PDA

View Full Version : Players making squad for special teams play


ChiefGator
08-22-2005, 06:11 PM
I keep reading about people making the squad for special teams play. And I keep thinking, we seem to have ALOT of special teams players.

1) Gammon.. I know, i know.. the best at what he does. But contributes in no other way.. er.. fourth TE?

2) Hall.. I know, i know.. the best at what he does. Not that great of a receiver, except for a couple big plays every now and then.

3) Stills

4) Bo

5) Grigsby


It just seems like these are ALOT of players just for Special Teams. Am I wrong?

Mark

jidar
08-22-2005, 06:18 PM
If we cut Gammon, then the first time we blow a game due to a bad snap (which will happen), we will WISH we still had him.

The rest bring more than just ST to the table.

Rudy lost the toss
08-22-2005, 06:47 PM
I think Bo will contribute to the passing game

Katipan
08-22-2005, 06:48 PM
Boomer was the first one down there for at least the first 2 kick offs, Saturday.

milkman
08-22-2005, 07:22 PM
If we cut Gammon, then the first time we blow a game due to a bad snap (which will happen), we will WISH we still had him.

The rest bring more than just ST to the table.

I agree with you that Boe and Hall do bring something more than STs to the table, even if, in Hall's case definitely, and Boe's possibly, what they bring is very limited.

In Stills case, unless he really flourishes at LB, he brings absolutely nothing else.

He, as a DE, has been a liability against the run, and as a "pass rush specialist" has 8 sacks in 5 years.
That is, for all intents and purposes, nothing.

However, he is a STs stud, and with our STs play falling inot the category of something less spectacular, cutting him, at this time, is not a practical option.

I actually have hope he does turn out to be a solid B/U LB.
It really seems like a more natural position for him, to me.

ChiefGator
08-22-2005, 07:27 PM
Yeah, I think it is Stills that really starts to bother me. He's the third player who basically only contributes in special teams. Boomer is a rookie, so that's where rookie LB's often sit.

Just seems like we have some luxuries on special teams, but maybe a little short elsewhere.

That said, I guess we aren't cutting any all-pros either.. Our scrap heap ain't gonna be that good.

Coach
08-22-2005, 07:28 PM
Ronnie Cruz might make it as a special teamer as well.

philfree
08-22-2005, 07:37 PM
Ronnie Cruz might make it as a special teamer as well.

Yeah and I'd rather keep Johnaton McKenzie Smith as our 3rd RB. If we have RB injuries like we did lst year we'll need someone who can run the rock. That's Smith IMO. He can play STs too! Of course of Holcombe wasn't injured he'd prolly be a shoe in and save us a roster spot.


PhilFree:arrow:

Uatu
08-22-2005, 07:50 PM
Do you remember the last time we had a bad snap?

Neither do I. Let's keep it that way.

A bad snap can easily lose a game for you. Does anyone think Ronnie Cruz is going to win any games for us? Is even the vaunted Rich Scanlon going to win any?

Hell I'd rather have Gammon on the roster than Scan, at this point.

morphius
08-22-2005, 07:56 PM
Bo and Hall add something to the passing game, just because they are not starters does not mean that they don't bring something other then ST to the game. Though Bo needs to prove to me that he is what people say he is.

Boomer is being trained as the backup MLB with hopes he can compete for the starting position or take over, that really a need on any team. Plus he has that desire to play the game and hit people that you want the MLB to have, now he just has to keep improving.

tk13
08-22-2005, 07:59 PM
Mitch Holthus said during the AZ game that last week during practice, Gammon had a bad punt snap. Said he'd never seen that happen before, couldn't believe he did it.

One guy who I always like to support for ST play is William Bartee. He couldn't cover Vermeil running down the sideline, but he's fast and a very solid tackler. I hope he makes the squad as a backup safety, which it seems like he will.

Consistent1
08-25-2005, 08:46 PM
Bo and Hall add something to the passing game, just because they are not starters does not mean that they don't bring something other then ST to the game. Though Bo needs to prove to me that he is what people say he is.

Boomer is being trained as the backup MLB with hopes he can compete for the starting position or take over, that really a need on any team. Plus he has that desire to play the game and hit people that you want the MLB to have, now he just has to keep improving.


That is more on the money regarding Boomer than what I have seen people saying lately. It seems like everyone hated Kawika up until the last couple weeks, and the media got the fans all pumped up on Boomer. Boomer has done well with the media to a point, but let's not forget the media has done well WITH HIM. Works both ways and coming from a 1-AA school that isn't very competitive at this point, you can't expect Zach Thomas within a month. I think some people sort of expected him to really compete with Mitchell, and that isn't realistic. However, if you look at his speed and strength combination, with a year's experience on the team, he will be in the mix next year.

I see people saying he will be cut, etc...and that may well be the case, I don't know. I really hope he makes the team and gets a year's experience under his belt on ST's and maybe a little mop up duty here and there. The guy won't dissapoint you next year, I will bet on that. I just hope he doesn't end up playing in Europe or some bullshit like that. That would be detrimental to his strength and conditioning coming back next year. He will be familiar with the program, no school commitments, etc...and the boy will work his ass off. I really hope he makes it, he is a solid citizen.

jspchief
08-25-2005, 08:49 PM
Yea Gammon is the best at what he does.

Just look at all the other teams that lose all those games because they don't have Gammon. :rolleyes:

jspchief
08-25-2005, 08:53 PM
Has anyone actually watched Boomer on special teams? He's not exactly tearing it up.

Opening kick-off of both games so far, he's been the first guy down there, only to get knocked on his ass by the wedge, without remotely busting it or slowing it down.

He needs to do something about his technique. So far all he's accomplishing is shortening his lifespan, while giving the opponent's STs a big hit to get excited about.

tk13
08-25-2005, 08:58 PM
Yea Gammon is the best at what he does.

Just look at all the other teams that lose all those games because they don't have Gammon. :rolleyes:
Are you serious? You don't think teams have lost games over a bad snap? Why don't you ask Giants fans about that...

el borracho
08-25-2005, 09:01 PM
I wouldn't cry if we cut Stills and Gammon. Of course, we would have to feel confident we were cutting them to keep someone more valuable (either short-term or long-term) on the roster.

jspchief
08-25-2005, 09:07 PM
Are you serious? You don't think teams have lost games over a bad snap? Why don't you ask Giants fans about that...250+ games played every year, and the only example you can think of is from 3 or 4 years ago. That's 1 out of 1000.

Does it happen? Sure. But it's not like all these other teams are routinely scrambling after bad snaps, while our special teams dominate with Gammon's accuracy.

When we lose guys like Lilja, I can only wonder if Gammon is worth it.

tk13
08-25-2005, 09:13 PM
250+ games played every year, and the only example you can think of is from 3 or 4 years ago. That's 1 out of 1000.

Does it happen? Sure. But it's not like all these other teams are routinely scrambling after bad snaps, while our special teams dominate with Gammon's accuracy.

When we lose guys like Lilja, I can only wonder if Gammon is worth it.
That's hardly the only time that's happened. One of the more famous ones was that Giants playoff game a couple years ago. Lions blew a snap on an extra point just last year that won a game for the Vikings. Redskins blew a playoff game a few years back on a bad snap. So on and so on... I don't know about you, but I don't want to be that team, I'd rather repeat the Colts game in 2003 than lose on a bad snap.

That's something scary to tempt fate on... I don't think guaranteeing every single snap is of less value to a team than a 8th or 9th OLineman that isn't going to play. No way.