5 Biggest Takeaways from the St. Louis Rams' First Week of Camp
The first week of St. Louis Rams training camp is complete and the team was able to put in some solid work.
As required by NFL policy, the team had to go through the first several practices without the pads on, which made it difficult for many reporters to gauge the team's progress.
But the team added pads later on in the week and is now in full-contact mode.
On Saturday, August 4, the team played a scrimmage in front of thousands of fans at the Edward Jones Dome, and they'll get their first taste of blood on Sunday, August 12, when they welcome Andrew Luck to the NFL as they take on the Indianapolis Colts for the first preseason game of the year.
There's still a lot of work to be done, but here are five things we can take away from the Rams' first week of training camp.
Janoris Jenkins Is Legitimate
Janoris Jenkins slipped to the Rams in the second round of the NFL draft due to character concerns, but no one has ever denied that Jenkins is an elite talent.
Jenkins was always expected to start immediately, but some people didn't realize how good he actually is.
NFL reporter Adam Schefter reported to Sports Center on ESPN that Jenkins is already looking like a player with "Pro Bowl potential" (according to Turf Show Times).
And other than Schefter, there hasn't been a negative word said about Jenkins and his training camp production.
Jenkins is looking more and more like the real deal.
Brandon Gibson Is Not Going Away Without a Fight
Brandon Gibson has been extremely average throughout his three seasons with St. Louis. It was always assumed that Gibson was a starter because he was merely the best among a substandard group of pass catchers.
With the addition of rookies Brian Quick and Chris Givens in the draft, as well as veteran Steve Smith in free agency, it was looking as though Gibson's days were numbered.
But Gibson has been working with the first-string offense all week and has been impressive.
According to Jim Thomas of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Gibson was the most impressive offensive player during the team's scrimmage on Saturday, August 4.
It's hard to tell if Gibson's production is a positive thing, or if it's an indicator that the other wide receivers have been extremely disappointing.
Sam Bradford Is Ready To Lead
According to Bryan Burwell of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sam Bradford was one of the main reasons why Jeff Fisher chose to coach the Rams over the Miami Dolphins, and Fisher has been very impressed with the potential that Bradford has displayed.
The success of the 2012 season depends heavily on the personal success of Bradford, so the positive training camp reports are encouraging.
Bradford seems ready to complete the transition from being a wide-eyed youngster to a team leader.
Scott Wells' Situation Is Concerning
The Rams signed center Scott Wells to a four-year contract worth $24 million last spring (according to Spotrac), and he is expected to be the most important veteran addition to the offense this season.
Wells is being depended on as someone who can solidify an offense line that was beyond awful last season, but he's been absent from both mini-camp and training camp.
According to Turf Show Times, Wells' absence is still related to a knee scope from earlier in the offseason.
At this point, there's still plenty of time for Wells to make a return and get into shape.
Although, if he's still absent by about the third preseason game, then it's time to be concerned.
Harvey Dahl Is Fuming
The Rams may have showed a lack of passion at times during their disastrous 2011 season, but the exception was always offensive guard Harvey Dahl.
The hot-headed lineman was always willing to get in someone's face, and it looks like he's planning on playing with the same fire in 2012.
Despite being in training camp for only a week, Dahl has already shown a willingness to get into a scuffle with a defender.
If Scott Wells' return to action is delayed, at least the Rams will still have Dahl looking out for Sam Bradford.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?