Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 74 of 74

Thread: Safety concerns

  1. #61
    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 z.nrd View Post
    Back for a quick one. Now, I am trying to go one pile-on post at a time, and answer every point. So far I have only done 3 points from PO post #1. I will get there, eventually, and try to answer a bunch of it. Won't get very far this post.

    For those who are not part of the discussion, lurkers and readers and such, the goal is to show an interesting discussion among Rams fans showing mutual respect yet differing over fundamental viewpoints and perceptions. Very thing a message board is s'posed to be for. Diversity of views.

    Okay. First though I will go to the last post cause at least it has the virtue of being fresh (and is a decent post from a guy who is obviously just interested in the discussion.

    Though I disagree with it.

    NOw saying he had 6 tackles within 2 yards of the LOS is not...impressive. In fact, it's pretty weak. The question had to do with HOW OFTEN he does it, and .... 6 times in a season is weak. So remember, I never said, he can't do it *ever*...I asked how OFTEN he did it, because plays like that might show how decisive, instinctive, and quick his reads and reactions are. It was just a way of asking, how many impressive, decisive plays does Atogwe make in run defense, plays that show his instincts and the quickness of his reactions?

    As far as covering Fitzgerald...yeah okay he makes plays against the best, but I would be more impressed if he LIMITED THEM. Can anyone think of a game where afterward they said "hey X got limited and it was cause of Atogwe." No just did he make some plays, which is what I would expect from a mediocre to average at best guy, but did he make a difference? To be fair...some of his FRs did precisely that. But in addition to his FRs.

    Even then, I misled the last poster with the way I put it. No good FS makes all or even most of his plays near the LOS. But a good FS will do that often enough for it to be noticed in a game. I didn't mean to make the LOS itself the issue. If anyone wants to, name the great run defense plays Atogwe made that impressed you---where he diagnosed quickly and shot into the picture to limit a gain. I'll expand this and say not just near the LOS, since that quite understandably got misunderstood, and so I have to clarify it....not just near the LOS, but AT ALL. As the final line of defense, near the LOS, anytime anywhere. Even Archuletta did that sometimes---you'd see him arrive to shut a play down even if the runner got past the DL and LBs. He would arrive decisively with authority. I don't know what happened to AA but he was capable of that his first couple of years...and AA was never all that great (deficiencies in coverage). The issue for me is instincts, reactions, and ability to diagnose. That may mean sometimes, depending on the play, that the FS would be deep and serve as the last line of defense, so to speak (and I should add that way too many other teams highlights show Atogwe being the culprit on a long run. The fact that Coakley and the DEs were bad too doesn't interest me in this discussion...a good FS can play like a good FS even in a bad defense. He won't make that much difference if the rest of the defense is bad, but, you can still tell how good HE is under those circumstances.)

    Back to one at a time from the beginning, where I left off.

    Okay, forward. Beginning with the point where PO poster #1 said I didn't point out the liimitations with stats. And of course obviously I did. I pointed out that stats are not meaningful in measuring Atogwe's performance because they do not say when he made opportune plays quickly based on effective reads. They could just mean that as a FS in a porous defense he got lots of chances and didn't always miss. I pointed out that the issue is instincts, reactions, and so on. So yeah I dealt with that stuff...typically for my posts in this thread, I repeated it several times. I don't see how anyone could miss that.

    And I *do* have a clue what I am talking about when I talk about instincts. "Instincts" is just a word people use to describe how quickly a player can process info in the middle of a play and respond with the right or appropriate response. It had to do with "not thinking"---or, in reality, thinking so fast it seems like you're not (ie. notoriously, in football, if you have to "think about it," you haven't reached the point yet where your reactions are quick enough.) Atogwe had problems with reads and responses and reacting quickly. That's WHY he takes bad angles so often---he can't process things as fast as players who ARE (what we call) very instinctive.

    Disagree if you want but I've always looked for that kind of thing watching the game, from a long time ago.

    Haslett may be quite happy but I don't take that as a final nail in the argument coffin, cause, in fact, Haslett has a long history of being weak at making good personnel judgements. Remember he defends Chillar too, and not everyone is convinced Chillar is the guy we need in his spot. He also stuck with Fisher long past the point where it was obvious Fisher was a liability. And so on. Like all coaches Haslett may have blind spots...and maybe the safeties is one of them. Doesn't matter. There's lots of ways to respond to that issue. Neverthless, I am claiming that eventually, they will reach a point where they have to improve at safety or accept a lower ceiling for overall defensive improvement.

    If I am wrong and Atogwe becomes a solid consistent pro who makes his share of key plays all season, then, fine...I'll be wrong. Shrug. But right now, I don;t see anyone saying "hey Atogwe can do this, he did that, he's good at this, watch him when XYZ happens, he got better at this n that, his game includes this and that skill"...it's all stats, "Haslett said," and a wee bit of baiting cause who dares question OJ Atogwe.

    IN other words, if I didn't voice my own view on the guy and just said "convince me Atogwe will be a first-rate FS in this league, describe his game"...so far, I wouldn't be all that very much convinced.

    There is the other argument which is more or less that he does more good than harm and being servicable is okay.

    Okay, but, to me, this defense looks like it needs a multi-tasking solid stud SS---who can play the run instinctively, play 8 in the box, blitz effectively, at least hold his own in coverage, AND zone up with good effect. Why? Cause that's the way this defense works. It's a high-risk, stunting, blitzing defense with fast but undersized LBs, and a defense like that will always be better off with a first-rate guy at SS, someone who can make a difference going back and going forward. Since Chavous has value as the brains of the outfit, plus is a scrappy guy who can contribute, I just thought he would be at least as good at FS as Atogwe....and keeping Chavous on the field means keeping the brains of the secondary on the field. Chavous can't be the SS they want. A bit too small, a bit too slow, a bit not physical enough---he would be better at FS, and the defense would be better with a really first-rate SS.

    Or short of that, something better than what they have. Maybe just someone faster. Maybe just someone stronger. Something.
    Couldn't agree more. Though the homers on this board will even argue over this most current post of yours.


  2. #62
    Roy G. Biv's Avatar
    Roy G. Biv is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    The Modern Day Dead Ráibéad
    Age
    41
    Posts
    251
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Safety concerns

    What in the holy name of flyin' fornication is going on around here? I'm gone for a couple of days, and this is what I return to? I haven't seen this much verbal manipulation of one's own genitals since the last presidential debate. I don't have an opinion on this one but I do have to ask one question. What the hell does some mope sitting in front of his tv eating doritos on a Sunday afternoon know about a player's instincts? That must be one sweet tv, because all mine shows me is whatever happens to be in front of the camera at the time. I got to get me one of those that shows a players instincts. They got those at Best Buy, Circuit City or what?
    "I'm not going to hide my opinions. They're coming to you between 7000-4000 Angstroms for all the world to see. Oh yes, you will be enlightened."

  3. #63
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy G. Biv View Post
    What the hell does some mope sitting in front of his tv eating doritos on a Sunday afternoon know about a player's instincts?
    '

    You know how to tell? Watch the player. In more than one game. Does he react quick, a lot; does he make plays by getting into the action fast? Or is he more often than not behind the curve?

    It's just a word. I even explained how the word is used and what it means (it doesn't refer to anything mysterious, it refers to something real). It's not supposed to rile up people of threaten those who have bad blood pressure.

    If you think you can watch a game and tell good players from bad players from average players from better players, then, you have opinions too. Who did you think was better---Fletcher, Duncan, Claiborne, Witherspoon? Why? If you think you know....no one's any different.

    So settle down and try not to over-react to a mere word and/or if someone sees things different than you. Fair enough?
    Last edited by z.nrd; -06-30-2007 at 08:15 PM.

  4. #64
    Bar-bq's Avatar
    Bar-bq is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,824
    Rep Power
    92

    Re: Safety concerns

    :\ Z.NRD! You've managed to completely ignore my post...*Lip Quiver*

    But you're not off the hook quite yet. I want to hear a response m'boy.


    Roy G... You have to shop around for one of those "Player Reaction" TVs. I think you'll find circuit city has them in their catalogue, but they're almost always on Back Order with their Chinese manufacturers. I'd say do some hunting at local garage sales, or failing that, you could make a trip to Z.Nrd's house on Sundays, and steal his TV when he's on the jon.

  5. #65
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,023
    Rep Power
    164

    Re: Safety concerns

    I love a good discussion/debate. Unfortunately, this thread does not qualify. What I find amazing is that z.nrd has no credentials other than that which we all have (football fans who post on a message board), and yet he expects others to accept his subjective, vague and nonspecific observations as valid points. And when people reject those observations, they are merely repeated in posts of ever increasing lengths.

    Which brings me to the next reason why this is not a good discussion/debate. Simply put, if you can't make a cogent point in a succinct manner, it may be that you don't have a cogent point to make.

    All in all, this thread has simply become boring, which is the worst sin of all on a message board. :x

  6. #66
    EvilXenu's Avatar
    EvilXenu is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tom Cruise's Basement, Planet Teegeeack
    Posts
    60
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by z.nrd View Post
    For those who are not part of the discussion, lurkers and readers and such, the goal is to show an interesting discussion among Rams fans showing mutual respect yet differing over fundamental viewpoints and perceptions.
    Really? I could have sworn the purpose here was for you to prove to everyone that you're an expert on evaluating NFL safeties.

    And I *do* have a clue what I am talking about when I talk about instincts. "Instincts" is just a word people use to describe how quickly a player can process info in the middle of a play and respond with the right or appropriate response.
    You know, just because you can define the word, doesn't mean you have any better knowledge about a player's instincts than any other fan (which, by the way, is less knowledge than the coaches have, and they seem to think Atogwe is worth developing).
    And you thought Mike Martz was "mad"!

  7. #67
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilXenu View Post
    Really? I could have sworn the purpose here was for you to prove to everyone that you're an expert on evaluating NFL safeties.



    You know, just because you can define the word, doesn't mean you have any better knowledge about a player's instincts than any other fan (which, by the way, is less knowledge than the coaches have, and they seem to think Atogwe is worth developing).
    You're getting personal. I'm not. I wrote a post, offering a perspective. Lots of people disagreed. I answered the disagreements. I never claimed to know more about safety. Just defending my perspective. I don't claim to know more about instincts. Just using a word we all use talking about players. Just making an argument. You don't need to take that personally.

    As for AR and BrbiQ and their more recent posts...haven't even read em yet. I'll catch up with you. Still a lot of posts to answer. Am getting there. It will happen a bit at a time. Patience.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -07-01-2007 at 12:27 AM.

  8. #68
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Safety concerns

    * "Production numbers" are meaningless if we're talking about quality of play---where the tackles are made, in what context, that sort of thing. But people can watch a player play and judge his quality of play. That's just a normal way of going about discussing a player. For example, stats did not show anyone the fact that for about the first half of the season, Jackson ran too upright. When he learned to run lower, under/behind his pads, he instantly became a better runner. You could see it. Stats are always at best only half the equation. You also need an eyeball knowledge of what a player's up to---what he does, how he looks.

    * There is the argument that guys like Jenkins were servicable and replacable but the Rams won with them anyway. Well first I disagree that the 99 Rams defense consisted of 3 exceptional players and that the rest were okay. Obviously Fletcher and Carter did a lot, but the glue that held the defense together was Farr and Agnew. Excellent play from 2 skilled technicians at DT. Anyway, that aside, you have a point...though, my take is that this defense, under Haslett, is so aggressive that it needs a steady force at SS to make it all work. Lots of blitzing, stunting, different looks, so it needs an anchor---a guy who can get into coverage okay, can play near the LOS when that's the package, can blitz, and can be very effective against the run. That's what would anchor a fast, aggressive defense with smallish fast LBs.

    That;s the best response yet, btw---meaning, your post (rammiser). I just want more out of this defense and I just think that the way Haslett plays them, they need excellent play at safety to excel. As it stands I think the play is not quite servicable...I think the safeties have deficiencies that rank them a little lower than that, PLUS this particular defense needs more out of the safety spot. Will they make the playoffs with the present safeties? Maybe, I dunno, but I think they are exploitable.

    * Chavous was far from excellent last season, though I like him, and he certainly wasn't awful---he's heady, savvy, scrappy, and capable of some big plays. But he can't force the run, he isn't a great blitzer, and is a step slow, a shade not strong enough, and not a great asset in coverage. They can do better than Chavous. And again stats DO lie sometimes because, in fact, on a team with a swiss cheese front 7, safeties are gonna get a lot of opportunities. That's not the same as saying that if you WATCH the guy, he is regularly making a real difference against the run and in coverage. Chavous will always be good enough so that you can justify putting his brains and savvy and gamesmarts on the field, but when we watch him, we don't see someone who can regularly make decisive plays. Depends on whether you think servicable is good enough. In the case of Chavous I think he would be better suited for FS.

    * When I typed "Browns" in that sentence I meant the BEARS. Just a typo. I guess I had Brown on my mind cause that's who I was talking about. And yeah Brown was injured (and was sorely MISSED, as the Browns er um Bears players themselves said). That's why I said I would take their ORIGINAL starting safeties (ie. pre- injury).

    * as for your "very clever," you need to read that better. I said the RAMS defense needs a first-rate safety to excel. I also said I didnt say EVERY *defense* needs that. So, logically, the Rams belong to the subset requiring excellent safety play to be elite, while some other defenses do not belong to that subset. Thought all that was clear. It's like saying the Martz offense absolutely needs a qb with first-rate accuracy to excel, but that not every offense needs that kind of qb. I don't see where the problem is. I think maybe you didn't read that carefully. Given that, all the innuendoes about presumed intent or motivation just means you are talking about the poster, and attributing bad things to him, when you just didn't get what was being said.

    * Again, on Chavous. The guy does not have everything you need in a good SS for this defense. And I keep answering about the numbers though some are acting like nothing was said. On a porous defense safeties can get a lot of opportunities. That doesn't mean they were making a differerence or making decisive plays with all those tackles. Where were the tackles, why, under what circumstances. Though having said that, I do keep saying I would like to see Chavous at FS...I just want him paired with a more complete SS. And Brown can do more than Chavous. Saying Brown is heady doesn't mean I think he's identical to Chavous...I actually think a healthy Brown offers something more, though again, I like the idea of Chavous at FS.

    * I will keep repeating this until someone actually acknowledges and responds to it. The numbers show that Atogwe and Chavous made tackles. With a porous front 7, that's going to happen...but what the numbers don't show us is the effect, timing, placement, and decisiveness of those tackles. Just saying they can tackle doesn't solve the argument. Unless you're arguing with someone who says they can't tackle. And that's not the case. Watching the game, what you DON'T see is safeties who appear first-rate and with the quality of difference makers in spite of the poor play around them. What you see is guys who make some plays (not enough) but are just not going to get the Rams known as a team with great safety play. Meanwhile, if Bob Sanders played on the 2006 Rams defense, it would most likely be just as bad (front 7) but you would see him actively showing his stuff. You would be able to tell his quality in spite of the surrounding cast. That's not what you see when you watch these 2 guys (though, again AGAIN, I like Chavous, just more as a FS and paired with someone really good at SS). Watching the game counts. Numbers mean nothing outside the context of watching the game.

    * Just look at Witherspoon's first 4 games...he was a bountiful playmaker. I don't like his game when he was trying to cover for a busted up Pisa or a bad Coakley, but Witherspoon is one of the Rams 2 best defenders (Little being the other).

    * Pulling the "before you turn your back on me" number is uncool. Please avoid moves like that. It's not the only one where you tried to imply something bad about the poster. How about this instead. We see the thing differently, like it or not. And that's all it is. No need to take it personally or make it personal in any way, shape, or form. It's not about the poster...it's about 2 fans who evaluate a couple of players differently. So please stow the personalizing.

    * Having safeties who can make tackles when offered so many opportunities is far from miraculous. Having safeties who would self-evidently excel in those circumstances might be miraculous, but more likely just a testimony to good personnel decisions. But when people watch the 2006 Rams defense, they don't go "wow, look at those safeties, shame they're wasted on such a bad team." Instead they go "okay there he made a play" followed by "ooops, why didn't he get there sooner on that one, he seems not to react real quick....this does not remind me of the first-rate safety play I see on other teams."

    Okay that caught me up to stage one. There's more. I'll get to that later.

    Mostly, though, of course, I keep repeating what I said, or clarifying it when someone takes it to mean something it didn't, or asking people to give me a nice descriptive sense of why they are so good (what are their skills, what's their game like, what's it like to watch them, how would you describe them....game observation stuff). I mean I keep saying (more or less) "prove that those tackles mean something in terms of how good they are" and all folks do is repeat the very numbers whose value I questioned in the first place.

    And I aint sayin no one CAN do those things...or that someone can't give a good descriptive account of Atogwe's game. I am just saying no one has done it yet.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -07-01-2007 at 02:36 AM.

  9. #69
    Bar-bq's Avatar
    Bar-bq is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,824
    Rep Power
    92

    Re: Safety concerns

    Quote Originally Posted by z.nrd View Post
    *

    * Pulling the "before you turn your back on me" number is uncool. Please avoid moves like that. It's not the only one where you tried to imply something bad about the poster. How about this instead. We see the thing differently, like it or not. And that's all it is. No need to take it personally or make it personal in any way, shape, or form. It's not about the poster...it's about 2 fans who evaluate a couple of players differently. So please stow the personalizing.
    My friend you've misread

    What I was saying was that I was interested to see youname 5-6 plays witherspoon individually made this season. Then, what i said was before you turn "It" (It being your question, asking us to name 5-6 plays OJ made") I had such and such to say about the amount of tackles our safeties made.

    Was nothing personal in there. That i can see. And if i'm blind to it I apologise in advance fore repeating it...???

    But whatever. This has been fun, but we'll have to agreee to disagree. I'm done here. But...you know...you're wrong

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Glenrothes, SCOTLAND
    Posts
    9,963
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Safety concerns

    ***ADMIN NOTE***

    Please read the rules of this forum.
    If you do NOT agree with someone and don't have the ability or self control to not resort to personal attacks, then do not take part in that particular thread.
    Its a very simple rule.

    ***END ADMIN NOTE***


  11. #71
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,297
    Rep Power
    142

    Re: Safety concerns

    Several pages ago, I should have read my own signature and stepped out of this "debate", no that's not it, maybe "discussion", not exactly, how about "bad mime routine"......that lost soul just can't get out of that box.

    There are some issues that can't be debated, and there are some debaters with too many issues. As I am probably both, and neither situation makes for a pleasant experience, I will bid this thread farewell as an active participant.

    If anyone needs me, I'll be over here with Coach Linehan and Coach Haslett at the "Our Safeties Don't Need Replacing" Bar & Grill.
    "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. #72
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,510
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: Safety concerns

    This has got to be the most print our safeties have ever gotten.

  13. #73
    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 RamDez View Post
    ***ADMIN NOTE***

    Please read the rules of this forum.
    If you do NOT agree with someone and don't have the ability or self control to not resort to personal attacks, then do not take part in that particular thread.
    Its a very simple rule.

    ***END ADMIN NOTE***
    omg are you serious?

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Glenrothes, SCOTLAND
    Posts
    9,963
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Safety concerns

    Yes.




    .


Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

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
  •