Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 74

Thread: Safety concerns

  1. #31
    chiguy's Avatar
    chiguy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,134
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by rammiser View Post
    Give Atogwe some time he'll be fine.
    Give Kennedy some time, he'll be fine.

    Give Hargrove some time, he really showed flashes!

    Give Lewis some time, he's going to really break out.


    I, for one, want guys who will perform now rather than in some mythical fantasy future. Atogwe may yet turn out to be both decent and consistent (he's neither yet, in my book), but we all need to stop pretending that our defensive players fail to execute because of their age. Sometimes -- indeed, quite frequently with the Rams of late -- its because they aren't good.


  2. #32
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,550
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Safety concerns

    Maybe I'm missing something here, but are we talking about the same two guys who had more solo tackles than any safety tandem in the league (tied with Oakland's Schweigert/Huff with 132)? And were 2nd and 3rd on the team in total tackles?

    A FS who led all NFL DBs in forced fumbles, top 10 among safties for picks, 9th in solo tackles among all safeties? A SS 3rd in solo tackles among all safeties, referred to by his coaches as a "coach-on-the-field", and leadership skills impressive to the point of being named a team captain his first year with the team?

    Just so I'm clear......these are the guys we're talking about?

    I understand the idea of wanting to upgrade. EVERY position can be upgraded. However, if we're going to upgrade, let's do it at a position that HASN'T produced at a high level. I watch the games too, and I KNOW we have bigger needs than Safety. We addressed some of those needs (D-line, 3rd receiver, TE, LB depth) to some degree or another, and next year Safety may be a position of need......because Chavous will be 32 before the '08 season and Atogwe will be a RFA, not because Atogwe/Chavous is the weakest position of need.
    Last edited by HUbison; -06-29-2007 at 09:27 AM.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  3. #33
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,492
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by chiguy View Post
    Give Kennedy some time, he'll be fine.

    Give Hargrove some time, he really showed flashes!

    Give Lewis some time, he's going to really break out.
    Extremely weak analogy. Atogwe's performance last year was superior to any year's performance by any of the three players you listed. Also, including Hargrove is kind of silly, as he was traded because of his off-the-field issues.

  4. #34
    RAMMAN68's Avatar
    RAMMAN68 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Escondido, CA
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,714
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Safety concerns

    I think OJ will be better this year, I'm on the fence with Chavous, but he is a team leader on the field, if Todd Johnson can spell him in short yardage situations I think the safety position will be fine this year. Besides, it all starts in the trenches.
    JUST WIN ONE FOR THE FANS


    "HIT HARD, HIT FAST, AND HIT OFTEN"
    Adm. William "Bull" Halsey

  5. #35
    rammiser's Avatar
    rammiser is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Age
    40
    Posts
    1,999
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by chiguy View Post
    Give Kennedy some time, he'll be fine.

    Give Hargrove some time, he really showed flashes!

    Give Lewis some time, he's going to really break out.


    I, for one, want guys who will perform now rather than in some mythical fantasy future. Atogwe may yet turn out to be both decent and consistent (he's neither yet, in my book), but we all need to stop pretending that our defensive players fail to execute because of their age. Sometimes -- indeed, quite frequently with the Rams of late -- its because they aren't good.
    Avenger is right weak analogy. For one, I have used this to point out that Steven Jackson would be fine, and now I'm using it for Atogwe. I havnt used it for every young guy we ever drafted. Secondly if you can say you thought Lewis would be a bust right from the get go your a better prognosticator than most of us on this board. I never really liked Hargrove, and I dont like Adeyanju. Kennedy was a project from the start and I had hopes for him, but he's lazy. If your expecting every player at every position to come in and perform right away you'll be waiting your entire life, it will never happen. Atogwe performed fine last year, as a first year starter. I can't believe how crappy our defense was last year yet most of you have such a keen eye to how bad Atogwe was. If not for him we go 7-9 not 8-8. He single handedly saved the Redskin game. Maybe you forgot about him punching the ball out when Betts ripped off a long run. He has play making ability and was 1 of 11 guys taking bad angles and missing tackles last year. If you consider the amount of times Chavous and Atogwe had to make plays because of our crappy d-line in hindsight maybe they didnt do so poorly afterall. If it wasnt for those two on many,many occasion's saving td's because of running backs breaking through the line untouched with a full haead of steam our defense would have been far worse. He's young and improveing unlike Kennedy and Lewis hes getting better and the stats speak for themselves.
    Just Fix It

  6. #36
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something here, but are we talking about the same two guys who had more solo tackles than any safety tandem in the league (tied with Oakland's Schweigert/Huff with 132)? And were 2nd and 3rd on the team in total tackles?

    A FS who led all NFL DBs in forced fumbles, top 10 among safties for picks, 9th in solo tackles among all safeties? A SS 3rd in solo tackles among all safeties, referred to by his coaches as a "coach-on-the-field", and leadership skills impressive to the point of being named a team captain his first year with the team?

    Just so I'm clear......these are the guys we're talking about?

    I understand the idea of wanting to upgrade. EVERY position can be upgraded. However, if we're going to upgrade, let's do it at a position that HASN'T produced at a high level. I watch the games too, and I KNOW we have bigger needs than Safety. We addressed some of those needs (D-line, 3rd receiver, TE, LB depth) to some degree or another, and next year Safety may be a position of need......because Chavous will be 32 before the '08 season and Atogwe will be a RFA, not because Atogwe/Chavous is the weakest position of need.
    First no one in this thread said that safety was the weakest position of need.

    What actually got said was this---that AFTER the front 7 and CB are upgraded, the Rams mediocre safeties will have to be upgraded. The very way that's put means that the front 7 and CB are the greater priorities NOW.

    And yes we are talking about the same 2 guys who amassed meaningless stats on a bad defense but who also each showed different but distinct weaknesses as players.

    As far as stats etc. v. play....name the teams in the league that would flat out trade their safety tandem for the Rams safety tandem.

    The ones that would do that are *bad* at the safety spot.

    The ones who wouldn't are *better* than the Rams at safety.

    Because in spite of a ton of impassioned misreading, the actually argument here is that they are medicre to average at best.

    Hence, better than bad.

    But not first-rate.

    As far as stats go...watch a player play. Cause in case anyone thinks that on the basis of stats Atogwe is a better player than Perry, they might want to re-think their evaluative criteria.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -06-29-2007 at 02:09 PM.

  7. #37
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,492
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Safety concerns

    Actually, if I could upgrade one position on the defense right now, safety would not be at the top of the list. I'd say DE or SLB would be my top two priorities.

  8. #38
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Actually, if I could upgrade one position on the defense right now, safety would not be at the top of the list. I'd say DE or SLB would be my top two priorities.
    So that when I say after the front 7 and CB are addressed then safety becomes the next priority....

    ...we are in complete agreement.

    At least when it comes to that.

    Unless, mysteriously, you don't count DE or SLB as being part of the front 7.

    But I doubt that. So, again...complete agreement.

  9. #39
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,492
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Safety concerns

    That may be, but you also said this:

    by the end of 2007, the need for an upgrade at safety will be obvious
    So I guess I just don't get the import of your overall point. If the Rams front 7 is the priority and, as you put, still needs to be "upgraded" or "addressed," and the second priority is to upgrade the CBs, then why even bother talking about upgrading the safeties? There are limited resources (draft choices, cap $) to deal with personnel issues, and if a position is (as you acknowledge) not a priority, isn't that the perfect time to try to develop a player at that position who only has one year under his belt and has demonstrated some playmaking ability?

    The only way safety will become a practical priorty to be addressed in the near future is if the young players on the front 7 (Carriker, Wroten, Ryan, Jackson, Alston) and the young CBs (Hill, Bartell, Wade) develop sufficiently in 2007 to allow the Rams to focus on the safety position in 2008. If you believe that will happen, great, but you haven't expressed it that way. If that does not happen, the safety position will remain a secondary concern (no pun intended ) and the Rams will either stick with what they have or hope find a sleeper in the mid to late rounds of next year's draft.

  10. #40
    blood85's Avatar
    blood85 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Merced,California
    Age
    43
    Posts
    1,336
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: Safety concerns

    I think we're "ok" at safety. Granted, there are better out there, but I think the Rams wanted to work with what we have and see what happens.

  11. #41
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,550
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Safety concerns

    First no one in this thread said that safety was the weakest position of need.
    I believe your opening salvo was...
    Safety just wasn't up there on the list of priorities.

    But it will be next time, I bet.
    So after the front 7 and CB, safeties are a concern. So you're saying the safeties are the least of our worries? Yet, the replacement of Atogwe and Chavous will be a priority next time? Which is it, do you think they can play or not?
    And yes we are talking about the same 2 guys who amassed meaningless stats on a bad defense but who also each showed different but distinct weaknesses as players.
    I hate to be the burster of bubbles, but stats are far from meaningless. Defenders tackle. That's what they do. So when I say that our two safeties were among the league leaders, that's far from meaningless. How is tackles less of an indicator than the qualitative opinion from a fan as to the proper angle one takes to a play? Think back about Hargrove, Coady, Duncan.......those are guys who didn't take good angles AND had the (lack of) stats to prove it. Numbers don't lie. Chavous and Atogwe, even with taking what you deem to be bad angles, gets the job done better than most.
    As far as stats etc. v. play....name the teams in the league that would flat out trade their safety tandem for the Rams safety tandem.
    Let's ask it this way, Zachary. What teams would the Rams trade our safeties for theirs? That would be a short list.
    As far as stats go...watch a player play. Cause in case anyone thinks that on the basis of stats Atogwe is a better player than Perry, they might want to re-think their evaluative criteria.
    We ALL watch these players play. That's what we do, and that's why we're here. Some of us just have numbers that agree with us. Which is better........a player who looks good according to some qualitative appearance, but has poor statistical production or the opposite?

    As for me, I don't care a player looks like epileptic rhino on the field, if they get the job done, I'll take them.

    As for Atogwe better than Perry, the only DB named Perry I find on an NFL roster is Jereme Perry. And, uh, yea, I'd gladly take Atogwe over the Browns 2nd string corner.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  12. #42
    Bud Light Guy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    66
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by rammiser View Post
    ZNRD,

    In 1999 we had the GSOT. We finished 6th in defense that year. Most teams played catch up in every game by passing the ball. We did not have great safties we had servicable safties. You don't need great safties to win a superbowl. You need guys who play well enough not to hurt you and that's what I see in Atogwe. He does force turnovers, and on the other hand does miss some tackles, but again who didnt on our defense last year? We need a defense that doesnt give up 200 yds rushing a game. If we can finish in the top 15 in defense the Rams will have a real shot this year. On top of that we can't have all pro players at every position. It's the salary cap age. Look at the great defenses in the league they have 2 or 3 stars and the rest are hard working servicable but replaceable players that work cohesivly as a unit. That is what we need, we have our stars we need players to play well enough not to cost us a game and Atogwe is fine in that book.
    No offense to Arenas Williams, but Ronny Lott was better safety.

  13. #43
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    I believe your opening salvo was... So after the front 7 and CB, safeties are a concern. So you're saying the safeties are the least of our worries? Yet, the replacement of Atogwe and Chavous will be a priority next time? Which is it, do you think they can play or not? I hate to be the burster of bubbles, but stats are far from meaningless. Defenders tackle. That's what they do. So when I say that our two safeties were among the league leaders, that's far from meaningless. How is tackles less of an indicator than the qualitative opinion from a fan as to the proper angle one takes to a play? Think back about Hargrove, Coady, Duncan.......those are guys who didn't take good angles AND had the (lack of) stats to prove it. Numbers don't lie. Chavous and Atogwe, even with taking what you deem to be bad angles, gets the job done better than most. Let's ask it this way, Zachary. What teams would the Rams trade our safeties for theirs? That would be a short list. We ALL watch these players play. That's what we do, and that's why we're here. Some of us just have numbers that agree with us. Which is better........a player who looks good according to some qualitative appearance, but has poor statistical production or the opposite?

    As for me, I don't care a player looks like epileptic rhino on the field, if they get the job done, I'll take them.

    As for Atogwe better than Perry, the only DB named Perry I find on an NFL roster is Jereme Perry. And, uh, yea, I'd gladly take Atogwe over the Browns 2nd string corner.
    I said, they have to repair the front 7 first, which was this year's priority. That was said in a context where the discussion was this---why DIDN'T THEY ADDRESS SAFETY THIS YEAR? My response was, other things had to come first. IE they can "get by" with what they have at safety though some day they are going to have to fix safety too cause it's just NOT a first-rate unit.

    So I said WHEN THE FRONT 7 IS FIXED IT WILL BECOME MORE APPARENT THAT THE SAFETY SITUATION HOLDS THEM BACK. How that got turned into "the least of our worries" is beyond me, cause the phrase "least of our worries" does not convey what I said and I flat reject it as being what I meant.

    I btw don't see a contradiction between drafting an end next year and a safety unless of course you think someone recommended drafting 7 safeties with the available draft picks in 2008.

    Yes everyone watches the team and as should be abundantly apparent, we don't all agree on the results. But the real actual (missed) point is this----flat stats arguments with a bad defense are meaningless. They simply are.... because tackle stats for safeties on a bad defense COULD mean anything, and so you can't just quote the stats without a supporting argument pointing to facets of the guy's actual play. To say a safety on a bad defense has a lot of tackles only tells us that at a bare minimum, the guy doesn't always miss. . . and, sadly, has a lot of opportunities. But I could name 5-6 plays at least that Witherspoon made against the run that made a difference in a drive. Name 5-6 plays Atogwe made against the run that made a difference in stopping a drive. Numbers don't lie only in this sense---they tell you the guy made that many tackles. They don't tell you where on the field, how often he diagnosed the play, how often he made a difference, or how often he missed. Cause a bad defense will give a FS lots of chances to tackle. So what. That alone doesn't make him a first-rate safety. Frankly most people, even his greatest defenders, will be hard-pressed to name 5-6 great plays he made against the run...yet with first-rate defenders, even on a bad defense, we can all do that. This gets to the main issue I have with Atogwe. He takes bad angles (still), he is slow to react (still), and misdiagnoses a lot of plays (still) because he does not have the kinds of instincts and game smarts and reactions you need to be a first-rate safety in the NFL. Hence my description of him as somewhere between mediocre and average at best.

    Kim Herring had 106 tackles and assists in 2002. Do you miss the great Kim Herring? Is he destined for your safety hall of fame? Jason Sehorn had 90 tackles and assists in 2003. Is Sehorn your idea of a great safety?

    As for which teams, if the Rams had a chance, they would trade for? Well since neither of us can mind-read the team, maybe the real question is, which safeties would YOU trade for or not? If it was up to me, I would say, for starters that each playoff team has at least one guy I would take over either Atogwe or Chavous-as-a-SS.

    As for me. I want a first-rate defense so I want first-rate safeties, not ones that I see (for very good reasons) as mediocre to average at best. I want guys who actually DO get the job done, not guys who are defended by stats only arguments...the limitations of which I pointed out (and bear in mind that was not an argument against STATS, it was an argument saying that tackling stats are meaningless when you are trying to judge how good 2 safeties are on a bad defense...you need a lot more than stats to make a case for them. For example, no one here yet has even tried to argue against the claim that if you watch Atogwe, it is apparent that he does not have first-rate reactions, instincts, or diagnostic skills.)

    I like the fact that Chavous is heady and leader, but he is better suited for FS. So I would be happy if they moved Chavous over and replaced him with a real genuine first-rate stud strong safety.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -06-29-2007 at 05:02 PM.

  14. #44
    Bud Light Guy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    66
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Safety concerns

    Safeties don't take that long to develope in the NFL. After a couple seasons, you can generally tell what you have in the player you drafted. Atogwe isn't really that talented. He is part of the mess Martz left behind. Martz was awful at drafting defensive talent and the defense is really paying for it. I really don't see him being a part of the Rams too much longer, especially if the Rams look to draft a S early in next year's draft.

  15. #45
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,492
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by z.nrd View Post
    ISo I said WHEN THE FRONT 7 IS FIXED IT WILL BECOME MORE APPARENT THAT THE SAFETY SITUATION HOLDS THEM BACK.
    I disagree with this statement entirely. No team in the league has "first rate stud" players at every position on a unit. Rather, most great units are comprised of a few key great players and several average-good players. The great players draw enough attention to make the average-good players succeed (often to a point where they appear to be better players than they would on most other teams).

    Take the Bears defense from 2006, which ranked first in yards allowed and points allowed in the NFC and carried a relatively weak offense to the Super Bowl. Did they have "first rate studs" at every position? Not even close.

    They had a three great players (Tommy Harris, Brian Urlacher, Lance Briggs), a few good to very good players (Alex Brown, Adowale Ogunleye, Mark Anderson, Charles Tillman, Nathan Vasher) and some pretty average players (Tank Johnson, Ian Scott, Hunter Hillenmeyer.

    Here's a quiz: Who were their starting safeties for the bulk of the year?

    Answer: Chris Harris, Cameron Worrell and Danieal Manning (a group so "first rate" that, even with Mike Brown returning from injury this year, the team felt compelled to sign a big name FA this offseason to bolster the squad. You may have heard of him. Adam Archuleta)

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. FOX Fantasy Football is coming!
    By Ram Warrior in forum FANTASY
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -06-21-2006, 12:52 AM
  2. Free Safety Competition Heats Up - Wagoner
    By Nick in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -08-26-2005, 02:20 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: -07-31-2005, 05:37 PM
  4. Atogwe Hopes to Make the Grade at Safety
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: -06-24-2005, 01:32 PM
  5. St. Louis Searches for Stability at Safety
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -05-06-2005, 09:51 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •