Why Can't Adam Carriker Play DE?

*EvilXenu* · #1 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

In all the discussions of the possibility of taking Glenn Dorsey, it seems like people just assume that Adam Carriker shouldn't be moved to DE.

Why not?

He was a DE in college, and played in both 4-3 and 3-4 formations. He may not be a classic speed/end rusher, but he is quick off the line and could become a good bull rusher. Also, if the Rams need to generate a pass rush from his side, they could have Witherspoon blitzing while AC ties up the OT.

Putting injury concerns to the side, it seems to me that Dorsey is the best defensive player in the draft (or, at least, tied for first with Chris Long).

I can understand taking Chris Long if the Fins don't. But if he's gone, I think a defensive line of Carriker/Dorsey/Ryan/Little sounds pretty darn good.

**txramsfan** · #2 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Some here think he's not suited for DE due to his speed and size. However, one will never know till he's thrown into that mix.

Some of us (me included) agree with you that the Rams should take Dorsey with the second pick. Others don't. That's the beauty of a message board.

*Rambos* · #3 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

He was a DE in college

In a 3-4, which means he was a DT.

Quote:

both 4-3 and 3-4 formations

You would have too show me that that link, if so how many sacks did when he was in a 4-3?

Quote:

if the Rams need to generate a pass rush from his side, they could have Witherspoon blitzing while AC ties up the OT.

Thats true but you would like to get there with the front four, not have to rely on the blitz.

I don't think anyone is saying he can't play DE. Question is would DE be the most productive spot for him. Will AC be much better then Hall ar DE?

I would rather move AC to NT if we took Dorsey and get an edge rusher later in the draft.

**HUbison** · #4 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by rambos

You would have too show me that that link, if so how many sacks did when he was in a 4-3?

In a 2007 pre-draft interview with ESPN, Carriker was asked about the better fit for him. He replied

Quote:

Originally Posted by AC

I'm comfortable with either. I've played both 4-3 and 3-4 here at Nebraska.

His stats are as follows....

Senior - 7 sacks, 14 tfl
Junior - 9.5 sacks, 17 tfl
Soph. - 3 sacks, 7 tfl

**HUbison** · #5 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by rambos

Question is would DE be the most productive spot for him.

Ultimately, I think the question goes one step farther......which is more productive: DE Carriker, UT Dorsey......OR.....DE Long, UT Carriker......OR.....DE Gholston, UT Carriker?

*Rambos* · #6 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

DE Little, NT Carriker, UT Dorsey, DE Quentin Groves or DE Lawrence Jackson.

Hub I guess AC is key IMO as we just spent a first rounder on him, and we have Ryan on the bench. Thats why I can't see us taking Dorsey, but you never know.

Quote:

His stats are as follows....

Senior - 7 sacks, 14 tfl
Junior - 9.5 sacks, 17 tfl
Soph. - 3 sacks, 7 tfl

Not sure where he did what from? It would be nice if he played a year at DE in a 4-3. He played both last year for us as well.

*dabeerman* · #7 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

i agree w rambo we take the best disruptive force in the draft in dorsey and still get a speed rusher in 2nd or 3rd rd -q groves should be there and w a few injury concerns , p merling possibly could fall . im probably in the minority but i dont like wr in the 2nd rd , i think we focus on the de and of lines w the first 2 -3 picks . wr possibly 3rd to 4th rd

*MauiRam* · #8 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilXenu

In all the discussions of the possibility of taking Glenn Dorsey, it seems like people just assume that Adam Carriker shouldn't be moved to DE.

Why not?

Because Nick said he can't -- that's why!! You can take it to the bank ..

*viper* · #9 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by MauiRam

Because Nick said he can't -- that's why!! You can take it to the bank ..

That about sums it up for me

(Although, I wouldn't mind giving it a shot)

*serkicker32* · #10 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

With all of this based on sacks, what happened to worrying about the run defense? Wouldn't having Carriker playing end on run downs and moving him inside on pass downs be the better option? It's a lot harder to get a first down or score in the redzone if you can't run.

**AvengerRam** · #11 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by MauiRam

Because Nick said he can't -- that's why!! You can take it to the bank ..

Really? I guess you forgot these dubious Nick prognostications:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

Are you kidding me? Everyone knows that Ryan Leaf will be a better pro than Peyton Manning. Its not even close.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

Lawrence Phillips' character issues are way overblown. He's the next Eric Dickerson.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

For all the hype he's received, Lawrence Taylor simply does not have the tools to be more than a special teams player at the next level.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick

By drafting Terry Bradshaw, the Steelers have ensured yet another decade of mediocrity.

I'm not saying he's always wrong, but he really missed the boat on those ones, wouldn't you say?

*rams4life88* · #12 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by txramsfan

Some here think he's not suited for DE due to his speed and size. However, one will never know till he's thrown into that mix.

Some of us (me included) agree with you that the Rams should take Dorsey with the second pick. Others don't. That's the beauty of a message board.

That's true, In my opinion he seems like he would be the Richard Seymour type. But like you said, you never know till hes put into that position.

*MauiRam* · #13 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

Really? I guess you forgot these dubious Nick prognostications:I'm not saying he's always wrong, but he really missed the boat on those ones, wouldn't you say?

Av .. you are incorrigible ..

**Nick** · #14 (**permalink**) -28-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilXenu

In all the discussions of the possibility of taking Glenn Dorsey, it seems like people just assume that Adam Carriker shouldn't be moved to DE.

Why not?

Can he play there? Yes. Should he? I don't think so, and I suspect the coaches don't either since Haslett has said his best position will likely be the three-technique tackle. Let's also remember when they drafted him, they said from that very day that he'd be a tackle.

I've made a number of pretty detailed arguments about why Carriker just isn't a great fit as a 4-3 DE. I'm not responding from my apartment at the moment so I can't post all of those links, but I can start you off by directing you here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilXenu

Also, if the Rams need to generate a pass rush from his side, they could have Witherspoon blitzing while AC ties up the OT.

This is a pretty poor solution, though. Having Witherspoon blitz in order to help provide pressure puts us in the situation we're basically in now. The point is to find a front four that doesn't need blitz help to provide pressure, and I think as a pass rusher, Carriker's abilities are better suited for inside play where he can match his strength and leverage up against a guard rather than outside against a tackle. Again, not that he can't do it, but just that it's not going to be where he's best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilXenu

Putting injury concerns to the side

Which you can't do unless you've seen the medical reports and don't see anything to be concerned about. Some people like to accuse agents of leaking these injury rumors regarding Dorsey, but the fact of the matter is that Balzer's source was an NFL team doctor, not an agent with an agenda.

*Chris58* · #15 (**permalink**) -29-03-2008

Why can't Carricker play DE? Because from the first day he arrived in Ram Park, the coaches knew he couldn't. They moved him to NT and later UT. Some might say that he was moved to DT because we signed Hall but signing Hall had nothing to do with moving him to DT. A premier DE in the NFL is far more highly prized than a premier DT which are much more plentiful, easier to find and develop. Had Carricker been able to play DE in the NFL he would have been competing there regardless of Hall's presence.

I feel that speculating about moving Carricker to DE is a waste of time. One, the coaches aren't going to switch him to DE. Two, those who suggest jumping Carricker back and forth from DE to DT during a game ignore the physical requirements of the two positions. If AC has to weigh in at 290 to play UT, then his effectiveness on the edge will be minimal at best. If he is asked to trim down to 275 to play DE, then he gets man-handled when used at UT.

Does this make me think the Rams wont take Dorsey? Probably. But they may anyway. I'm looking forward to the draft and hoping for success next year. :l