Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

I would not say it would have been gratuitous

July 20, 2017 02:39PM
One could make a strong case, that Sam deserved to at least be on the practice squad.

Michael Sam had 11 tackles and three sacks that preseason. There were 20 DEs with at least one sack and 8 tackles in the preseason that year. Only 2 did not make a roster. There were 31 rookies who had two or more sacks and 10 or more tackles in the preseason between 2010 and 2014 (again, Sam exceeded those numbers in both categories), Sam is one of only three to not make at least a season-long practice squad. Frank Trotter out of Memphis is the only other defensive end in this category. Trotter was an UDFA but not one of the ones added right after the draft. He signed with Philly in June after doing well after attending a minicamp on a tryout basis. So he was added but most likely as camp fodder. Furthermore, of the 69 Defensive Players of the Year of the big five conferences drafted from 2000 to 2014, Sam is the only one who did not make a roster or practice squad.

Here are Sam's and Westbrooks' preseason stats

Sam 11 tackles, 10 solo, 3 sacks for 20 yards
Westbrooks 12 tackles, 11 solo, 2 sacks for 9 yards

There is very little difference there. Now I have no problem saying that they were going head to head for one spot and the team chose Westbrooks, who makes the squad is not just based on the game performances - it could be who is performing better in practice, how well they are doing on the field in plays where they don't make the stop (are they filling their gaps, following the game plan, blowing up blocks so a LB can make the tackle or being blocked and opening up running lanes, etc.) and so on.

But based on his preseason stats he probably was good enough for some team to add him to their practice squad. The rams' strength was their DL that year so there were less open spots then on a team that had a weaker line coming into 2014 who played a 4-3 such as Jacksonville or Oakland should have brought him in.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

  Rams give unofficial list of projected preseason starters in media release

zn855July 19, 2017 07:16PM

  Re: Rams give unofficial list of projected preseason starters in media release

Rams43288July 19, 2017 07:21PM

  Pretty much what we thought

FootballGenius246July 19, 2017 07:32PM

  no surprises

LMU93209July 20, 2017 03:10AM

  1 surprise imo

PHDram309July 20, 2017 04:04AM

  Re: 1 surprise imo

LMU93210July 20, 2017 04:52AM

  Why?

FootballGenius228July 20, 2017 07:59AM

  Re: Why?

PHDram208July 20, 2017 08:04AM

  Re: Why?

dzrams215July 20, 2017 12:30PM

  +1. Nm

FootballGenius151July 20, 2017 01:37PM

  Re: Why?

CraigMatson179July 20, 2017 01:50PM

  I would not say it would have been gratuitous

The Professor241July 20, 2017 02:39PM

  Re: I would not say it would have been gratuitous

CraigMatson190July 20, 2017 03:28PM

  Re: Why?

PHDram185July 20, 2017 02:49PM