Adam Archuleta: Free Agent

*theesuspect* · #1 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

Now honestly do you think the Rams should let Adam Archuleta go to free agency or resign him? Hes still a young player and regarded by many as one of the premier safeties in the NFL. Rumors abound the Seahawks are interested.

*chiguy* · #2 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

Who regards him as a premier safety in the NFL? He's never done well in man-to-man coverage and has stunk in zone coverage since Marmie came over, suggesting that he's only suited to the Cover 2. Plus, he doesn't have the same athletic profile as he did before he was injured. I like Arch and what he did for us when he was in Lovie's defense, but I doubt anyone thinks of him as a "premier" safety. He's welcome back if his cap number is low.

*RamJackson39* · #3 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

I would love to see him in Rivera's defense. I think he would wreak havoc. it would allow him to be a blitzing SS instead of using him in coverage more. I'd resign him if we got a defensive genius like Rivera

**Nick** · #4 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

My 2006 Plan for Adam Archuleta

My thoughts.

**HUbison** · #5 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by RamJackson39

I would love to see him in Rivera's defense. I think he would wreak havoc. it would allow him to be a blitzing SS instead of using him in coverage more. I'd resign him if we got a defensive genius like Rivera

If Rivera can bring in a little flavor of the old 46 defense and modify it to fit our personnel, Arch could find himself back at the LOS a lot more than he has in the past two years. It may be a return to the old Arch......if his back holds out.

**Nick** · #6 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUbison

If Rivera can bring in a little flavor of the old 46 defense and modify it to fit our personnel, Arch could find himself back at the LOS a lot more than he has in the past two years. It may be a return to the old Arch......if his back holds out.

He really would be a very good fit in the 46 defense.

*RamJackson39* · #7 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

He really would be a very good fit in the 46 defense.

I think he would be the Arch of old in the 46. It would free him up and allow him to be closer to the LOS. Arch didnt look bad until Marmie came on the scene. The reason why is simple. He took a run stopping SS and dropped him back into coverage far too much. Arch should spend most of his time blitzing and staying close to the line in run support.

*chiguy* · #8 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

He still can't cover people, so unless we move back to the cover 2 zone I don't see of what use he is to us.

**HUbison** · #9 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiguy

He still can't cover people, so unless we move back to the cover 2 zone I don't see of what use he is to us.

Well, I guess that's the point of our 46 discussion. The 46 would have Arch playing the line instead of dropped back as a true cover 2 would.

*RamJackson39* · #10 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiguy

He still can't cover people, so unless we move back to the cover 2 zone I don't see of what use he is to us.

Rivera runs a cover 2 version of the 46. The build of this defense is IMO the most impressive in the league. It has the safeties playing close to the line and very rarely in true man coverage. Arch is decent in zone coverage which is really the only the coverage that he'd be asked to do. Most of the time, he would be up near the line, blitzing the QB and stopping the run. The front four usually pinches in. The DE's usually stunt in and then loop around on passing situations which is a play that I really like. The DT's use their bodies to fill gaps and allow the LBs to make plays, which is why Urlacher was so much better this season. So, it stops the run by filling the middle gap. The DE's rush the passer, the LB's fill the holes left by the DE's rushing, and the SS usually finds himself blitzing the QB. It's a very disruptive defense that doesnt ask the DB's to cover very long. Since there is a lot of zone coverage though, this blitzing usually doesnt allow the receivers to find a whole in the coverage. I would love to see this in St.Louis.

*RAMMAN68* · #11 (**permalink**) -11-01-2006

One thing to remember about the D, there is a lot of people rotating in and out. If we do run a 46/cover 2 I'm sure there would be someone else playing deep SS in the 2 deep set. I would defiantly bring Arch back. The guy has a lot of heart and a solid work ethic that is hard to find.:clanram:

*RamsFan16* · #12 (**permalink**) -12-01-2006

Sadly just let him go. He has never improved on coverage and is missing alot of tackles now. Maybe someone else can work on him but until then let him go.

*chiguy* · #13 (**permalink**) -12-01-2006

Fair enough folks, but there is no guarantee that we're hiring Rivera. Plus, Arch looked horrible in zone coverage this year (at least partly a function of Marmie) and has looked awful period since he started getting hurt on a regular basis. If the price is right, I'd re-sign him. But I wouldn't open the bank.

*serkicker32* · #14 (**permalink**) -12-01-2006

Maybe we should let the new coach, who ever that will be, decide if we should keep him based on the defense we end up running next year

*chiguy* · #15 (**permalink**) -12-01-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by serkicker32

Maybe we should let the new coach, who ever that will be, decide if we should keep him based on the defense we end up running next year

Well of course. Does that mean we can't discuss our thoughts in the meantime? Its not like we can watch them in the playoffs this year.