Saffold surgery is a success… (plus alliteration)

This topic has 7 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by zn.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

Author

Posts
January 15, 2015 at 3:51 pm #16580

zn
Moderator

Saffold surgery is a success

By Jim Thomas

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/saffold-surgery-is-a-success/article_f87f31cf-952f-5f44-8ecf-b39638514b6a.html

Rams offensive guard Rodger Saffold should be healthy and ready to go in time for training camp following shoulder surgery last week.

So says Dr. Frank Cordasco, who performed the surgery Jan. 7 at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City.

“In late July, when the summer ball (training camp) really starts, he should be there with the team,” Cordasco told the Post-Dispatch.

So barring a setback, Saffold should be fine to play in the Rams’ preseason games.

Cordasco repaired a torn labrum in Saffold’s left shoulder and said the expected rehabilitation time is six months.

“I think he should be able to do some of the OTAs as long as there’s no contact,” Cordasco said, referring to the June practices known as organized team activities.

For the first month after surgery, it’s a matter of recovery and healing, Cordasco said. “The second month is motion,” he continued. “The third month is strength. And then months four through six, depending on the athlete, you get into more sport specific rehabilitation.”

Saffold had problems with the shoulder in 2013, but it was decided he could continue playing without surgery, wearing a brace, without causing any further damage in 2014. He had a couple of instances where he suffered shoulder dislocations during the season but was able to continue playing.

Even so, Cordasco said, “It was clear this wasn’t going to go away.”

Saffold said during the season that he contemplated having surgery on the shoulder after the ’13 season, but didn’t because of free agency. He originally agreed to terms with Oakland but the Raiders backed out, failing Saffold on their physical because of concerns about the shoulder.

After re-signing with the Rams, Saffold appeared in all 16 games this season and started every contest at either guard or tackle. It marked the first time he has played in all 16 contests since his rookie season in 2010.

The procedure was arthroscopic, making the rehab process easier than if it had been an open surgery. Cordasco said he did nothing with the rotator cuff itself.

“The rest of the joint surface is in good shape,” he said.

January 15, 2015 at 4:35 pm #16595

rfl
Participant

zn wrote:

Saffold surgery is a success

By Jim Thomas

Saffold had problems with the shoulder in 2013, but it was decided he could continue playing without surgery, wearing a brace, without causing any further damage in 2014. He had a couple of instances where he suffered shoulder dislocations during the season but was able to continue playing.

Even so, Cordasco said, “It was clear this wasn’t going to go away.”

Saffold said during the season that he contemplated having surgery on the shoulder after the ’13 season, but didn’t because of free agency. He originally agreed to terms with Oakland but the Raiders backed out, failing Saffold on their physical because of concerns about the shoulder.

In other words, this problem was KNOWN! Indeed, this must have been what caused OAK to back away.

Some injuries come out of nowhere and no one is to blame. Other injuries are known beforehand, and in that case, a staff is responsible for the decisions it makes.

Now, please understand. I like Saffold a lot and value him. Assuming he overcomes this shoulder issue, I am glad we took him back from OAK and I look forward to him playing very well in future.

But. Having said that. Let’s review:

The Ram FO went into ’14 with a prospective OL including …

* A C who is injury prone and declining in performance
* A LOT who’s been hurt and is declining in performance
* A draft pick, likely Robby, who was remarkably green at pass blocking
* Only 1 clearly effective OG, a guy with a KNOWN bad shoulder
* A bunch of young OLmen who have played marginally or worse.

That’s what was known. They are responsible for what they decided to do about it all.

1. They went with their under-performing C who had a predictably bad year. They had no real plan B at C. The guy thewy drafted 2 years ago has apparently shown nothing.

2. The vet LOT predictably played marginally and then got injured. This destabilized the OL.

3. They got a vet FA for ROG who seemed to be credible, but who had declined after an injury. They bet that he would regain skills shown in the past. This acquisition misfired horribly: he played a lot and played abysmally.

4. They Drafted the green LOT but prepped him at OG. He didn’t see the field for a while, then played OG, then moved to LOT when the vet went down, leaving them stuck with the vet ROG. He played pretty poorly on the outside, and might well have been hampered by a lack of prep time at the position.

5. They went along with Saffold’s decision to play with the bad shoulder that OAK had rejected. Result: intermittent in-game injuries and subdued performance.

6. The other young guys generally appear to have been bad picks. Even on a beat up OL, they offered little to no help.

Now, football is played in the real world, not Plato’s Ideal Realm. One doesn’t always have good options at OL. Sometimes, people have to make bets.

But, see that’s what an FO is responsible for. They re-signed Saffold knowing about the shoulder. They took on the burden of an OG likely to play hurt or worse. They at least partially own the results.

They own the decisions on Well, Long and Joseph as well. Beat up guys who have all shown trends of diminishing performance. Those are the guys they trusted.

And they drafted Robby, prepped him at guard, but were then forced to play him at a position he clearly isn’t ready for. They own the results.

Did they have better options? I dunno. Maybe, maybe not. But the OL this year was the result of 3 years of drafting and signing FAs. It contained easily identifiable, predictable problems, all of which were fully discussed beforehand. This is where they went, and they are responsible, just as all staffs are responsible for roster decisions and the bets they represent.

ZN has assured us that OL ain’t a hard fix. To be honest, I don’t buy that. We’ve been yearning for a sound OL for years and years. The best we see is parts of seasons when guys are healthy. And you know what? Fisher has not yet been able to change that. Everyone says he wants a power running game. But he STILL hasn’t built an OL that can support his vision.

He owns that.

By virtue of the absurd ...

January 15, 2015 at 4:46 pm #16598

zn
Moderator

rfl wrote:

ZN has assured us that OL ain’t a hard fix.

Well, no…OLs ARE hard to fix. Usually.

What I said was that if Saffold returns, and they keep Barksdale, filling in a guard and a center are not hard to do. There are any number of ways to do it.

But in GENERAL yes an OL is hard to fix.

I was just saying that THIS PARTICULAR FIX (assuming all they need is a guard and a center) is not hard.

In terms of Saffold’s shoulder, all this came out last summer when he returned to the Rams after being rejected by Oakland. At the time the Rams said that as was, his shoulder condition was known and was fine. He did re-injure it, but that was not something predictable. In other words, it was not inevitable that he would suffer a collision or trauma that would re-injure it. As I said, that was all out there in the open last summer.

January 15, 2015 at 5:06 pm #16599

wv
Participant

rfl wrote:

And you know what? Fisher has not yet been able to change that. Everyone says he wants a power running game. But he STILL hasn’t built an OL that can support his vision.
He owns that.

Well, I think the biggest failing of Snisher was
the Jake Long decision. There was a lot of discussion
about that signing and a lot of posters were against it
because of his injury-history. (I loved the signing at the time)

Well, it turned out to be a bad signing. And Wells turned out
to be a bad signing. And Joseph turned out to be a bad signing.
And B.Jones turned out to be a bad draft pick. As well as Rok.

So, yeah they ‘own that.’ They’ve made some bad free-agent personnel decisions.

But other than the OLine and QB the team looks promising.

Can they finally fix the OLine?

Yeah, i think so. Cause they know damn well
its the key to the season. And they have
Barksdale, GR and Saffold which is a good start.

w
v

January 15, 2015 at 5:50 pm #16609

wv
Participant

http://www.rams-news.com/chris-long-to-say-were-close-is-very-realistic-video/
Long is Optimistic. He says he’s not bullshitting this time 🙂

w
v

January 17, 2015 at 1:17 pm #16744

zn
Moderator

wv wrote:

Everyone says he wants a power running game. But he STILL hasn’t built an OL that can support his vision.
He owns that.

Well, I think the biggest failing of Snisher was
the Jake Long decision. There was a lot of discussion
about that signing and a lot of posters were against it
because of his injury-history. (I loved the signing at the time)

Well, it turned out to be a bad signing. And Wells turned out
to be a bad signing. And Joseph turned out to be a bad signing.
And B.Jones turned out to be a bad draft pick. As well as Rok.

So, yeah they ‘own that.’ They’ve made some bad free-agent personnel decisions.

But other than the OLine and QB the team looks promising.

Can they finally fix the OLine?

Yeah, i think so. Cause they know damn well
its the key to the season. And they have
Barksdale, GR and Saffold which is a good start.

w
v

I think that he DID build an OL that supported a power running game. And that when it was not injured it did just that.

For example, after Stacy started in 2013, the Rams could run. Extrapolate their avg. rushing game numbers with Stacy across 16 games and they get 2084 rushing, which would have been 8th in the league.

Now if people want to say he should not have relied on the previously injured Jake Long, that’s one thing. And bear in mind I was initially against signing LOng, but it’s because I thought Saffold was a better pass-blocking LOT.

Nothing in Long’s past arm injuries indicated you should be wary of future KNEE injuries though.

To me though they can’t say Wells was a bad signing because he wasn’t. His streak of freaky injuries and illnesses started with the Rams. Some mention age, but I don’t accept that argument…centers can and have routinely played through their 11th and 12th seasons.

Joseph wasn’t supposed to start.

Rok? So what. When it comes to lower draft picks, UDFAs, and ronin types like Barksdale, you add several and see who sticks. You don’t lament a 5th round pick. Over a 20 year period from 2012 back to 1993, the NFL drafted 43 guards in round 5, and of those, 5-6 became viable starters.

Jones? No one knows yet one way or another. He hurt his back, that set him back.

What about Person, Rhaney, Bond, and/or Washington? No one knows yet.

January 17, 2015 at 1:54 pm #16749

wv
Participant

zn wrote:

I think that he DID build an OL that supported a power running game…

Now if people want to say he should not have relied on the previously injured Jake Long, that’s one thing. And bear in mind I was initially against signing LOng…

To me though they can’t say Wells was a bad signing..

Joseph wasn’t supposed to start.

Rok? So what…

Jones? No one knows yet..
What about Person, Rhaney, Bond, and/or Washington? No one knows yet.

Well, they made a big mistake signing Jake Long. I have
no qualms about judging them on that one. He was the
key signing for their OLine Plan. A lot of people
thought he was too big of an injury risk, at the time.

Do you think they made ANY mistakes with their OLine plan
so far?

w
v

January 17, 2015 at 2:57 pm #16751

zn
Moderator

wv wrote:

I think that he DID build an OL that supported a power running game…

Now if people want to say he should not have relied on the previously injured Jake Long, that’s one thing. And bear in mind I was initially against signing LOng…

To me though they can’t say Wells was a bad signing..

Joseph wasn’t supposed to start.

Rok? So what…

Jones? No one knows yet..
What about Person, Rhaney, Bond, and/or Washington? No one knows yet.

Well, they made a big mistake signing Jake Long. I have
no qualms about judging them on that one. He was the
key signing for their OLine Plan. A lot of people
thought he was too big of an injury risk, at the time.

Do you think they made ANY mistakes with their OLine plan
so far?

w
v

Well I don’t remember a lot of people (or even any people) saying he was “an injury risk.”

I remember people wondering if after 2 arm surgeries he was capable of playing at an effective, high level.

And no one said he was at risk for getting OTHER injuries.

I think any “mistakes” they made are neither here nor there. No one builds a line with a 100% hit rate.

It’s just that when I see a long line of injuries…including all 4 centers in 2014…I don’t immediately think “quick blame a coach.”
Author

Posts