Why where these players not tried as returners

Quote:
Why where these players not tried as returners

Is this some kind of combo double trick question?

Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
same reason they let Rossum go and never give J.Hill a chance to show what he's got. Blind staff.

I also think letting rossum go was a huge mistake

Originally posted by Niners99:
just because youre fast doesnt mean you can do a specific position well.

thats like saying "man, Michael Lewis is a big, physical player, why dont they use him at RB?"

its more than speed. you have to judge the flight of the ball, the spin, know when to let it go, when to fair catch, when to return, and than have the open field skills to make something happen. catching a ball come down at a high sharp angle, flipping over end is nothing like catch a pass.

remember Josh Morgan dropped that pass early on, i want to say in the first Rams game? the pass got slightly tipped at the line, and it wobbled. he told Sing it went through his arms because "it came down like a punt".

That was all of Shaun Hill's passes. Except 3 yard out passes, those skipped like a rock.

[ Edited by unst4bl3 on Feb 19, 2010 at 23:05:33 ]

Originally posted by dald1:

Originally posted by Niners99:
just because youre fast doesnt mean you can do a specific position well.

thats like saying "man, Michael Lewis is a big, physical player, why dont they use him at RB?"

its more than speed. you have to judge the flight of the ball, the spin, know when to let it go, when to fair catch, when to return, and than have the open field skills to make something happen. catching a ball come down at a high sharp angle, flipping over end is nothing like catch a pass.

remember Josh Morgan dropped that pass early on, i want to say in the first Rams game? the pass got slightly tipped at the line, and it wobbled. he told Sing it went through his arms because "it came down like a punt".

sorry but i completely disagree for the reason that we put arnaz battle who was proven to fumble the ball time and time again instead of trying a person who either is fast or was a college return man. That just doesnt make sense to me, both hill and smith have fresh legs as opposed to morgan so they would have been better on KR, not to mention morgan isnt the fastest guy either.

what does that have to do with what i said? you cant disagree with my opinion unless youre disagreeing with my saying you cant just stick any player with speed at a return position....

What makes you think that none of these guys were looked at to be returners?

Just because you never saw them in games doesn't mean they weren't extensively looked at during practices.

Originally posted by jprchrds:

Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
same reason they let Rossum go and never give J.Hill a chance to show what he's got. Blind staff.

I also think letting rossum go was a huge mistake

Rossum was let go by the Cowboys too. wayy too injury prone. Reggie Smith i believe has the same problem which is why they dont want to give it to him.

Hill has barely any experience doing it so if they already got unsure guys with experience why try out an unsure guy with no experience.

Arnaz Battle

G GS PR PRY TD LG Avg KR KRY TD LG Avg
2004 14 0 31 266 1 71 8.6 13 257 0 40 19.8

So Arnaz has experience and some success with it in the past at the highest level so i can see why they gave him extra chances.

The FO made a mistake of not identifying return man as a priority even when we did have Rossum. We had no great backup plan incase of injury. I think they thought they can fill that position with nickel and dime players.

Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
same reason they let Rossum go and never give J.Hill a chance to show what he's got. Blind staff.

This should have been taken care of when we released Rossum, but the team will address the position with multiple players who can & will get many chances to return.

Our problem was not returning kicks, it was returning punts.

Do any of those players that you mentioned have experience returning punts? I don't see any exhaustive experience. I thought Battle would be ok returning punts because he had experience at it at the pro level. Who knew he would eff things up so bad?

-9fA

Originally posted by ruthless49er:

Originally posted by jprchrds:

Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
same reason they let Rossum go and never give J.Hill a chance to show what he's got. Blind staff.

I also think letting rossum go was a huge mistake

Rossum was let go by the Cowboys too. wayy too injury prone. Reggie Smith i believe has the same problem which is why they dont want to give it to him.

Hill has barely any experience doing it so if they already got unsure guys with experience why try out an unsure guy with no experience.

Arnaz Battle

G GS PR PRY TD LG Avg KR KRY TD LG Avg
2004 14 0 31 266 1 71 8.6 13 257 0 40 19.8

So Arnaz has experience and some success with it in the past at the highest level so i can see why they gave him extra chances.

The FO made a mistake of not identifying return man as a priority even when we did have Rossum. We had no great backup plan incase of injury. I think they thought they can fill that position with nickel and dime players.

Wow really? Too injury prone?

Prove that with some facts. How many times was Rossum on the sidelines due to injury before McCloughan cut him?

Dallas let him go cause they could absorb the hit. Yeah he got injured. It was also our bye week and he was playing on a new surface which aggravated his groin issue.

I'm sick and tired of people goin on about how Rossum was injury prone.

He wasn't let go cause he was injury prone. He was let go due to his age(34) and how little he saw the field.

Career stats

It was only blind luck that he was injured after the Cowturds picked him up. There was no guarantee that he would have remained healthy with us, but given that most of our opponents have grass fields it was a better chance than in Dallas.

So please quit with the nonsense. the Man was on the field for us, for 13 games last season and 3 this season this is not counting kick returns that did not go to him.

I do not have the inactive roster handy but I don't recall Rossum being deactivated due to injury.

You can't blow off the gaff by McCloughan by deflection. And it's 3 gaffs really.

1st Rossum cut in favor of Spurlock.

2nd lost a guy who may have been a better Back than Coffee. At least a better change of pace Back to Frank.

3rd cutting Spurlock who was snatched up by New Orleans and runs back a TD for them.

Rossum was a career return man. Even at 34 > Spurlock.

Frank being down for 3 games and Coffee proves ineffective.

Spurlock never gets a chance to pull PR duty. So in effect his career as a 9er amounted to THREE lousy plays. All of which could be run by MROb, Battle or even Nate Davis.

Freakin pathetic.

~Ceadder

our special teams coaching was piss poor obviously they had no idea what they were doing. It cost us the Hou and SEA game.....which translates to THE DIVISION and a home playoff game that most of us would of gone to and could of won.

A few years ago we had dynamite STs...what went wrong? The HC change may have impacted the STs more than any other group. Are too many vets getting out of STs duty? Too many not getting out of duty?

The moves that are being criticized (Rosum cut to save Spurlock, etc.) seemed to be looking toward the future, trying--with the last roster position--to try players in game situations. That is not all bad. Doing well in TC is not a guarantee of doing well in games.

Lastly, while I would prefer drafting OLmen in the first, Spiller would not be drafting a returner but a great insurance policy should Gore go down...with the added ability to return while he waits. Smart teams do not depend on one running back for the season and the 9ers are getting near to decent and should look toward the next big leap for respectability.

[ Edited by dtg_9er on Feb 21, 2010 at 20:06:07 ]

Originally posted by BurritoSmuggler:
you know, i dont know. i thought reggie smith was a returner in college too. i dont get it.

injured

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by ruthless49er:

Originally posted by jprchrds:

Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
same reason they let Rossum go and never give J.Hill a chance to show what he's got. Blind staff.

I also think letting rossum go was a huge mistake

Rossum was let go by the Cowboys too. wayy too injury prone. Reggie Smith i believe has the same problem which is why they dont want to give it to him.

Hill has barely any experience doing it so if they already got unsure guys with experience why try out an unsure guy with no experience.

Arnaz Battle

G GS PR PRY TD LG Avg KR KRY TD LG Avg
2004 14 0 31 266 1 71 8.6 13 257 0 40 19.8

So Arnaz has experience and some success with it in the past at the highest level so i can see why they gave him extra chances.

The FO made a mistake of not identifying return man as a priority even when we did have Rossum. We had no great backup plan incase of injury. I think they thought they can fill that position with nickel and dime players.

Wow really? Too injury prone?

Prove that with some facts. How many times was Rossum on the sidelines due to injury before McCloughan cut him?

Dallas let him go cause they could absorb the hit. Yeah he got injured. It was also our bye week and he was playing on a new surface which aggravated his groin issue.

I'm sick and tired of people goin on about how Rossum was injury prone.

He wasn't let go cause he was injury prone. He was let go due to his age(34) and how little he saw the field.

Career stats

It was only blind luck that he was injured after the Cowturds picked him up. There was no guarantee that he would have remained healthy with us, but given that most of our opponents have grass fields it was a better chance than in Dallas.

So please quit with the nonsense. the Man was on the field for us, for 13 games last season and 3 this season this is not counting kick returns that did not go to him.

I do not have the inactive roster handy but I don't recall Rossum being deactivated due to injury.

You can't blow off the gaff by McCloughan by deflection. And it's 3 gaffs really.

1st Rossum cut in favor of Spurlock.

2nd lost a guy who may have been a better Back than Coffee. At least a better change of pace Back to Frank.

3rd cutting Spurlock who was snatched up by New Orleans and runs back a TD for them.

Rossum was a career return man. Even at 34 > Spurlock.

Frank being down for 3 games and Coffee proves ineffective.

Spurlock never gets a chance to pull PR duty. So in effect his career as a 9er amounted to THREE lousy plays. All of which could be run by MROb, Battle or even Nate Davis.

Freakin pathetic.

~Ceadder

cedder.
you can say that someone who MAY be better a mistake. esp when none of us were at practice to see why. he has not proven good enough to stick on another team either so i dont see a mistake or gaffe here. just a fans rush to judgement.


2. 1 run back doesnt make the player. did he break tackles or was the hole wide enough for a semi to get through?

Originally posted by SF4EVA:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by ruthless49er:

Originally posted by jprchrds:

Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
same reason they let Rossum go and never give J.Hill a chance to show what he's got. Blind staff.

I also think letting rossum go was a huge mistake

Rossum was let go by the Cowboys too. wayy too injury prone. Reggie Smith i believe has the same problem which is why they dont want to give it to him.

Hill has barely any experience doing it so if they already got unsure guys with experience why try out an unsure guy with no experience.

Arnaz Battle

G GS PR PRY TD LG Avg KR KRY TD LG Avg
2004 14 0 31 266 1 71 8.6 13 257 0 40 19.8

So Arnaz has experience and some success with it in the past at the highest level so i can see why they gave him extra chances.

The FO made a mistake of not identifying return man as a priority even when we did have Rossum. We had no great backup plan incase of injury. I think they thought they can fill that position with nickel and dime players.

Wow really? Too injury prone?

Prove that with some facts. How many times was Rossum on the sidelines due to injury before McCloughan cut him?

Dallas let him go cause they could absorb the hit. Yeah he got injured. It was also our bye week and he was playing on a new surface which aggravated his groin issue.

I'm sick and tired of people goin on about how Rossum was injury prone.

He wasn't let go cause he was injury prone. He was let go due to his age(34) and how little he saw the field.

Career stats

It was only blind luck that he was injured after the Cowturds picked him up. There was no guarantee that he would have remained healthy with us, but given that most of our opponents have grass fields it was a better chance than in Dallas.

So please quit with the nonsense. the Man was on the field for us, for 13 games last season and 3 this season this is not counting kick returns that did not go to him.

I do not have the inactive roster handy but I don't recall Rossum being deactivated due to injury.

You can't blow off the gaff by McCloughan by deflection. And it's 3 gaffs really.

1st Rossum cut in favor of Spurlock.

2nd lost a guy who may have been a better Back than Coffee. At least a better change of pace Back to Frank.

3rd cutting Spurlock who was snatched up by New Orleans and runs back a TD for them.

Rossum was a career return man. Even at 34 > Spurlock.

Frank being down for 3 games and Coffee proves ineffective.

Spurlock never gets a chance to pull PR duty. So in effect his career as a 9er amounted to THREE lousy plays. All of which could be run by MROb, Battle or even Nate Davis.

Freakin pathetic.

~Ceadder

cedder.
you can say that someone who MAY be better a mistake. esp when none of us were at practice to see why. he has not proven good enough to stick on another team either so i dont see a mistake or gaffe here. just a fans rush to judgement.


2. 1 run back doesnt make the player. did he break tackles or was the hole wide enough for a semi to get through?

No, I agree with you 4eva. But going with what we know Scott made quite a few personnel mistakes. I'm not going to hold it against him, I'm only pointing them out as they happened and why they were mistakes. Sorry if I made it sound like I was condemning Scott.

But this coming season if he makes blatant gaffs like that again, I think that it will be time to move on. But that's just me.

~Ceadder