productive.

It's the very first rule on the board, and I do it every once in a while. Hardly anyone notices.
Until now. :lol:

 

[albefree69]

Well I apologize anyway kurtfaulk. I had zero intention of upsetting you in any way. :cheers:

 

[RamFan503]

RamFan503 having trouble seeing shades of gray:
Cracks me up that so many people were so high on OJ - many calling him the best player on the team back then. OJ got burned many times going for the ball or trying to strip the ball instead of making the tackle. Yeah, he had exciting plays, but that came at a cost at times - and much more so than I see with JJ. So in talking about JJ and being a possible liability, I think just about any playmaker is a liability at times. Take that away and you have a player with a boatload of skills playing tentative. I almost guarantee no one would like the result of that kind of play.

Yeah, I have difficulties with that statement. There is a huge difference between taking the opportunities that manifest themselves and trying to manufacture your own. Nothing is as black and white as your statement seems to make it seem. Possibly I'm reading too much into what you're saying but that's what I'm reading.

A player can try for the interception or make the sure play of batting the ball away. Go for the INT only if it's a high probability. I think coaches even teach that. Sometimes you have to try for the big play but that's a different situation.

Ogletree could expend all his energy in trying to strip the ball because the tackle was already assured. I'm not saying players shouldn't take chances. I just think they should be in conjunction with taking care of their responsibilities and not in lieu of.

I actually think we're talking in circles a bit. The reality IMO is that you don't go for a guy like JJ if you simply plan on him batting away the ball. The guy is 5'10" on tip toes. The guy IS big plays. Yeah - he'll get burned at times. But he wasn't brought in to be just solid. He was brought in to be a game changer. And IMO, he has done just that for the plus far more than he has done it for the minus. Take into account that he is likely to get the toughest assignment on the filed. Think he is not going to get burned from time to time? Think he isn't better served by occasionally trying to guess? If the D is playing right, JJ's man also has at least one more set of eyes on him. He's the BEST RECEIVER ON THE FIELD. If JJ can go ones on him for the most part, how huge is that? I think our problems lie elsewhere.

 

[albefree69]

RamFan503 still not completely getting my point:
I actually think we're talking in circles a bit. The reality IMO is that you don't go for a guy like JJ if you simply plan on him batting away the ball. The guy is 5'10" on tip toes. The guy IS big plays. Yeah - he'll get burned at times. But he wasn't brought in to be just solid. He was brought in to be a game changer. And IMO, he has done just that for the plus far more than he has done it for the minus. Take into account that he is likely to get the toughest assignment on the field. Think he is not going to get burned from time to time? Think he isn't better served by occasionally trying to guess? If the D is playing right, JJ's man also has at least one more set of eyes on him. He's the BEST RECEIVER ON THE FIELD. If JJ can go ones on him for the most part, how huge is that? I think our problems lie elsewhere.

I'm just not explaining myself very well and I can tell that because of the bolded part you wrote. I expect every CB to get burned occasionally. He has been burned many times and you haven't heard me say squat about them.

Let me try a different tack. Almost every day in practice I'd hear how Jenkins was shutting Givens down. How did he accomplish that? He did it by maintaining tight coverage and not by trying to make the highlight reel. The two incidences I'm complaining about are different from the other times he's been burned. At least they are in my mind.

So while I agree with much of what you said above, it doesn't address the Diva mentality I see in him. When he's in the spot light in games he plays much different than he does at practice. He's going to need to get a lot of turnovers if he's going to overcome the not so good performance he turned in last year. But it's only his second year and maybe he'll get his head straight. Or not.

 

[kurtfaulk]

Well I apologize anyway kurtfaulk. I had zero intention of upsetting you in any way. :cheers:

You didn't upset me man. I wasn't even having a shot at you. It's just a figure of speech. I had no idea that it was deemed as a hostile attack on you. Just wanted clarification on why the word was changed.

.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

how did typing in crying turn into complaining?

is it this sites' policy that you can't say to another poster that they're crying about a particular subject?

i would classify crying as over the top complaining. very pertinent in this thread. no offense albe.

.

I did that, because I patrol the board to make sure that people get a fair shake at having the posts they direct at another poster answered in a civil manner. Crying is essentially whining through eyes full of tears. I understand the slang meaning, but I still made a judgement call. I wouldn't let anyone tell *you* that *you* are "crying" either. Nothing personal to you, kurt. I just want the discussion to be productive.

It's the very first rule on the board, and I do it every once in a while. Hardly anyone notices.
Until now. :lol:

No worries man. Now that I know crying is a no-no I will try to express myself with some other variety of words.

.

 

[albefree69]

kurtfaulk crying while not watching Old Yeller:
You didn't upset me man.

While I still have no clue what you're talking about it's good to know that we're OK and I can continue to point out how wrong you are. :ww: :lol:

 

[LosAngelesRams]

I haven't seen a diva in JJ. Link me the article were hes being a diva.

 

[RamFan503]

RamFan503 still not completely getting my point:
I actually think we're talking in circles a bit. The reality IMO is that you don't go for a guy like JJ if you simply plan on him batting away the ball. The guy is 5'10" on tip toes. The guy IS big plays. Yeah - he'll get burned at times. But he wasn't brought in to be just solid. He was brought in to be a game changer. And IMO, he has done just that for the plus far more than he has done it for the minus. Take into account that he is likely to get the toughest assignment on the field. Think he is not going to get burned from time to time? Think he isn't better served by occasionally trying to guess? If the D is playing right, JJ's man also has at least one more set of eyes on him. He's the BEST RECEIVER ON THE FIELD. If JJ can go ones on him for the most part, how huge is that? I think our problems lie elsewhere.

I'm just not explaining myself very well and I can tell that because of the bolded part you wrote. I expect every CB to get burned occasionally. He has been burned many times and you haven't heard me say squat about them.

Let me try a different tack. Almost every day in practice I'd hear how Jenkins was shutting Givens down. How did he accomplish that? He did it by maintaining tight coverage and not by trying to make the highlight reel. The two incidences I'm complaining about are different from the other times he's been burned. At least they are in my mind.

So while I agree with much of what you said above, it doesn't address the Diva mentality I see in him. When he's in the spot light in games he plays much different than he does at practice. He's going to need to get a lot of turnovers if he's going to overcome the not so good performance he turned in last year. But it's only his second year and maybe he'll get his head straight. Or not.

So you're boiling down one play his rookie season and one play this preseason to him being a diva? He plays tight coverage in practice AND during most other plays in games. He shut down a lot of receivers last season. And how do you know that he hasn't jumped any routes in practice? I thought I had heard about a couple of his interceptions in practice coming from him jumping routes. Freakin' practice diva. :hmph:

 

[LesBaker]

Well myself not only do I see no diva ion the kid when I've heard/seen interviews with him he actually seems like a fairly humble dude to me.

I'm not saying he's a 4 pillar type though LOL.