Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 87
  1. #46
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,479
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by txramsfan View Post
    From what it sounds to me, Gholston and Chris Long are projects at DE....while Dorsey is established at DT. Call me a small town country boy, but with all the 3-cone and 5-cone and this and that stuff....knowing that whatever defense you play you are going to be that one position established guy is a big plus.
    I don't think Gholston or C.Long are projects at all. They have both played as edge rushers and should be ready to step in as starters from day 1.


  2. #47
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,859
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Tx, I do am wondering how either of them, Long especially, could be considered projects?

    Long is considered the most NFL-ready of any prospect out there, including Dorsey. He would need some grooming if he were to play OLB, mostly in coverage skills, but he could still start from day one. Most importantly, if you tell him to do something, he'll go at it full steam and will already know how to do it.

    Gholston has played both as a linebacker and DE and could start at either from day one. His issues lie in that he does not have a polished game and has gotten by on mostly his superior athletic ability throughout college. The question lies in when he will learn the skill set required to be a consistently dominant pass rusher in the NFL.

  3. #48
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    I guess it's the whole "he can play either LB or DE" that to me, in my very simple mind, a project.

  4. #49
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,859
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    With Long and Gholston, this isn't a knock on them, but rather evidence as to how versatile they are. They could play OLB in a 3-4 or DE in a 4-3, and be suited to play either one from day one. Gholston could use some bulk to play 4-3 and Long might need to lose a bit to play LB, but they would both be perfectly viable and impact starters at either position, which both have similar pass rushing and line of scrimmage run stopping responsibilities.

  5. #50
    PeoriaRam's Avatar
    PeoriaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,173
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post

    Gholston has played both as a linebacker and DE and could start at either from day one. His issues lie in that he does not have a polished game and has gotten by on mostly his superior athletic ability throughout college. The question lies in when he will learn the skill set required to be a consistently dominant pass rusher in the NFL.

    And that does not make him a project how? If the Rams would have to invest time and resources in attempting to develop the basic skills needed for a NFL DE, then he is a project.

  6. #51
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,593
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    With Long and Gholston, this isn't a knock on them, but rather evidence as to how versatile they are. They could play OLB in a 3-4 or DE in a 4-3, and be suited to play either one from day one. Gholston could use some bulk to play 4-3 and Long might need to lose a bit to play LB, but they would both be perfectly viable and impact starters at either position, which both have similar pass rushing and line of scrimmage run stopping responsibilities.
    Gholston weighed in at 266lbs at the combine and was the strongest player per lb in the entire event. Leonard Little has played at about that weight for most of his career and has been our best defensive player for several years. My guess would be that Little couldn't do 37 reps at the combine these days.

    So why in the world would Gholston need to bulk up?

  7. #52
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,593
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Tx, I do am wondering how either of them, Long especially, could be considered projects?

    Long is considered the most NFL-ready of any prospect out there, including Dorsey. He would need some grooming if he were to play OLB, mostly in coverage skills, but he could still start from day one. Most importantly, if you tell him to do something, he'll go at it full steam and will already know how to do it.

    Gholston has played both as a linebacker and DE and could start at either from day one. His issues lie in that he does not have a polished game and has gotten by on mostly his superior athletic ability throughout college. The question lies in when he will learn the skill set required to be a consistently dominant pass rusher in the NFL.

    If Vernon Gholston can equal a guy (Chris Long) in sacks (14), with no polish to his game, using mostly his God-given ability, imagine how scary this guy will be when he learns how to play.

  8. #53
    RealRam's Avatar
    RealRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    8,205
    Rep Power
    68

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Gholston weighed in at 266lbs at the combine and was the strongest player per lb in the entire event. Leonard Little has played at about that weight for most of his career and has been our best defensive player for several years. My guess would be that Little couldn't do 37 reps at the combine these days.

    So why in the world would Gholston need to bulk up?
    If Vernon Gholston can equal a guy (Chris Long) in sacks (14), with no polish to his game, using mostly his God-given ability, imagine how scary this guy will be when he learns how to play. -- Fortuninerhater

    Scary is right, FH. With the speed and quickness that VG has right now (not even 22 yrs. old yet), I think he will mature into a solid and just right 275 lb. DE in a few years. I see C. Long at 280.


    And your point of "...when he [Gholston] learns how to play" is very valid. Nothing like developing in the NFL. He just might become the Spook for more than one offense. I've read that some analysts wonder if Vernon is more of an athlete than a football player but in today's NFL, that is the clear trend, that is, combine top athleticism with football instincts.


    BUT we'll more likely end up with Chris Long and that's terrific. :bash:
    Last edited by RealRam; -04-11-2008 at 10:41 PM. Reason: Quote

  9. #54
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,859
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Gholston weighed in at 266lbs at the combine and was the strongest player per lb in the entire event. Leonard Little has played at about that weight for most of his career and has been our best defensive player for several years. My guess would be that Little couldn't do 37 reps at the combine these days.

    So why in the world would Gholston need to bulk up?
    Very true, he was able to tie lifting the most reps and weighs less than Jake Long. As for why he should bulk up a bit, there are two reasons. One, so that he's able to leverage against offensive tackles better. Two, for durability reasons. Since you mentioned him, Little has been hurt in three of his six starting years, missing five games on average during those bad years. A little more weight would take away a bit of his explosiveness, but also could help prolong his career.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater
    If Vernon Gholston can equal a guy (Chris Long) in sacks (14), with no polish to his game, using mostly his God-given ability, imagine how scary this guy will be when he learns how to play.
    And imagine if Chris Long played a position that moved him away from double teams as opposed to into them!

    Quote Originally Posted by PeoriaRam
    And that does not make him a project how? If the Rams would have to invest time and resources in attempting to develop the basic skills needed for a NFL DE, then he is a project.
    I was going to defend Gholston, but you know, you're right. I was wrong. He is a bit of a project isn't he?

  10. #55
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    59

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    If Vernon Gholston can equal a guy (Chris Long) in sacks (14), with no polish to his game, using mostly his God-given ability, imagine how scary this guy will be when he learns how to play.
    Or imagine what happens when he's playing against more guys who are in professional conditioning programs year-round and the difference in athleticism is not so exaggerated. What I'm seeing with Gholston is a guy who gets 3 sacks in one game and then goes two or three games without a sack. Within a single game, Long is going to get more pressure as his opponent gets tired, whereas Gholston supposedly starts to tire and become less effective later in the game.

  11. #56
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,593
    Rep Power
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    And the two tackles that aren't made by that player are just as likely first downs that lead to scores or scores themselves with the way our defense tackles. I'll take the extra two tackles closer to the line of scrimmage, thank you. We have enough issues bringing down the ball carrier, once we have that down, we can focus on hitting harder.

    Wow, how in the world would you know that? You must be Godlike.

    Sounds to me like you just jumped to a conclusion based on something you just made up in your head Mr. I back my arguements up with facts.

    And who was even talking about the Rams' issues? I was speaking in general terms.

    [QUOTE=TekeRam;224270]Very true, he was able to tie lifting the most reps and weighs less than Jake Long. As for why he should bulk up a bit, there are two reasons. One, so that he's able to leverage against offensive tackles better. Two, for durability reasons. Since you mentioned him, Little has been hurt in three of his six starting years, missing five games on average during those bad years. A little more weight would take away a bit of his explosiveness, but also could help prolong his career.

    And imagine if Chris Long played a position that moved him away from double teams as opposed to into them!


    Look dude, we could argue about these guys all day and night (and it seems like we have), but nothings going to change my opinion on the subject until I'm proven wrong once they get on the field for thier respective teams.

    And frankly, I'm rather tired of the subject. Say what you want about VG, but in two years time (barring injuries) Vernon Gholston will be better than Chris Long, mark my word.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenfleece View Post
    Or imagine what happens when he's playing against more guys who are in professional conditioning programs year-round and the difference in athleticism is not so exaggerated. What I'm seeing with Gholston is a guy who gets 3 sacks in one game and then goes two or three games without a sack. Within a single game, Long is going to get more pressure as his opponent gets tired, whereas Gholston supposedly starts to tire and become less effective later in the game.
    See my previous post.

    Quote Originally Posted by RealRam View Post
    Scary is right, FH. With the speed and quickness that VG has right now (not even 22 yrs. old yet), I think he will mature into a solid and just right 275 lb. DE in a few years. I see C. Long at 280.


    And your point of "...when he [Gholston] learns how to play" is very valid. Nothing like developing in the NFL. He just might become the Spook for more than one offense. I've read that some analysts wonder if Vernon is more of an athlete than a football player but in today's NFL, that is the clear trend, that is, combine top athleticism with football instincts.


    BUT we'll more likely end up with Chris Long and that's terrific. :bash:
    Very true RealRam, we'll likely have to admire Mr. Gholston from afar. I just hope that he doesn't get to much better than Chris.
    Last edited by Nick; -04-12-2008 at 05:17 AM. Reason: Use the Edit button instead of making four back-to-back posts

  12. #57
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    59

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    See my previous post.
    Ah, of course. The idea that a player with poor instincts who has been playing football for years and is still lacking in fundamentals will suddenly change his ways and become a dedicated student of the game goes without saying right? It's almost cliche to talk about players who get by on raw talent in college and how often they don't cut it in the pros. The comparison between C. Long and Gholston is like asking, "would you rather have someone who can already do everything it takes to succeed or a guy who has done well so far because he can run fast and might eventually learn the things he needs to succeed at the next level?"

  13. #58
    BM_Face's Avatar
    BM_Face is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Nebraska
    Age
    43
    Posts
    436
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    But there's another question that has to be asked: Which is more preferable? 4.5 drag down tackles a game, or 2.5 snot-rocking tackles per game?
    4.5 every time. 2.5 'snot-rockers' gets a player on espn, 4.5 'drag-downs' gets games won.

    The Rams need more tackles in 2008. We couldn't tackle anybody in the 4th quarter.

    Every tackle has a chance to force a turn-over. The 'snot-rocking' tackle may have a higher chance of causing a fumble, but are the odds enough to outwiegh the extra two tackles per game. No way.

    I would be fine with VG if we could trade down. He is not a #2 pick.

  14. #59
    masonmo1 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    mISSOURI
    Posts
    5
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    The thread on the Ram's trading Alex Barron for a mid-round pick is crazy due to their lack of depth at the OT position. Alex has the physical tools to be a solid starter and if Loney can't develop Alex then Loney needs to go not Alex!

    Hopefully some veteran leadership on the OL will take over and help Alex reach his potential. Orlando Pace needs to step up and assume a leadership role in molding the OL!!!

  15. #60
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,593
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: Thomas on 1380: It's down to the two Longs

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenfleece View Post
    Ah, of course. The idea that a player with poor instincts who has been playing football for years and is still lacking in fundamentals will suddenly change his ways and become a dedicated student of the game goes without saying right? It's almost cliche to talk about players who get by on raw talent in college and how often they don't cut it in the pros. The comparison between C. Long and Gholston is like asking, "would you rather have someone who can already do everything it takes to succeed or a guy who has done well so far because he can run fast and might eventually learn the things he needs to succeed at the next level?"
    How do you know what kind of instincts he has? Have you done a case study on him? Or are you basing this on your own opinion?

    And how long has he actually been playing football? I would venture to say that in the grand scheme of things, he would be considered a baby in this sport by most knowledgeable experts.

    So for you to try to paint a picture that this guy who has been playing football for a countless number of years, just doesn't have the aptitude to learn the fundamentals of the game is extremely self serving of you.

    Look dude, say what you want about Chris Long, but the fact of the matter is, he's had every advantage there is in this game to this point (with the HOF dad and all), and somehow this guy who doesn't even know how to play yet, is still right there, vying for the top spot in the draft with him.

    What does that tell you?

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Jim Thomas Live Tuesday, January 15
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -01-17-2008, 03:29 PM
  2. Jim Thomas Live, Jan 4th
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -01-05-2008, 09:34 AM
  3. J. Thomas Live, 12-27
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -12-28-2007, 11:46 AM
  4. Jim Thomas Live: 12/11/07
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -12-11-2007, 07:59 PM
  5. Jim Thomas Live, October 30
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -10-30-2007, 08:58 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
  •