Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 44
  1. #1
    eauclare Guest

    I am going on record

    by saying the Rams pick will be, drum roll please, Glen Dorsey. The only way he won't get picked is if the Phins take him, which is unlikely or if the Rams get a trade offer. If someone like the Falcons make an offer to trade up one for their 3rd round pick, I would do it.

    Dorsey has the ability to keep guys off Pisa and WW.

    I got constructive criticism in my "Don't believe the Rams" post, but I am sticking by my guns.

    Your front four next yr is LL, Ryan, Dorsey and AC.


  2. #2
    Bald_81's Avatar
    Bald_81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    25
    Posts
    950
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: I am going on record

    Join the club with me and tx. I am listening to Jeremy Green's podcast as we speak, and he, Kiper, and McShay are doing a mock with Jake going #1 and us taking Dorsey at #2. Either we are infatuated with him, or this is a big smokescreen by us in order to get a trade down.

  3. #3
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    31
    Posts
    3,879
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: I am going on record

    Ok, you two, I will again ask... just what kind of production do you see with a Carriker on the edge, weighing what he did in college, 293? Please, find me an example of a 290+ DE who has gotten a large number of sacks.

    It's all well and good that you think that Dorsey is great... I do too, however, the reason people say that we should get him is because AC can play end and be a pass rush threat there. Show me a reason why I should think he can be.

    My reason why he can't? He's too slow because he's too big to play a 4-3 DE effectively and if he could, don't you think that he'd have played out there last year, given both starters were hurt? We had Ryan, Glover and Wroten for the middle.

    In other words, what can Dorsey do at UT that Carriker can't?

  4. #4
    eauclare Guest

    Re: I am going on record

    Dorsey is a perfect three technique tackle that can play all over the line. AC can't do that. IMO, AC had to play UT out of neccisity. It comes down to schemes. With Dorsey, Haslett should be able to create more favorable situations for LL, AC and our LB's.

    Dorsey can collapse the pocket up the middle and blow up double teams. Athletic three technique DT's are very rare. He had 7 or 7.5 sacks last year even with injuries.

    Just my opinion, but they won't pass on him unless they get a nice trade offer.

  5. #5
    viper's Avatar
    viper is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Age
    53
    Posts
    1,692
    Rep Power
    26

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Ok, you two, I will again ask... just what kind of production do you see with a Carriker on the edge, weighing what he did in college, 293? Please, find me an example of a 290+ DE who has gotten a large number of sacks.

    It's all well and good that you think that Dorsey is great... I do too, however, the reason people say that we should get him is because AC can play end and be a pass rush threat there. Show me a reason why I should think he can be.

    My reason why he can't? He's too slow because he's too big to play a 4-3 DE effectively and if he could, don't you think that he'd have played out there last year, given both starters were hurt? We had Ryan, Glover and Wroten for the middle.

    In other words, what can Dorsey do at UT that Carriker can't?
    Or Haslett switches to a 3-4 defense full time or at least more often than last year.

    DE - Carriker
    NT - Ryan
    DE - Dorsey

    Then we pick up a few more of the pieces in later rounds. A 3-4 linebacker to replace Chillar perhaps. Just sayin.

  6. #6
    Bald_81's Avatar
    Bald_81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    25
    Posts
    950
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Ok, you two, I will again ask... just what kind of production do you see with a Carriker on the edge, weighing what he did in college, 293? Please, find me an example of a 290+ DE who has gotten a large number of sacks.

    It's all well and good that you think that Dorsey is great... I do too, however, the reason people say that we should get him is because AC can play end and be a pass rush threat there. Show me a reason why I should think he can be.

    My reason why he can't? He's too slow because he's too big to play a 4-3 DE effectively and if he could, don't you think that he'd have played out there last year, given both starters were hurt? We had Ryan, Glover and Wroten for the middle.

    In other words, what can Dorsey do at UT that Carriker can't?
    Jim Thomas has already come out and said that Carriker won't be pushed out to DE, he will instead play at NT. Although that doesn't utilize all of his talents, he played there in spurts last season and showed his versatility. On running downs, that is when he would shift out to DE because he is superb against the run and it would be Dorsey at UT and Ryan at NT.

    I've used this example before: If Calvin Johnson was in this draft, would we pass on him because our need at DE is much greater than WR? I mean, we have Holt as #1, why take Calvin we need a DE so much more. This also works in relation to Dorsey. We aren't replacing Carriker, we are just utilizing his ability in different ways which would still allow him to excel. He is the type of player that will do whatever is asked of him and give his full 100% every time.

    The main reason why Dorsey is a better UT than Carriker is because he played there through his entire college career where as Carriker not only played at a different position but he also played in a different formation. Carriker even said last season he was still learning some of the nuances of the position and had to adjust to playing inside rather than outside. Dorsey is much more explosive off the ball and his passion and leadership can't be measured but are very intriguing to this point. For all I know, I'm wasting my time and the Rams are going to take someone else and this is all just a smokescreen on their part. However, if Dorsey is the pick, I won't be shocked to see it coming and I understand what they want to do with him.

  7. #7
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,050
    Rep Power
    172

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Please, find me an example of a 290+ DE who has gotten a large number of sacks.
    Charles Grant had a couple of 10 sack seasons playing at 290, but I agree that Carriker is better suited to play UT.

    I think that the "Dorsey Plan" is to have this lineup:

    Base Formation:

    DE: Carriker
    UT: Dorsey
    NT: Ryan
    DE: Little

    Passing Down Formation:

    DE: J.Hall
    UT: Dorsey
    NT: Carriker
    DE: Little

  8. #8
    eauclare Guest

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by viper View Post
    Or Haslett switches to a 3-4 defense full time or at least more often than last year.

    DE - Carriker
    NT - Ryan
    DE - Dorsey

    Then we pick up a few more of the pieces in later rounds. A 3-4 linebacker to replace Chillar perhaps. Just sayin.
    Exactly Viper. That's what I meant when I said it gives Haslett more flexibility to scheme. I gurantee, if we had a Dorsey type on the roster last year, AC would have stayed at end. They moved him to UT out of desperation.

  9. #9
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    28
    Posts
    4,927
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: I am going on record

    Actually you cant really use a Calvin Johnson argument, because we do actually have a need at WR. However, we dont have a need at UT, especially since we spent a first round pick there last year.

    It also doesnt work because we will only have one UT on the field on defense at all times, whereas we will likely have a minimum of two WRs on the field for every offensive play

  10. #10
    Dominating D Guest

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Ok, you two, I will again ask... just what kind of production do you see with a Carriker on the edge, weighing what he did in college, 293? Please, find me an example of a 290+ DE who has gotten a large number of sacks.

    It's all well and good that you think that Dorsey is great... I do too, however, the reason people say that we should get him is because AC can play end and be a pass rush threat there. Show me a reason why I should think he can be.

    My reason why he can't? He's too slow because he's too big to play a 4-3 DE effectively and if he could, don't you think that he'd have played out there last year, given both starters were hurt? We had Ryan, Glover and Wroten for the middle.

    In other words, what can Dorsey do at UT that Carriker can't?
    This was way too easy.

    Reggie White...... DE 300 lbs
    Do you need more or is this enough???

    I believe Carricker has played DE in college just like Long....

    Carricker maybe slow for a typical DE but are you sure C. Long is quicker? In fact, most of the reports indicate that one of Longs weakness is getting off the block quick.....

    I still like Long and I do believe he will be a good player but I just think Dorsey has all the tools to be a dominate DT in this league. I much rather the Rams use the 2nd pick of the draft on a dominate player versus what the team needs.....

    Just my 2 cents....

  11. #11
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    40

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post

    In other words, what can Dorsey do at UT that Carriker can't?
    Likely command double teams every week-which helps out the other defensive linemen.

    For what it's worth, a good pass rush doesn't necessarily need to rack up the sacks in my opinion. I'd just be happy with consistent QB hurries and knockdowns.

  12. #12
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    31
    Posts
    3,879
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by eauclare View Post
    Dorsey is a perfect three technique tackle that can play all over the line. AC can't do that. IMO, AC had to play UT out of neccisity. It comes down to schemes. With Dorsey, Haslett should be able to create more favorable situations for LL, AC and our LB's.

    Dorsey can collapse the pocket up the middle and blow up double teams. Athletic three technique DT's are very rare. He had 7 or 7.5 sacks last year even with injuries.
    Ok, so you say that Dorsey could play all over a 4-3 line, yet AC can't. Even despite him bulking up(from a 3-4 DE to a 4-3 DT) to play a decent NT and a respectable UT as a rookie last year. Since you listed him as a DE in your post, I assume that you mean that AC, who weighs MORE than Dorsey now, and is supposedly LESS able to play all over the line can suddenly be mobile enough to play DE? I love Carriker, but I highly doubt that he can play on the edge they way we'd need him to.

    AC had to play UT last year out of what necessity? To shore up the middle? When we found that Ryan could play, why didn't we have him, Glover and Wroten in a rotation then? What need was greater than getting a pass rush off the edge last year when Little and Hall were both hurt? How can you explain Carriker's continued presence inside when he was desperately needed at DE if he could indeed play DE in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by viper
    Or Haslett switches to a 3-4 defense full time or at least more often than last year.

    DE - Carriker
    NT - Ryan
    DE - Dorsey

    Then we pick up a few more of the pieces in later rounds. A 3-4 linebacker to replace Chillar perhaps. Just sayin.
    Ok, sure. This was my idea at one point in time. The first problem is that I've seen on a few occasions the opinion that Dorsey is not suited at all to play a 3-4. The reasons ranging from that it takes away from his skill set(only if you play 2 gapping as opposed to one gap), to him being unsuitable to take OT's on full time.

    For the sake of argument, lets say that he'd do just fine there. Personally, I think it'd be a great front three. But the second, and much more important problem is that all of our LB's are in the 230 -245 range. 3-4 LB's tend to be in the 250-270 range so that they can more effectively deal with linemen. All of our guys would have to gain some muscle and weight which would hurt their speed.

    Of course, we could try running a 3-4 with smaller, cover 2 guys, but I think that a power run game would kill us as our DE's would be exploited one gapping and then our smaller LB's would be manhandled.

    That's not to say it won't work, but Haslett would be creating a hybrid Cover 2/3-4 which would be rather interesting to see if it could work. Do you think it could? Who knows it could become the next new rage around the league!

  13. #13
    RAMarkable is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Age
    59
    Posts
    2,116
    Rep Power
    41

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by eauclare View Post
    by saying the Rams pick will be, drum roll please, Glen Dorsey. The only way he won't get picked is if the Phins take him, which is unlikely or if the Rams get a trade offer. If someone like the Falcons make an offer to trade up one for their 3rd round pick, I would do it.

    Dorsey has the ability to keep guys off Pisa and WW.

    I got constructive criticism in my "Don't believe the Rams" post, but I am sticking by my guns.

    Your front four next yr is LL, Ryan, Dorsey and AC.
    Doggone it, eauclare, I was going to post something just like this NEXT week on either Wednesday or Thursday. Ya beat me to it! Oh well, as I've been saying for 2 weeks now, it's my opinion that J. Long and G. Dorsey are numbers 1 & 2 on the Rams Big Board. And, barring some kind of trade, we will see one of these two gentlemen in a Rams uniform soon.

    Also, I like both your's and Dominating D's reasoning processes as to why the Rams are going to select G. Dorsey next week. I do think that many on ClanRam are getting too caught up in the "needs" dept. and somehow I don't think that Devaney and co. see it that way.

    WHAT SAY YE?

  14. #14
    rams 24/7 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    california
    Posts
    317
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: I am going on record

    So your saying that ADAM CARRIKER will go back to his original spot at RE.

  15. #15
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: I am going on record

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    I think that the "Dorsey Plan" is to have this lineup:

    Base Formation:

    DE: Carriker
    UT: Dorsey
    NT: Ryan
    DE: Little

    Passing Down Formation:

    DE: J.Hall
    UT: Dorsey
    NT: Carriker
    DE: Little
    That is pretty much what I figure it would look like, too, with the current personnel. Of course, taking Dorsey doesn't mean we wouldn't take a defensive end later. Now I'm still an advocate of taking Chris Long if he's there, but I wouldn't hate it if we took Dorsey. If there's any doubt about his leg in the team's mind, I don't think they'd actually take him at #2; so if the Rams do take him, I'm going to figure they're pretty certain it isn't an issue. A Dorsey/Carriker pairing in the middle would be a strong combination, but it would have significant ramifications in terms of the draft (trying to fill all the other needs sufficiently afterwards) and the cap (paying two defensive tackles first round money).

    One reason I think the Rams might not take Dorsey is because there wasn't one real defensive end on their list of visitors Tuesday. You would think we might bring in at least one or two defensive ends graded in the second to third rounds just for appearance's sake.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Post reports from your school!
    By DJRamFan in forum COLLEGE
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: -06-08-2010, 04:01 PM
  2. Some of our Rams Historical Moments
    By OldRamsfan in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: -03-16-2009, 10:23 PM
  3. A look back at the "new" NFC West
    By Brain Daddy in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -04-10-2007, 11:58 AM
  4. Ram at the Head of the Class
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -10-01-2005, 10:45 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: -12-29-2004, 11:04 AM

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
  •