Lay Off Craig Dahl ... GEEZUS!

Seen several posters comment on how "horrible" Dahl. First, Dahl is coming back off a hamstring injury. Second, he is a SS/LB hybrid type. They have always envisioned using him a nickle linebacker type. The intention never was to have him as a starting safety who had primary coverage responsibilities ...

Dahl showed a knack to be around the ball, and was laying some wood in the run game. He is a perfect compliment in that regard ...

Expect SS Anthony Smith to be elevated soon to replace Butler as the starter if he cannot go. Then Dahl can return to playing the role he was envisioned to play ...

Seriously, some just can't look at/don't understand the big picture. There is clearly a reason Dahl made the team, and he showed why today. He is a very, very sound tackler and good enough to be effective in the aforementioned role ...

Doesn't mean he's a world beater, were you expecting him to be a pro-bowler? He's a backup safety ...

I completely agree with this statement. Considering the situation i believe Dahl did a decent job, When i read those negative comments about him i was left wondering what the hell they expected out of the guy, he's a backup people... And he did make some nice tackles like infiniti stated.

GEEZUS? Is that like his rapper name?
http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/1...hop4834693.jpg

OMG excuses excuses excuses

Dahl is a role player. In this particular situation his role was to be the SS. It wasnt to be that nickel-back role. Yea i liked what he did vs. the run but his primary role was to help out in coverage and he was horrible at that.

Again he did do well vs. the run. But not vs. the pass. He is not a starter but he is 2nd string SS so he should be ready to step in. The Packers we targeting the ball to his direction so he should be aware of that and get ready to make a play. Like a pick.

No he was not completely horrible. He was horrible at being a pass coverage safety. He did a good job vs. the run. So if Butler cant go next week i wouldn't be against starting Dahl as long as he makes an adjustment when someone is targeting him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RamsInfiniti

Seen several posters comment on how "horrible" Dahl. First, Dahl is coming back off a hamstring injury. Second, he is a SS/LB hybrid type. They have always envisioned using him a nickle linebacker type. The intention never was to have him as a starting safety who had primary coverage responsibilities ...

Dahl showed a knack to be around the ball, and was laying some wood in the run game. He is a perfect compliment in that regard ...

Expect SS Anthony Smith to be elevated soon to replace Butler as the starter if he cannot go. Then Dahl can return to playing the role he was envisioned to play ...

Seriously, some just can't look at/don't understand the big picture. There is clearly a reason Dahl made the team, and he showed why today. He is a very, very sound tackler and good enough to be effective in the aforementioned role ...

Doesn't mean he's a world beater, were you expecting him to be a pro-bowler? He's a backup safety ...

---

Agree completely with you, Infiniti. Being critical of Dahl is extremely misguided. He is one in a long line of Rams who has been thrust into an expanded role out of necessity. We have many more pressing issues with this football team than the "horrible play of Craig Dahl"

the guy's a backup/special teams guy..what do you people expect..

im not critical of Dahl himself, he can only play with the tools he has ...but when you have 5 safeties on the roster and only dress 3..i dont think its wise to dress up a "hybrid LB/SS" type to then when he`s needed to play,not play him in a role that suits his skill set. Anthony Smith should have dressed but as he didnt i think i would have slid Atogwe over to SS and put either Bartell or Fletcher at FS.
thats not to be too critical of Dahl himself tho..as against a very strong Rec corps with his own skill set, i think he actually done the best he could have in the role he was given to play and did indeed make some good plays aswell as the not so good.

What I don't understand is why a guy who was a a starter for the world champion steelers coming of a great pre- season with packers didn't play over an injured nickle linebacker Craig Dahl. I know he just got here and needs to pick up the scheme, but IMO Smith should have been our 3rd safety off the get-go he is way better than Dahl and Roach combined. Plus he spent a whole offseason with the Pack he knows there Offense.

Dahl just played bad. I don't know what else to say about that. I don't question his effort or being placed in a difficult situation due to Butler's injury, but he didn't get the job done and GB went after him constantly.

Excuses are for losing football teams and that's what the Rams are these days. There are bigger problems than how your backup SS got burned, but at this point, it's either you're part of the problem or part of the solution. Dahl's play today was part of the problem.

I didn't think he played especially poorly. I'd have to go back and see if he was supposed to be over the top on any of those long pass plays, but he tied the team lead with 6 solo tackles. The bad pass plays that stuck out in my mind included one where Bradley Fletcher got burned and another where Bartell got burned.

Didnt dahl dive to break up a touchdown pass or am i not remembering things correctly?

Craig Dahl = The New Marc Bulger.

Leave em' alone!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by btimsah

Craig Dahl = The New Marc Bulger.

Leave em' alone!

---

So does that mean you are gonna bash him for superficial reasons also? o no! liek doll aint playin liek a starter shuud.
Most likely because because he isnt a starter.

I was kidding..

Serioulsy? I really don't think football players should be exempt from criticizm after a poor job regardless of position or slot on the depth chart. That being said, I don't think he played any more poorly than player 'x' on defense today. Not all 36 points jogged by him into the endzone.