Cheers and Jeers

[Lanky Livingston]

I would agree with this if we hadn't been dealing with it for 2 years now. It was called against Dallas in the season opener last year, but other than that? Over the past 2 years this play, Rak getting nearly strangled, continues to go uncalled. There has to be something more to it. We are missing something. What is it?

1.) Is there an interpretation of this rule we do not know about?

I'm not sure how you interpret the above any other way than for those to be holding calls.

Did the OL immediately work to bring their hands inside? No
Was Orakpo hooked? Yes
Was his progress impeded? Yes
Result: Holding

2.) Are the refs really that blind?

I will go with stupid.

3.) Is Rak in need of another move?

What does this have to do with whether or not the above should be holding calls or not? Sure, he could use another move - doesn't take anything away from the muggings he's getting now.

4.) Should Rak take a dive to bring notice to it?

Personally, I think intentionally going to the ground is a bad option, for the following reasons:
1) it takes him out of the play, when despite the hold there is still a chance he gets to the QB and gets a knock down/sack/fumble.
2) there is a greater potential for injury in this scenario IMO.

 

[Elephant]

Lanky, what you fail to seem to understand is that I agree with you about the refs. The refs should make the call according to the NFL Rulebook. The problem I have is that you don't want to acknowledge that they are not making the call for a reason. I do not know what that reason is and I am not going to label them stupid or blind for not making the call. I am merely trying to suggest that there is something more to it than you and I see. That's it.

We are going to disagree with the dive call. I am not saying do it every time he is held. But if he takes a dive on one of the more serious holds, it will bring more attention to him. I should also note that he should be approaching the refs after each questionable call, he should tell his coaches so they can speak with the refs and Shanahan should contact the NFL. Has any of that been done? I don't know, but we are still talking about Rak being held after the 1st game of Orakpo's 3rd season in the NFL so you and I are missing something here.

 

[Elephant]

I'm not sure how you interpret the above any other way than for those to be holding calls.

I don't know either, but are they being called? No! Why? And like I said above, it is not because the refs are stupid, not buying it.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Eh, I have no problem at all labeling the refs stupid OR blind. There is tons and tons of evidence to back THOSE claims up, without even touching the Rak calls.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I don't know either, but are they being called? No! Why? And like I said above, it is not because the refs are stupid, not buying it.

But the problem is, they DID call it against Dallas (and at least one other time, but I can't think of the situation). The plays were almost identical! That leads me to believe its just inconsistency in refereeing.

 

[Elephant]

But the problem is, they DID call it against Dallas (and at least one other time, but I can't think of the situation). The plays were almost identical! That leads me to believe its just inconsistency in refereeing.

And that is why I think there is some grey area we must not know about. IMO.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

The only thing I can think of is that when the defender has his hand on Rak's chest, they consider his hands "inside," despite the fact that Rak has blown by them and they are now impeding his progress with a hook. Although that still doesn't explain why the call in Tampa was not made.

I agree with you, but my personal opinion is the "grey area" is simply inconsistent referees.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Another reason Orakpo may not have been as dominant as possible - he was playing on a sprained ankle.

Found at the bottom of this article: http://www.csnwashington.com/09/12/...ey/landing_v3.html?blockID=563162&feedID=5559

 

[Miles Monroe]

What does this have to do with whether or not the above should be holding calls or not? Sure, he could use another move - doesn't take anything away from the muggings he's getting now.

This is where I disagree. It's just like wrestling, you learn a counter to the moves that will contain you. If he has a counter, he won't get mugged the way he has.

 

[KDawg]

Rak whiffed on a couple tackles, but was all over the field, to me though, when you are the lynchpin of a defence you had better have a full stat line as well as doing the little things. was he bad? no, but I expect more out of him. honestly he disapointed me yesterday. Kerrigan sometimes looked lost but man the kid has an impressive motor, he is the epitome of if you screw up at a hundred miles an hour people are less angry than when you screw up and slow down.

This is exactly what I thought Ryman meant. He and I disagree on Rak's role on this team a bit. I think he's more of a leader and a DeMarcus Ware type. He thinks he should be more like Clay Matthews. Totally different molds of backers and players. And I can't fault him for that

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

I just dont think he will be a demarcus ware type, he isnt as fluid an athlete and he uses more of a power game than speed. He has startling power for a guy his size and even though he has a solid quick first step he isnt as sudden as ware or a fluid in space or as straightline fast. I think he could be more of a matthews type, smashing blocks and driving linemen backwards to make tackles but he needs to show some new moves or they will simply engulf him like they have been doing.

I am actually wondering if he is capable of playing OLB in the 3-4 for more than short bursts. without being exposed.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

did I say he wasn't a beast? he is starightline fast and he is fluid enough to be competant as an OLB and special as a 4-3 de, and he is still one of my favourite players, however he is far more suited to being a 4-3 DE than a 3-4 OLB both in skillset and in his physical stats (aside from weight atm), that is an immutable fact not an opinion, feel free to provide anything to the contrary if you want to argue. If you look at his build he is a very natural 265, with little weight to lose without losing muscle mass, so he could easily carry 280-290 pounds on an NFL program. I get tired of people who have no clue about NFL strength programs or about skillsets who assume that because his raw numbers look like an OLB that he will somehow just fit what we would like. did you ever hear about Andre Carter? well rak is a slightly bigger slightly more athletic Andre Carter, he is solid to good as a 3-4 olb and he is superior to excellent as a 4-3 end. he uses power and strength as his primary moves not speed and suddenness.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

if you understood NFL strength programs you would know that for a guy with little body fat its far easier to gain than to drop weight opn an NFL program. and actually if you havent figured out by now that Raks skillset is based on strength moves and power and that it fits better as a 4-3 end than a 3-4 OLB then you havent been watching many redskins games. he does alright because he is a pretty good athlete and overcomes it for the most part, but you dont draft guys with the hope that they will be alright in the first round and you dont build your defence around a guy who does alright. as for the no clue comment, if you make statements continously that are clueless about such things I tend to assume that you in fact may not understand how NFL strength progams work and are thus not having a clue about it.

fact- rak played better at DE than OLB.
fact- Raks game is based on strength and power, he isnt a guy who just runs around Ots .
fact- he is solid as a 3-4 olb but he flashed probowl ability as a DE because he had simple responability.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

[Ryman]If a player does not instantly go from 7 sacks to infinity sacks when switching from 4-3 DE to 3-4 OLB, he is an ABJECT FAILURE.[/Ryman]

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Fact he has played more in the 3-4 than the 4-3 and his number of tackles has not significantly gone up.
Fact despite almost doubling his pass rush attempts in the switch he has less sacks and pressures. especially considering last season he was the goto guy.
Fact The majority of his big plays during his rookie season came when he had his hand in the dirt and last season he looked far better when allowed to rush out of a 4 man front.

its facetious to simply say he only dropped 2.5 sacks,that is misleading much like most of the stats you quote when arguing with me about this switch, if all things were equal , then no a 2.5 sacks dropoff shouldnt be a season killer, when it comes from a guy who doubled his rush attempts and still dropped 2.5 suddenly it is slightly more indicative of a failure to maximise his talents.

Lanky, if the majority of a reason for switching your defence is to supposedly cater to one players strengths (and seeing as Rak was the only guy who supposedly was a better fit in a 3-4) and IF you are making him the focal point of your defence, and IF you double his rush attempts and then he drops in stats rather than gets better, then yes its definately a point of concern.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

and Mike, when I draft a guy in the top 15 and make my defence around him, I want more than pretty good or just fine.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Ummm no Mike, thats pretty much the opposite of what I have argued all along, I have argued that if you dont see results right away with a switch to the 3-4 then it was not a good switch I don't know how you could possibly have read it your way unless you in fact dont read (which is something I am starting to wonder about). ALL of the dominant 3-4 teams pretty much made the switch when they had a majority of 3-4 players or they worked around them (baltimore and the pats) with good schemes until they had a majority BEFORE SWITCHING FULL ON. the bad 3-4 teams all just do the switch with whatever they have on hand and live with the results as they slowly change players over multiple seasons. Oddly enough those teams arent the dominant ones for at least 2-3 seasons and even then its usually due to multiple players leaving.

btw perhaps you need to read your own posts before insinuating that I am putting words in your mouth in fact look up a couple posts where YOU wrote
"and with only dropping off by 2.5 sacks he is doing JUST FINE." when you are the sole reason for a switch in defences, you had better be better than just fine. you also wrote "But Rak is fitting in nicely and doing well."

 

[Neophyte]

Gents, let's all remember where we are, please. We have an unmoderated forum for you to get all up in each others virtual grills. Let it at the door when you come in here. All of you.