Rolle on Sirius

[kerouac9]

I wish Rolle the best but nobody cares about him anymore.

Rhodes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rolle.

Obviously. Because one of these guys played in the Pro Bowl last season and is the highest paid safety in the league, and the other one finished 2009 on the bench.

So, that's some clear reasoning. Based on salary and production, they're probably a wash. But don't pretend like you saw a ton of Kerry Rhodes playing last year to base this opinion on.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Obviously. Because one of these guys played in the Pro Bowl last season and is the highest paid safety in the league, and the other one finished 2009 on the bench.

So, that's some clear reasoning. Based on salary and production, they're probably a wash. But don't pretend like you saw a ton of Kerry Rhodes playing last year to base this opinion on.

Holy crap, you're seriously taking facts out of context to prove your point.

Antrelle Rolle was the THIRD alternate to the Pro Bowl, while Kerry Rhodes was benched two games in the MIDDLE of the year NOT based on poor play. In 2006 Rhodes was voted to the ALL PRO TEAM over Ed Reed...

 

[kerouac9]

Holy crap, you're seriously taking facts out of context to prove your point.

Antrelle Rolle was the THIRD alternate to the Pro Bowl, while Kerry Rhodes was benched two games in the MIDDLE of the year NOT based on poor play. In 2006 Rhodes was voted to the ALL PRO TEAM over Ed Reed...

2006 was three years ago, Krang. If Kerry Rhodes were playing at a Pro Bowl level last season, why would he have been benched?

I like Rhodes; I think he'll be a solid player for us, although I don't think he's the prototype center-fielder type that many on this board are insisting he is. I think he's more of a rover guy who will freelance--that may be why he was benched last season. That's essentially what Antrel Rolle was.

Rhodes will be a guy who's a little better in coverage than Rolle, but not as dynamic with the ball in his hands. What I'm saying is that I think that people here (but not around the rest of the NFL and in the Cards' own complex, based on his contract offers) are underrating Rolle and overrating Rhodes.

If Rhodes was such an excellent asset, then why did the Cards have to pay so little for him? Why weren't teams more desperate for a safety--like Miami or the Giants themselves--interested in him? This is a guy who Kris Jenkins called a woman this offseason and Rhodes didn't even have a response for him.

 

[Krangodnzr]

2006 was three years ago, Krang. If Kerry Rhodes were playing at a Pro Bowl level last season, why would he have been benched?

Because he was vocally against Coach Ryan's style and they already had a good enough replacement waiting in the wings.

I like Rhodes; I think he'll be a solid player for us, although I don't think he's the prototype center-fielder type that many on this board are insisting he is. I think he's more of a rover guy who will freelance--that may be why he was benched last season. That's essentially what Antrel Rolle was.

Rhodes will be a guy who's a little better in coverage than Rolle, but not as dynamic with the ball in his hands. What I'm saying is that I think that people here (but not around the rest of the NFL and in the Cards' own complex, based on his contract offers) are underrating Rolle and overrating Rhodes.

When I watched the team this year, and mind you I haven't been able to watch the team much in years, I was shocked at how often Rolle was beaten or out of position. I would hope that Rhodes is better than Rolle because I was never impressed with Rolle in the first place

If Rhodes was such an excellent asset, then why did the Cards have to pay so little for him? Why weren't teams more desperate for a safety--like Miami or the Giants themselves--interested in him? This is a guy who Kris Jenkins called a woman this offseason and Rhodes didn't even have a response for him.

Who cares what loudmouth Jenkins said? It's been stated through the media on numerous occasions that Rhodes rubbed some of his teammates the wrong way. Also as I mentioned before they have a replacement on the roster already (Eric Smith IIRC) and therefore could give up Rhodes for less (Randy Moss went for a 4th rounder too). Furthermore, teams would much rather sign a guy than give up draft capital.

 

[kerouac9]

Because he was vocally against Coach Ryan's style and they already had a good enough replacement waiting in the wings.



When I watched the team this year, and mind you I haven't been able to watch the team much in years, I was shocked at how often Rolle was beaten or out of position. I would hope that Rhodes is better than Rolle because I was never impressed with Rolle in the first place



Who cares what loudmouth Jenkins said? It's been stated through the media on numerous occasions that Rhodes rubbed some of his teammates the wrong way. Also as I mentioned before they have a replacement on the roster already (Eric Smith IIRC) and therefore could give up Rhodes for less (Randy Moss went for a 4th rounder too). Furthermore, teams would much rather sign a guy than give up draft capital.

I'm not sure that the biggest problem with Rolle was that he was out of position. I think it's that he was a poor, poor open-field tackler. The Cards were last in the NFL in open-field tackling, and Rolle was a major part of that.

As I said, I expect Rhodes to do yeoman's work. If he can be a more secure tackler and be a little more disciplined in coverage (I'm guessing his problem with Ryan was that he was expected to play more center field--like a traditional free safety--when he was used to roving around more under Magini: he said as much when he came here), then he may be a mild upgrade.

This is as much about fans here denigrating former Cardinal players as it is about my skepticism about Rhodes' new pedestal among a lot of posters. Rolle was an improving player here, and he was electric enough with the ball in his hands that Whis found a role for him on offense, as well. Rolle obviously didn't live up to his draft status, but I'm interested in seeing what he does with the Giants and am not going to look back on his career here with increased criticism now that he's gone.

 

[Duckjake]

Rhodes will be a guy who's a little better in coverage than Rolle, but not as dynamic with the ball in his hands. What I'm saying is that I think that people here (but not around the rest of the NFL and in the Cards' own complex, based on his contract offers) are underrating Rolle and overrating Rhodes.

From what I've seen watching some Jets highlights this appears to be an accurate assessment. Rhodes seemed to be in the right place a lot more than Rolle in coverage but doesn't look near as fluid as Antron. Rhodes is also taller which could help in covering the bigger WRs.

BTW: Anyone have any thoughts on how Rhodes name is going to be butchered?

Bet it won't be as good as Dansberry.

 

[kerouac9]

From what I've seen watching some Jets highlights this appears to be an accurate assessment. Rhodes seemed to be in the right place a lot more than Rolle in coverage but doesn't look near as fluid as Antron. Rhodes is also taller which could help in covering the bigger WRs.

BTW: Anyone have any thoughts on how Rhodes name is going to be butchered?

Bet it won't be as good as Dansberry.

There is a real dearth of difficult-to-pronounce names on either side of the ball now. I think we're going to have to settle for broadcasters stumbling over "Calais" and more rarely "Iwebema".

 

[Crazy Canuck]

There is a real dearth of difficult-to-pronounce names on either side of the ball now. I think we're going to have to settle for broadcasters stumbling over "Calais" and more rarely "Iwebema".

You mean there is a chance we'll hear the proper French pronunciation: Kal-eh

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

2006 was three years ago, Krang. If Kerry Rhodes were playing at a Pro Bowl level last season, why would he have been benched?

I like Rhodes; I think he'll be a solid player for us, although I don't think he's the prototype center-fielder type that many on this board are insisting he is. I think he's more of a rover guy who will freelance--that may be why he was benched last season. That's essentially what Antrel Rolle was.

Rhodes will be a guy who's a little better in coverage than Rolle, but not as dynamic with the ball in his hands. What I'm saying is that I think that people here (but not around the rest of the NFL and in the Cards' own complex, based on his contract offers) are underrating Rolle and overrating Rhodes.

If Rhodes was such an excellent asset, then why did the Cards have to pay so little for him? Why weren't teams more desperate for a safety--like Miami or the Giants themselves--interested in him? This is a guy who Kris Jenkins called a woman this offseason and Rhodes didn't even have a response for him.

I dont neccessarily disagree with your assesment. I think it is myopic to think Rolle now sucks since the Cards couldnt keep him. Also,Rhodes will be good for us because of the exact reason you state-he is a freelancer and a ball hawk. He will get more int's than rolle did for us, but i also think he will get beat deep more often.

And so everyone knows, Rhodes nickname is/was "Hollywood" and he is mouthy. That is why Jenkins called him a girl. He didnt fit into the Jets scheme either-which is the biggest reason Ryan and Co. let him go. Ryan brought in Jim Leonard who is a perfect for for the Jets and Rhodes was expendable (also due to his complaining about a contract etc.)

If you remember correctly, a few weeks before Boldin was traded, I posted something that was said on Sirius NFL Blitz that the Cards really liked Rhodes and were trying to trade Boldin for him. It apparently didnt pan out.

I dont honestly think the Cards ever had any intention of keeping Rolle regardless of what they say!