So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to struggle

[DR RAM]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

DR RAM with a Ripley's Believe It Or Not moment:
I certainly DON'T think that Saffold was playing half-assed.

So you're saying only some of the players were playing half-assed? Which ones?

Well, first off, I didn't say that, secondly, really?

I think they played hard, they just didn't scheme or show off moves.

On the offensive line, they have to play hard, you can't let your QB get killed.

 

[-X-]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X asked:
Would you consider it a problem if you knew that Fisher told the D-line to dog it?
Similarly, did you think our stellar showing in game 1 of the 2011 preseason was a precursor to a great season? lol.

Yes and no. I would consider it to be a coaching problem and not a player problem. I'm not sure which is worse.

As I mentioned before in another thread, not playing hard leads to injuries because, among other things, when you're playing hard you provide the force and when you're not playing hard the other guy provides the force. Here is very short article discussing this issue.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.wikihow.com/Stay-Injury-Free-in-Football" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.wikihow.com/Stay-Injury-Free-in-Football</a>

Football, a contact sport, is one of the most physical games played. Players passionate about the game hope to stay injury free in order to be their best at all times. You cannot play football without a chance of injury, but you can reduce your chances.
Avoiding injury is not all about shying away from contact. It is about being in control of the situation. None of these steps can 100% protect you, but each one is important in helping to avoid injury.

That is just one article talking about that issue. I can find many more. Yeah, let's do things that have a greater chance of causing injures. After all, it's not like we ever have any of those. Perhaps if Saffold had been giving 100% his opponent wouldn't have blown by him so fast and by doing so, forcing him to try and stop him with one arm.

You can debate this all you want but I doubt you'll be able to come up with any evidence that I'm wrong about this.

I'm not trying to prove you wrong about anything. Just offering a different POV. I agree that dogging it can lead to injuries. I was banging that drum BIG TIME during the 2011 season. Moreso regarding the fact that many of our players weren't comfortable in the system due to it being brand new, and also because they were rookies and had very little clue about what their assignments were. So *thinking* too much as opposed to going full-tilt was what was causing our guys to drop like flies. I agree with that.

But.

17 years worth of coaching is something we should put a smidgen of faith in as far as I'm concerned. I don't think that Fisher would purposefully put his players in a situation where they would get injured. "Dogging it" was my phrasing, and it may not have been the correct one. I just don't think Fisher was expecting to show anything, but was instead looking to see how the rookies were developing. They were rushing, they were engaging their man, but they weren't trying to force anything. That's also just a theory, but the end result was/is nothing to be concerned about in my opinion. I mean, really. It's the first preseason game between two teams with completely different agendas. We SMOKED the Patriots in preseason 2010 until Belichick played his starters into the 4th quarter. Think they were concerned? They lost two whole games.

 

[Mister Sin]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

What a jackass

 

[albefree69]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X replied:
17 years worth of coaching is something we should put a smidgen of faith in as far as I'm concerned. I don't think that Fisher would purposefully put his players in a situation where they would get injured. "Dogging it" was my phrasing, and it may not have been the correct one. I just don't think Fisher was expecting to show anything, but was instead looking to see how the rookies were developing. They were rushing, they were engaging their man, but they weren't trying to force anything. That's also just a theory, but the end result was/is nothing to be concerned in my opinion. I mean, really. It's the first preseason game between two teams with completely different agendas. We SMOKED the Patriots in preseason 2010 until Belichick played his starters into the 4th quarter. Think they were concerned? They lost two whole games.

First of all, I know that you and everyone else is just stating your own points of view about this. :bg:

How many years of coaching does Coach Venturi have? Does that mean I win? :lol:

Here's my bottom line and this pertains to DR RAM too. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Your saying that we used a vanilla D to not give anything away. Got that and I have no problem with it.

Then you say, and provide anecdotal evidence a la Joe thomas, that they weren't putting out 100% effort.

Then you claim (DR RAM) that Saffold wasn't playing half assed just those "other" players. No consistency.

Then you admit that not playing all out leads to a greater chance of injury but say trust the coach because he has a lot of experience. That flies in the face of admitting that giving less than 100% effort leads to injuries. No consistency.

Some of you seem to think that I'm saying the D-line has regressed. That would be wrong. I'm saying they mailed it in and many were not in game shape.

I see no consistency in your counter arguments.

Coach Venturi saw the same thing I did so I'm not out here on my usual limb all by my lonesome. :ja:

 

[-X-]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X replied:
17 years worth of coaching is something we should put a smidgen of faith in as far as I'm concerned. I don't think that Fisher would purposefully put his players in a situation where they would get injured. "Dogging it" was my phrasing, and it may not have been the correct one. I just don't think Fisher was expecting to show anything, but was instead looking to see how the rookies were developing. They were rushing, they were engaging their man, but they weren't trying to force anything. That's also just a theory, but the end result was/is nothing to be concerned in my opinion. I mean, really. It's the first preseason game between two teams with completely different agendas. We SMOKED the Patriots in preseason 2010 until Belichick played his starters into the 4th quarter. Think they were concerned? They lost two whole games.

First of all, I know that you and everyone else is just stating your own points of view about this. :bg:

How many years of coaching does Coach Venturi have? Does that mean I win? :lol:

Here's my bottom line and this pertains to DR RAM too. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Your saying that we used a vanilla D to not give anything away. Got that and I have no problem with it.

Then you say, and provide anecdotal evidence a la Joe thomas, that they weren't putting out 100% effort.

Then you claim (DR RAM) that Saffold wasn't playing half assed just those "other" players. No consistency.

Then you admit that not playing all out leads to a greater chance of injury but say trust the coach because he has a lot of experience. That flies in the face of admitting that giving less than 100% effort leads to injuries. No consistency.

Some of you seem to think that I'm saying the D-line has regressed. That would be wrong. I'm saying they mailed it in and many were not in game shape.

I see no consistency in your counter arguments.

Coach Venturi saw the same thing I did so I'm not out here on my usual limb all by my lonesome. :ja:

Alrighty then. I think you're reading too much into what I was saying, and are trying to make it a competition of sorts, but I'm relatively sure I was being consistent. I said not playing all out relative to the 2011 season (i.e. thinking too much) leads to injury, but at no point did I say that's what was happening against Cleveland. You're the one who implied that Fisher was putting his players at risk based on what you were reading. I only countered that by mentioning that he's been doing this (preseason and player development) for 17 years. If Venturi has more experience, and feels as though Fisher was being negligent, then I VEHEMENTLY disagree with that assessment.

 

[FRO]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

When you we're behind in a lot of your games and tied for first in sacks, the pass rush is something I worry very little about. Our entire starting defense is under 30, so it's not like we will hit that age dropoff. We didn't lose any key players as far as pass rushing. To say you worry about our pass rush is just weak.

What I do take away from what he wrote is that our offensive line looks good. That's what excites me.

 

[albefree69]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X replied:
I think you're reading too much into what I was saying, and are trying to make it a competition of sorts, but I'm relatively sure I was being consistent.

You could be right about me misreading you (although I did warn you that might be the case) but I can assure you that you're misreading me if you can write that sentence above. :bg:

I'm just having a lot of difficulty figuring out what you're arguing. I probably missed a key word or two. Of course when your argueing with multiple posters it's hard to separate your thoughts.

So you and others have no problems with how the Browns game played out. I do. Let's see if we agree or disagree about our performance in the next game. :ww:

 

[iced]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

the 1's d-line only played one series....

 

[tonyl711]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

I don't think they were not playing hard, what they were doing is playing as basic as they could, very few stunts or blitzes, just pretty much a straight forward rush, the fact that they were playing basic D when the O clearly gameplanned for this game makes it a lot easier on the Oline. do you really think that if the Rams would have been running stunts and blitzing that that game would have been the same? i think they were playing hard but very very basic. i trust Fisher.

 

[A55VA6]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

I feel this preseason will be no indication on what is in store in the regular season. This pass rush was outstanding last year and i expect it to be just as good maybe even better this year.

 

[-X-]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X replied:
I think you're reading too much into what I was saying, and are trying to make it a competition of sorts, but I'm relatively sure I was being consistent.

You could be right about me misreading you (although I did warn you that might be the case) but I can assure you that you're misreading me if you can write that sentence above. :bg:

I'm just having a lot of difficulty figuring out what you're arguing. I probably missed a key word or two. Of course when your argueing with multiple posters it's hard to separate your thoughts.

So you and others have no problems with how the Browns game played out. I do. Let's see if we agree or disagree about our performance in the next game. :ww:

Well I wouldn't go that far. Of course I was dissatisfied with the way it played out; and I made my feelings known at the time. I'd like for the Rams to win every game they play, but I rewatched it a few times too and came away with the impression that they weren't trying to make a "game" of it. Your views are echoed by Venturi, mine are echoed by Joe Thomas and Fisher. Meh. It is what it is. I don't think anyone should put too much stock into the outcome of preseason games, and I enumerated the reasons for that. I'll add one too. Spagnuolo was 10-2 in preseason his whole time here.

 

[albefree69]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

tonyl711 with his own perspective:
I don't think they were not playing hard, what they were doing is playing as basic as they could, very few stunts or blitzes, just pretty much a straight forward rush, the fact that they were playing basic D when the O clearly gameplanned for this game makes it a lot easier on the Oline. do you really think that if the Rams would have been running stunts and blitzing that that game would have been the same? i think they were playing hard but very very basic. i trust Fisher.

You're misreading what my problem with the performance of our D-line starters is.
I could care less that we didn't get any sacks.
I could care less that we used a vanilla D.
I could care less that we didn't blitz and in fact I'm glad we didn't.

What I do care about is our D-line didn't win any individual battles with their O-line.
What I do care about is that the D-line mailed it in and that's not just my opinion or Venturi's but Joe Thomas's too.

So no, I don't think they were playing hard and that's been verified by many sources. Of course I'm only talking about the starters and they didn't play very much so it's not a big deal. But I don't like it.

And as X just said it is just a preseason game but I firmly nelieve that Saffold's injury is the direct result of not having the correct mind set to start the game. He wasn't ready for the Browns to play that hard.

 

[albefree69]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X rightfully disagreed:
Well I wouldn't go that far. Of course I was dissatisfied with the way it played out; and I made my feelings known at the time.

Yeah, I didn't word that right cause I'm getting tired. I meant concerning the play of our D-line starters vs their O-line starters. I got lazy.

 

[FRO]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

As far as the Cleveland game, the Browns offensive line is very good. If the Rams pass rush is predictable (very little stunting or blitzing), those guys are good enough to stop it. I think their skill on the line and our lack of exotic plays has everything to do with the lack of pass rush. I wouldn't get concerned. Now when week 1 rolls around and Palmer has all day, worry then.

 

[albefree69]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

FRO loving procrastination:
Now when week 1 rolls around and Palmer has all day, worry then.

It's never too early to start worrying. I'm just gonna start worrying extra hard when that time comes. :lol:

 

[FRO]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

FRO loving procrastination:
Now when week 1 rolls around and Palmer has all day, worry then.

It's never too early to start worrying. I'm just gonna start worrying extra hard when that time comes. :lol:

I absolutely love procrastination. All I worry about is injuries. 2011 taught me to put 0 stock into the preseason.

 

[-X-]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

I firmly believe that Saffold's injury is the direct result of not having the correct mind set to start the game. He wasn't ready for the Browns to play that hard.

Yeah, I think you're gonna be alone on that one (but you're cool with that - lol).
At any rate, let's take a look (full screen HD if you want). Up to that point, he was blocking very well and kept running Kruger upfield and away from Bradford. On the play in question, it just looks like they got tangled up and another one of those *fluke* injuries reared its ugly head for Saffold. He did his job, but something weird happened there.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQbGgZYNODU[/youtube]

*this is my surplus YouTube account.

 

[DR RAM]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X replied:
17 years worth of coaching is something we should put a smidgen of faith in as far as I'm concerned. I don't think that Fisher would purposefully put his players in a situation where they would get injured. "Dogging it" was my phrasing, and it may not have been the correct one. I just don't think Fisher was expecting to show anything, but was instead looking to see how the rookies were developing. They were rushing, they were engaging their man, but they weren't trying to force anything. That's also just a theory, but the end result was/is nothing to be concerned in my opinion. I mean, really. It's the first preseason game between two teams with completely different agendas. We SMOKED the Patriots in preseason 2010 until Belichick played his starters into the 4th quarter. Think they were concerned? They lost two whole games.

First of all, I know that you and everyone else is just stating your own points of view about this. :bg:

How many years of coaching does Coach Venturi have? Does that mean I win? :lol:

Here's my bottom line and this pertains to DR RAM too. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Your saying that we used a vanilla D to not give anything away. Got that and I have no problem with it.

Then you say, and provide anecdotal evidence a la Joe thomas, that they weren't putting out 100% effort.

Then you claim (DR RAM) that Saffold wasn't playing half assed just those "other" players. No consistency.

Then you admit that not playing all out leads to a greater chance of injury but say trust the coach because he has a lot of experience. That flies in the face of admitting that giving less than 100% effort leads to injuries. No consistency.

Some of you seem to think that I'm saying the D-line has regressed. That would be wrong. I'm saying they mailed it in and many were not in game shape.

I see no consistency in your counter arguments.

Coach Venturi saw the same thing I did so I'm not out here on my usual limb all by my lonesome. :ja:

This is exactly what I said, so please don't twist it, so you can try to make your point. I told you how I felt. I know how you feel. Can we leave it at, so you don't keep questioning my integrity?

I think they played hard, they just didn't scheme or show off moves.

On the offensive line, they have to play hard, you can't let your QB get killed.

 

[rhinobean]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

Wonder if the end grabbed Roger's arm? Just saying.

 

[albefree69]

Re: So this guy thinks the Rams pass rush is going to strugg

X with visual aids:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQbGgZYNODU[/youtube]

I really hesitate to rely on my vision and I was primarily going by what someone else wrote about the incident but here goes.

I see him drop back a couple three steps and react very late to the speed of the DE attempting to get around him. He then made a belated attempt to get at least part of his body in front of the guy. Unfortunately, he only got an arm in front and he was spun like a top to the ground. I didn't see him directing/forcing the the DE to the outside at all. To me it looked like the DE was just to fast for him.

Now that doesn't mean that Saffold wasn't trying 100% but I don't think he was mentally ready. He made no attempt to slide over in front of him until it was too late. Just my opinion of course and totally subjective.