Chris Long vs Glenn Dorsey vs Vernon Gholston - Page 2

*RAMarkable* · #16 (**permalink**) -23-09-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

Yep, Long is a DE, Dorsey is a DT and Gholston is a LB, so the comparison isn't apples to apples, but I posted these stats for discussion and as an indicator of what these guys are doing. So far I'm happy with the decision my team made.

Interesting thread Mike, but another point you might want to consider is who is going to command more double-team blocks, Long or Dorsey? Since I believe that Dorsey will most definitely be blocked by multiple players throughout his career his stats will, of course, suffer somewhat. Also, which player will ultimately become the more dominant irrespective of their individual statistics.

But no matter really, Chris Long is now a Ram and all I can say is GO CHRIS!!

WHAT SAY YE?

*TekeRam* · #17 (**permalink**) -23-09-2008

Ok, RAMarkable... despite Dorsey getting double teamed, they're giving up 5.7 yards/rush compared to 4.9 for the Rams, and giving up 213 yards/game on the ground vs 154 for the Rams

Through the air is where they are much better, in a sense(since we're both 0-3), in that they are 6th in passing yards allowed, with 133.5 yards/game and 6.5 yards average gain vs our 327.5 yards/game and 9.9 yards average gain. Also, the Chiefs only have 2 sacks as well, so Dorsey's not absorbing pass blockers either.

*SWFCRAM* · #18 (**permalink**) -23-09-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by TekeRam

He's gotta be let on the field to show what he's got. Apparently he ripped the Seattle coverage to shreds when he got out there... catching most everything that he could be expected to catch, and being wide open for a TD that wasn't thrown to him.

Eddie Royal and Desean Jackson are both being played by their respective clubs, they've been given the opportunities. So far, Scott "I'm scared, will you hold me?" Linehan has been too frightened of what might happen if he plays the rookies too much, other than Long.

And of course Long has sucked horribly, racking up half our total sacks(1 of 2) and being a beast in Seattle. Oh no, the rookies might make us lose the game! Oh wait, Linny's got that taken care of by himself.

Totally agree. In defence of Donnie Avery, he was injured for the first game and getting back to fitness for the second. I'm sure if you put him into the Eagles offence against the sorry Rams secondary, he'd have a big day.
Just remember, we have an all-pro, future HOF receiver who so far this year has only 11 catches for 122 yards for our struggling team. That used to be one games production before Line-sham came along. If Holt isn't getting the ball, then a rookie who missed some games and pre-season will find life difficult.
He WILL be a quality player for this franchise for years to come.

btimsah · #19 (**permalink**) -23-09-2008

I would have still gotten Dorsey to play the nose and move Carriker to DE and ran the 3-4. But nobody asked me.. lol

*jkramsfan* · #20 (**permalink**) -23-09-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

Yep, Long is a DE, Dorsey is a DT and Gholston is a LB, so the comparison isn't apples to apples, but I posted these stats for discussion and as an indicator of what these guys are doing. So far I'm happy with the decision my team made.

could not agree more,very happy with Long and as someone said it doesn't hurt having a HOF dad.

Falconator · #21 (**permalink**) -24-09-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by btimsah

I would have still gotten Dorsey to play the nose and move Carriker to DE and ran the 3-4. But nobody asked me.. lol

btimsah,

but i think, respectfully, that you are wrong there because all the scouts that I heard said that Glen Dorsey is a 4-3 Undertackle and not a 3-4 nosetackle.......so, if you do draft Dorsey and put him in at nosetackle - then you are partly negating the position that he is more talented to play - Dorsey is not a huge space-eater which is all a 3-4nose is supposed to be. Dorsey is a penetrating, shoot-the-gap and make backfield plays type of 4-3 undertackle....so, conventional wisdom would say not to bother with selecting Dorsey unless you play a conventional 4-3 defense.

*Nick_Weasel* · #22 (**permalink**) -24-09-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falconator

btimsah,

but i think, respectfully, that you are wrong there because all the scouts that I heard said that Glen Dorsey is a 4-3 Undertackle and not a 3-4 nosetackle.......so, if you do draft Dorsey and put him in at nosetackle - then you are partly negating the position that he is more talented to play - Dorsey is not a huge space-eater which is all a 3-4nose is supposed to be. Dorsey is a penetrating, shoot-the-gap and make backfield plays type of 4-3 undertackle....so, conventional wisdom would say not to bother with selecting Dorsey unless you play a conventional 4-3 defense.

True, but that isn't stopping them with Adam Carriker.

*TKnight39* · #23 (**permalink**) -24-09-2008

I still think Long was the best choice for the Rams. I was thrilled with the pick!!!!

*punahou* · #24 (**permalink**) -24-09-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramblin` Ram

i guess with the Dorsey stats,they must have just run into him or something as from what ive seen of him so far..he looks to be out of shape and hasn`t been able to get any pressure up the middle...Long has adjusted to the NFL a lot quicker for sure..Long may his progress continue!

Dorsey looks like a short, squat Sean Gilbert.

Also-- Dorsey has NEVER proven to be a durable commodity. He has a penchant for getting injured-. As he did earlier this year already.

I dont see why his affliction for injury would change at this level.

Long was the correct pick.