Results 16 to 30 of 46
-
-10-16-2011 #16
Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- a
- Posts
- 2,521
- Rep Power
- 73
Re: Saffold
Bradford was hit hard numerous times besides the three sacks. I saw Jacob Bell get spun around like a top, as well.
I started this thread out of the disgust over the false starts by Saffold as I know that the O-line is not adequate for the spread offense. I am also pissed at Kendricks over false starts today and last week. Both Kendricks and Saffold seem to save the false starts for critical situations.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
-
-10-16-2011 #17
Re: Saffold
I'm almost convinced it may have been a lack of work during the offseason. Yes there was a lockout and coaches couldn't meet with the players, but could it have been while players from other teams were getting together to workout and run plays (or at least what plays they knew) we may have had a lot of guys slacking off? While other teams were running drills and actually organizing practices a lot of our guys just decided to take it easy? NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED, but with the way the O-line has been getting pushed around, the bone-headed plays in all aspects of the game, and the lack of disipline I've seen it sure looks like it...
-
-10-17-2011 #18
Re: Saffold
It doesn't take a lot of work to realise that "on two" means you go the second time Bradford says "HUT"
However, maybe that isn't the case. Maybe McDaniels changed the cadence and snap count etc. That still doesn't excuse the false starts.
But in all honesty, I would rather this offense just go on 1 every single play than have more false starts. I don't care about trying to get an edge over the defense with the snap count, just go on 1 and then beat them with your talent. It's better than going five yards back every time.
-
-10-17-2011 #19
Re: Saffold
Saffold's regression is baffling. He was outstanding last year. I disagree with any assertion that Smith played really well last year. He has been an injury plagued riddle, wrapped inside a question mark, disguised as a tackle since we drafted him. Of course, using the number 2 overall pick on a right tackle to move him to left tackle to them move him back to right tackle may not have been the best decision in the history of personnel moves, but hindsight is 20-20 and i certainly supported the pick at the time.
Smith's cap number is a lead weight around our neck. That is not the case with Saffold.
ramming speed to all
general counsel

-
-10-17-2011 #20
Re: Saffold
I'll reserve my judgment to see where they're at next season when they get to the 2nd year in the system. What I am pissed off about is how Smith gets paid bundles of cash for bringing a half-assed product to the table when he could at least bring some effort to protect.
-
-10-17-2011 #21
-
-10-17-2011 #22
Re: Saffold
See, now this is the overly simplistic comments that I'm talking about. These two tackles played very well last year. Saffold was the "steal" of the 2010 draft. It's intellectually lazy to say they "suck". If they "suck", they would have "sucked" last year as well.
I don't know what the answer is, but I know what it isn't."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
-
-10-17-2011 #23
Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2007
- Location
- Northern California
- Posts
- 209
- Rep Power
- 9
Re: Saffold
Wasn't Saffold helped off of the field at the end of the game? As bad as he has been this season, do we have a better backup? We still have almost NO depth at ANY position.
-
-10-17-2011 #24
-
-10-17-2011 #25
Re: Saffold
Co-hesion. They ain't got it. What they do have is: a new offense, lack of practice repetition and babies protecting the corner. Maybe the Rams could have tried to grab an OL from Pats or Broncos in the offseason to ease the new system transition. Idk. If I did.......probably would be working in the NFL. But I'm not and (just going out on a limb) I don't suppose many of us on this board do. Just saying.
-
-10-17-2011 #26
Re: Saffold
yes they played well LAST year. and to be honest, werent there a number of people complaining about smith last year also? Saffold played great last year at left tackle, Smith played mediocre at right. it is in our right, bradfords right, the line coaches right to say they suck right now. if you dont think they suck right now then what do you call it? this is not last year, this is the here and now, and they are sucking right now.
if its intellectually lazy for me to say they suck right now, then what would you call there play thus far in the season, cause in my eyes, they have played like complete horse crap. this has nothing to do with last year. this is all about this year. Most sacks given, most hurries, most hits. yea...they definatly dont suck........people can produce one year, and suck the next
so if they dont suck right now in this year, how are they playing? cause obviously were seeing something completly diffrent. if you think theyve played good football this season then wow, just wow, im at a loss for words atm.
-
-10-17-2011 #27
Re: Saffold
Lol cliff saunders is laying it down real like on 101 sports right now!! King, kendricks, saffold, smith, harris and everyone getting it!
-
-10-17-2011 #28
Re: Saffold
You're not hearing me, Tampa. Let's try it again. To say Saffold/Smith suck, is intellectually lazy. Why? Because they have in fact demonstrated they can play the position quite well. They don't suck. Alex Barron sucked. Jimmy Kennedy sucked. John St. Clair sucked. Why do they suck? Because they NEVER played well. Saffold and Smith are different because they DID.
So, again, the real question is......what has changed from last year to this year?
(Well Smith and Saffold aren't playing well this year)
No, that's a different result. Something has had to change in order to bring about that different result. What is that "something"?
The offense scheme changed. Maybe that's it. Maybe they simply never picked up the new offense. I don't know; that is one option. But I know they didn't magically forget how to play football in one offseason."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
-
-10-17-2011 #29
Re: Saffold
HUb is right here. These guys didn't obviously just forget how to play. Saffold was having a pro bowl caliber year. Smith had himself a good year too. What the problem is? We dont really know.
A shortened offseason, less time to gel with teammates. The new offense. The fact that we have limited padded practices I think is actually the reason were having such problems with fundamentals.
Before you could practice as much as you wanted. Now I believe you can only practice like 2 times a week in pads or something. That in my opinion is the main reason our guys have had so many issues with the fundamentals of football.
-
-10-17-2011 #30
Re: Saffold
i get what your saying, and i thought about this as well. but..
Smith didnt perform very well last year, at right tackle, when we were performing 3 step drops the majority of pass plays.
Saffold played great in the 3 step drop system.
now in our new scheme, which warrants us to protect longer then 3 steps, our tackles have performed less then average.
yes last year was a diffrent sytem, we had no OTA's, we lost al our offseason etc etc.
i do see what your saying HUB, not trying to undermine you at all, Saffold played great in last years sytem, smith played servicable.
Were in a new system now, and niether are performing near average in it.
Is it the systems fault for not addapting to there abilities? or is it there fault for not adapting to they systems needs?
what it comes down to is this: Smith has definatly underperformed as a number 2 overall pick. moved from LT to RT and still isnt playing well.
Saffold played great as a rookie in one system, but has played poor in a diffrent one.
i will say, Smith sucks, in 2 diffrent systems(one being the WCO, one being the spread) he has underperformed in both.
Saffold showed he could protect for the WCO but not int mcd's offensive scheme, and he also is creating lots of penalties.
Whether we think they suck or not, they both have clearly regressed in this new system. which does not bode well with me.
Similar Threads
-
X-ray, MRI Negative On Saffold
By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALKReplies: 0Last Post: -11-15-2010, 09:24 PM -
Saffold
By Dwight Frye in forum RAM TALKReplies: 5Last Post: -11-15-2010, 04:19 PM -
Video Breakdown of Saffold
By RamsSB99 in forum RAM TALKReplies: 4Last Post: -10-08-2010, 09:12 AM -
Saffold Passes First Test
By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALKReplies: 5Last Post: -09-16-2010, 06:21 PM -
Saffold close to a deal.
By Varg6 in forum RAM TALKReplies: 0Last Post: -07-28-2010, 10:39 AM




19Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote



Bookmarks