Show all posts by user

Re: misleading - 3 years ago

QuoteRamboni I agree no matter what the numbers say, I gave them both the "eye test". It always felt like Cam could break a long gainer, he has good vision and cut back skills that were sharper than what I saw in Hendo. Henderson has a bit more power upon contact but it seemed fairly negligible in comparison. Akers just felt more explosive. Or maybe I just need to get my eyes checked.

Re: This early in the season, and this late in the year.... - 3 years ago

QuoteJamesJM and losing Cam I've wondered if McVay has any changes in mind for the O this year... that is: a somewhat different strategy without Cam. I'm guessing no. - JamesJM What I'm watching for is if they have the right number of decent RBs to field a rotation. Right now it doesn't look like the rotation will be based on running style though, like previously where Henderson gave you

Re: but a situational guy is exactly what they (might) need - 3 years ago

QuoteLMU93 They are going to give RB1 to Henderson- as they should. Now, that doesn't mean he will have 270+ carries. But I think reality is also there is absolutely no one hanging out there they could sign that could come in and be that. Johnson (if healthy) is the type that could come in and give them 100-120 touches as the RB2. Alyo likes Adrian Peterson as a short yardage guy. I can under

misleading - 3 years ago

Henderson was in his 2nd year and even given that had 7 subpar games out of 15 (though injuries account for some of that). Akers was a rookie who had no training camp and had to learn NFL level pass pro. But then when Akers did settle in did well. And you have to watch these 2 guys not just do stats. Henderson is good but Akers does things that DH can't--they aren't in his skill set.

Re: agree with that sentiment - 3 years ago

QuoteLMU93 The best RBs will not do much behind a poor OL. I agree with the idea that this could galvanize the OL that much more to say "ok, it's up to us, we're going to run the ball well regardless." You need talent at RB, no doubt. And losing Akers is an unquestionable hit. But if the OL is good, running the ball WILL come together. It just will. This will be worth watching.

Re: um....yes - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams You can do this to any RB. No one said that EVERY game was effective. Actually, you would be hard-pressed to name a good NFL back who for various reasons (injuries included) was not productive in 7 out of 15 games. Look at Akers in the 2nd half of the season, after he got acclimated (as a rookie in a season with no training camp). So I will count the last 10 games (8 in the

c'mon - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Quotezn He IS better. Rams think so too. Find me quotations from McVay raving about Henderson.... McVay could be wrong. You've spent the last 6 months, at every turn, criticizing, questioning, or bringing up the possibility that McVay has made a mistake of some type. You have repeatedly noted that he is not infallible. McVay's raving does nothing for me. The bottom line for me,

Re: no this is objective - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Quotezn Quotedzrams Quotezn Quotedzrams Of course, this is an issue of what one thinks. Almost everything is and no one's opinion is gospel. It's interesting that you would try to paint it as that. Your opinion is noted. We disagree. I'm willing to go on record that we'll still have a top running attack. Good discussion! Akers has more in his arsenal as a back than Henderson does. I

Re: no this is objective - 3 years ago

QuoteAlbaNY_Ram "The fact that you're even asking this question makes me wonder if you're taking things wrong ..." Nope - that's not it. Just trying to pick your brain a bit. Okay, fair enough. I was a bit testy there I guess though I didn't realize it at the time. I was over-reacting to this idea that if you put Henderson 2nd to Akers in terms of the ability to be a primary back, y

vid: good analysis of Akers - 3 years ago

Re: Subjective vs. Objective - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams If you're basing your assessment of a player primarily on what your eyes see you are being subjective by definition.. With all due respect I have to disagree with that. It's what scouting teaches us constantly. You can see key traits on the field. They count in an assessment. Otherwise you are running blind. Let me give you an example. People don't remember this but when Faulk g

agree - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Quotemoklerman I just think we've seen what Henderson can do and it's not being a feature back... I don't think he'll end up being a feature back this year. What's more? They don't have to have a feature back. A couple of years ago the 49ers had the best rushing attack, went to the SB, and used a committee of 4-5 backs. Most were productive because of a great scheme and above averag

Re: Subjective vs. Objective - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Who knows if we're specifically talking about goal line on 4th down but we do know that last year he was their best RB inside the 5. It's why he had 5 rushing TDs. That';s a pretty limited category. In terms all "lessons" on being objective-- * if you can;t accurately describe a player's relevant skill set and how and in what ways it offers advantages or disadvantag

not really no - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams every RB McVay has plugged into his scheme has been effective. That's not accurate. You have to look at 2020 gamelogs. Because of injuries, missing games, AND 4 games where he didn't produce when healthy, Henderson has NOT been consistently productive. Not counting the game he missed entirely at the end, that's 7 games. In those 7 games DH carried 47 times for 92 yards

you're been wrong about that before & you are wrong about that now - 3 years ago

QuoteClassicalwit Henderson just can't do it by himself. He's not that kind of RB. The Rams' backs are all around the same size, but I f X- Jones were to add on another 15 pounds he'd be right at 6'-0" 225. That's premium size for an RB It;s like you keep repeating completely blown up and refuted stuff. You're wrong about this. What was pointed out to you many times before is that H

Re: no this is objective - 3 years ago

QuoteAlbaNY_Ram What does Henderson have going for him, then: he averaged 4.5 ypc last year while Akers averaged 4.3 ... Speed, explosion, GREAT contact balance. He's a very good "one move and gone" RB. I defended the Henderson pick when it happened though it was with the understanding he was a complementary back. People debated his size at one point but that's not relevant--he's lowb

Re: no this is objective - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Quotezn Quotedzrams Of course, this is an issue of what one thinks. Almost everything is and no one's opinion is gospel. It's interesting that you would try to paint it as that. Your opinion is noted. We disagree. I'm willing to go on record that we'll still have a top running attack. Good discussion! Akers has more in his arsenal as a back than Henderson does. It's just there. It's

Re: I completely agree - 3 years ago

QuoteRams43 Quoteoldschoolramfan Both RB's are explosive....But, Akers made something out of nothing at times. Special RB's do that. Henderson's issue is not ability, it's his availability. Possibly the most impressive thing about Akers to me was how well he continued to move the pile after getting gang tackled. I sure didn’t expect that. Both RBs are tough with excellent contact balance.

Re: To be fair, if you're panicking about your second year running back going down - 3 years ago

QuoteRam_Ruler When he was the second back on the roster for about eight weeks of the year until the starter got hurt. And that starter is literally still on the team, then your panic might be slightly overblown. Henderson has always looked good when healthy. And running back is not a position that is hard to get production out of. The Akers injury sucks But he's not Stafford, Donald, or Ramse

Re: a couple things on Henderson - 3 years ago

QuoteLMU93 He needs to prove he can stay healthy and be counted on. No question. But from an ability standpoint, there's also no question he has it. Two analytics sources- PFF and Football Outsiders- both rated him actually higher overall than Akers in 2020. PFF gave Henderson an 80.4 grade for the season (11th out of 70 RBs). Akers graded 75.7 (22nd out of 70). Football Outsiders gra

no this is objective - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Of course, this is an issue of what one thinks. Almost everything is and no one's opinion is gospel. It's interesting that you would try to paint it as that. Your opinion is noted. We disagree. I'm willing to go on record that we'll still have a top running attack. Good discussion! Akers has more in his arsenal as a back than Henderson does. It's just there. It's visible. Same w

Re: Yes DZ but Success Rate doesn't tell this entire story - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Quotezn Quotedzrams Quotemerlin What it misses is that Akers took half the season to settle in. Early in the season he missed a lot of holes and opportunities. Some in the redzone. There was one that was pretty funny, it was him following the designed hole when there was a hole he would have easily scored on a cut up the middle. Later in the season he wouldn't have missed that, he

Re: I base what I say here - 3 years ago

QuoteSoCalRAMatic The reason I brought up their sizes was in another thread I kept reading that Akers was so much bigger and that is why he is a bell cow and Hendu isn't. They're very similar in size. They are similar in speed too and I keep reading how Hendu is a change of space back. I, he's not. He's lightning fast as was Akers until this past Monday. They are both good at breaking tackles. T

Re: Yes DZ but Success Rate doesn't tell this entire story - 3 years ago

Quotedzrams Quotemerlin What it misses is that Akers took half the season to settle in. Early in the season he missed a lot of holes and opportunities. Some in the redzone. There was one that was pretty funny, it was him following the designed hole when there was a hole he would have easily scored on a cut up the middle. Later in the season he wouldn't have missed that, he was a different guy

Re: Henderson has 1 issue - 3 years ago

Quotesocalmab Henderson's issue is not size. It is the nagging injuries. He is explosive but he seems to be dinged often in regards to hamstrings, ankles foot basically lower body stuff. I think they have enough in the RB room where no one needs to be brought in. YOu have an excellent RB coach, they kept xavier on the roster for a reason last year He's explosive sure but nowhere near as el

Re: Now that's more like it.... - 3 years ago

QuoteRAMbler .....The Rams may not be out of the woods yet, but I certainly find that graph encouraging in regards to Henderson vs Akers. I'm not saying he's better...., I am saying that I now understand why the team is not panicking at this time. GO LOS ANGELES RAMS !!! :)-D They wouldn't panic either way. But Henderson is not Akers. Which is why they drafted Akers and why they rave

I completely agree - 3 years ago

Quotemerlin On my eyes and personal evaluation of these guys. I am not a scout. Not a coach. Not a guy who bats a thousand either. Just my opinion. Losing Akers makes this offense into something less. Subtracting him and looking at the depth chart it's now a "finesse" offense. Because Akers is a guy who can make it go. If you disagree that's fine man. I'm just sharing my ta

c;mon - 3 years ago

Let a guy at least make it through camp before we crown him. TE is one of the most challenging positions to learn in the NFL and for Harris, being a TE is a position switch. So far he has never blocked anyone in the pros with pads on. So too soon for the hall of fame induction (using fun hyperbole to make a point). And I like Harris.

no they didn't - 3 years ago

QuoteKillrazor Quotemoklerman McVay has never had any problems "communicating" with any of the other NFL QB's he's worked with. This is a narrative being promulgated by some to try and tarnish and blame McVay for Goff's shortcomings. The Rams wanted Goff to succeed. They got him an offensive minded HC, they got him tons of personnel, they got him OL, they gave him a HUGE contract....

Re: Todd has been a shell of TGII for nearly 3 years now. - 3 years ago

Quotestlramz At his prime, he was a force of nature. When his arthritic knees crapped out on him, he still had a nose for the goal line but lost all of his burst. Its sad really, but glad to see him with a winner. As far as facing him, he's now a non-factor. This isn't the return of the Bus or even playing Tyler in SF. He's basically a name at this point. Yep. And well put. T