Dawgs By Nature: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Cowboy Altitude for Wyoming Fans!

Report: Shaun Rogers Out for Season

The Cleveland Plain Dealer is reporting that according to a league source, Cleveland Browns DT Shaun Rogers will miss the remainder of the season due to either an ankle or Achilles injury. Rogers was reportedly on crutches in the Browns locker room after the game with a distraught look on his face. Ahtyba Rubin will likely take Rogers' place for the remainder of the season.

Rogers wasn't the only player to leave with an injury Sunday against the Bengals. The following three players also left the game with injuries:

The most concerning injury among those three has to do with Pool, who already has a history of concussions. With the league's recent added emphasis on protecting players who have concussions, you wonder if Pool is getting to the point where he might need to retire early.

"Of course, I'm worried about him," said Eric Wright. "I didn't know until just now he had a head injury."

If Wimbley can't go next week against the Chargers, the team's linebacker unit will feature Jason Trusnik and Matt Roth on the outside and Kaluka Maiava and David Bowens on the inside.

Any way you look at it, this defense isn't going to get any better in an already dismal 1-10 season.

0 recs  |  Comment 157 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

….and the hits just keep on comin’

by johnnyphoenix on Nov 29, 2009 11:47 PM EST reply actions  

You know when you are playing Warcraft and you are trying to hold onto your base, but then it gets overrun…and no matter what you do you know it’s just a matter of time before you have to reset the game. That is what I feel like right now, only about the Browns.

by Oscar_the_Dog on Nov 30, 2009 1:24 AM EST reply actions  

Will we win again this season without Shaun? I’m not feeling it.

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 30, 2009 2:40 AM EST reply actions  

Looking at the schedule, I don’t see another win on it.

I was holding out hope for the Oakland game, but without Rogers, the Raiders will pound us with their somewhat decent run game.

Since we have no offense, they will probably win.

by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 30, 2009 3:25 AM EST up reply actions  

This is why I am not too depressed about the Rogers injury. With him we probably at best win one more game, and still maybe not at all. If it in anyway hinders him next year then I become concerned, but right now it really doesn’t make a big difference.

by Roger Dorn on Nov 30, 2009 8:55 AM EST up reply actions  

Very reasonably considered, but I’m still finding it depressing!

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Nov 30, 2009 12:27 PM EST up reply actions  

At the very least, we give time to a backup who could make the most out of it and be a really really good backup next year.

Columbus til I die, Columbus til I die. I know I am, I swear I am, Columbus til I die!

by BLAZER_FAN_199 on Nov 30, 2009 2:59 PM EST up reply actions  

Thanks for accepting Eric Mangini´s apology and staying in Cleveland Shaun Rogers. Good luck with your recovery.

by mooncamping on Nov 30, 2009 8:38 AM EST reply actions  

Now he can get on with Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2…..
I wonder if we were playoff bound if he would be out for the season.

http://prideofcleveland.blogspot.com/

by Red-Right-88 on Nov 30, 2009 8:59 AM EST up reply actions  

Sit Pool for the rest of the year to. He doesn’t need to see the field again with the history of concussions.
 Shame about Rogers, the guy has busted his ass here at Cleveland and has nothing but a horrendus football team to show for it.
 Can someone fire Dabol?

by Grockcubs on Nov 30, 2009 9:12 AM EST reply actions  

What does the offensive coordinator have to do with the injuries to Rogers, Wimbley and Pool?

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 30, 2009 10:31 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Because he hasn’t shown the ability to coordinate an offense.

by danvail on Nov 30, 2009 10:43 AM EST up reply actions  

One could argue that the more often that defensive players are on the field, the more likely they’ll suffer an injury. Right now, Daboll’s offensive gameplan is contributing to our offense spending less time on the field.

Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.

by Chris Pokorny on Nov 30, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Dont forget Carl Smith is helping call the plays.

http://prideofcleveland.blogspot.com/

by Red-Right-88 on Nov 30, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions  

So basically you are saying that it is Daboll’s fault for Rogers getting hurt?

by Roger Dorn on Nov 30, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions  

I think the key word may have been “contributing,” but I don’t mean to speak for anybody.

by Western Reserve on Nov 30, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions  

I personally am not trying to say that; I just mentioned how one could attempt to defend such a claim.

Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.

by Chris Pokorny on Nov 30, 2009 2:45 PM EST up reply actions  

Haha, I was trying to get a bandwagon going on Daboll got Rogers, Pool and WImbley hurt.

by Roger Dorn on Nov 30, 2009 3:39 PM EST up reply actions  

I’m not buying it. Daboll might be awful, but to pin the blame for defensive injuries on him is a stretch. Win can find indirect links to just about everyone. Better to look at training regimen and practices. I’m thinking of Jamal’s comments about difficult practices before any failings of the offense.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 30, 2009 1:37 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

“we” can find… (not “win”)

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin

by Spidey on Nov 30, 2009 1:38 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Nothing. It is my daily fire Dabol statement.

by Grockcubs on Nov 30, 2009 2:30 PM EST up reply actions  

cleveland.com says Rogers is going to injured reserve and Pool may consider quitting football after so many concussions

by palcal on Nov 30, 2009 2:50 PM EST reply actions  

Don’t blame him.

In fact, I would be suprised if he comes back. At some point he has to think of life after football first.

by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 30, 2009 3:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Unless someone good comes available via FA, this certainly moves Safety up on the draft priorities list.

by JustBob on Nov 30, 2009 6:20 PM EST up reply actions  

I thought Eric Berry was already numero uno before this?

Author of the segment "A Brownie For Your Thoughts," on DBN. Check it out.

by SpecialBrownie on Nov 30, 2009 9:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Gonna miss the big guy. Hope you get back to your maneating self soon!!

Columbus til I die, Columbus til I die. I know I am, I swear I am, Columbus til I die!

by BLAZER_FAN_199 on Nov 30, 2009 3:00 PM EST reply actions  

well that’s just wonderful :-/
but look on the bright side… we’re not making a playoff run.

by emily522 on Nov 30, 2009 3:17 PM EST reply actions  

how is there a bright side to not making a playoff run? i’d rather be in the middle of a good season and still have a chance without him than just have the injury be one more turd on our huge pile of poop.

by Dawg Nuts on Nov 30, 2009 4:43 PM EST up reply actions  

true, but i’d rather have him injured now than during a critical point in the season.

by emily522 on Nov 30, 2009 4:46 PM EST up reply actions  

I’d rather have a season with a critical point.

Is this the whale section?

by sarcasmdave on Dec 2, 2009 1:54 AM EST up reply actions  

that is exactly my point; trying to make some kind of positive out of either aspect of this discussion is crazy. losing a player to injury in a meaningful season > losing a player to injury in a meaningless season.

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 2, 2009 10:23 AM EST up reply actions  

I don’t know about you guys, but I’m really glad we cut Brett Lockett! (sarcasm)

by TheRealSlimShady on Nov 30, 2009 8:27 PM EST reply actions  

In a bit of good news Adam Schefter reports that Shaun Rogers has a broken leg.

I say good news because that is much, much better than an achilles heel injury. I assume the big fella will be back next season at 100%.

by Bernie19Kosar on Nov 30, 2009 10:21 PM EST reply actions  

yeah a broken leg is definitely bad, but at least we don’t have a lecharles bentley situation on our hands

by notthatnoise on Nov 30, 2009 10:31 PM EST up reply actions  

unjinx

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Nov 30, 2009 10:39 PM EST up reply actions  

From clevelandbrowns.com, Mangini on Robiskie:

Usually the determining factor is what else they can do in the game

To summarise quickly he said that Stuckey and Massaquoi were doing well. Jake Allen did better in practice. Furrey (safety) and Cribbs (ST) had parts to play apart from WR. So Robiskie wasn’t activated.

From this I gather that Robiskie is just really not cutting it at the moment. Allen came in off the practice squad and kicked a 2nd rounder out for Pete’s sake.

by skipkirk on Dec 1, 2009 12:25 AM EST reply actions  

Robiskie is just really not cutting it at the moment.

Then you don’t draft him high in the second round…

by johnnyphoenix on Dec 1, 2009 2:14 AM EST reply actions  

Sure. That assumes you knew back in March that he wouldn’t cut it in late November.

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 1, 2009 11:25 AM EST up reply actions  

exactly. robiskie was rated by everyone to go in the early-to-mid second round

by notthatnoise on Dec 1, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions  

I think it was a terrible choice to draft these players, who have essentially the same style and limited skill set, right after another so closely together in the first place. So while Rey Maualuga, Lauranitis and Bulter are solidifying their defenses, we’re stuck with two WR’s who can’t do anything for us now, and possibly in the future. I place the full blame on the scouts, not the general consensous. There have been times where scouts have passes up on highly regarded players before.

And most draft boards I saw taking Robiske that high had him going to offensively solid teams like the Pats and Colts. If they wouldn’t have taken him I wouldn’t be surprised if he dropped to the fourth or third round

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 1, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Word. If any of you guys were blown away by watching Robo play on Saturdays (which, fess up, most of us did regardless of whether you like OSU) then I’m a little confused.

by joeee on Dec 1, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Lauranitis was not available to us at 36 unfortunately.

Also grouping Massaquoi and Robiskie into 2nd round WR busts is a little premature. It’s pretty clear that Massaquoi is way ahead of Robiskie as we stand right now. Massaquoi has been put in an unfortunate position as our number 1 receiver and only moderate offensive threat as a rookie. I can’t even think of another scenario where a 2nd round pick became a team’s number 1 offensive threat. I am not saying Massaquoi will be a number 1 receiver, because I don’t, but I do see him being a solid starter as a number 2 down the road.

I still do not care that we passed on Rey M.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 1, 2009 1:48 PM EST up reply actions  

Big L was taken right before Robo. It would have taken very little to move up one spot to nab him. I feel like we passed up the OSU player who was at the very top of his skill position for a OSU player who skill wise was towards the middle.

And it was Mangini who set us up in this predicament. We’re still without a major passing threat going into the future despite using 2 higher second round picks that could have been used on more impactful players at other positions. So now we still have to address the WR situation, along with our other problems using more mid round picks next year. And judging by the way this organization used them the past few years, I don’t have much faith in that.

And Cincinnatti picked up Rey and now they have a potent rush defense. Just sayin.

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 1, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions  

It would take the other team’s consent to move up 1 spot to take him. It’s very possible St. Louis really wanted Lauranitis and had no intention of trading down. Any other opinion is pure conjecture.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 1, 2009 3:19 PM EST up reply actions  

I don’t think its off base vying for that trade considering all the moves we made. Of course this is all commentary but nothing wrong with that

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 1, 2009 3:24 PM EST up reply actions  

I am just saying, for all you know we tried to trade up to get him and the Rams hung up the phone because they wanted him.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 1, 2009 4:28 PM EST up reply actions  

you’re right. but even in that case taking Robo still was a terrible choice imo. If they were actively going after Big L I fiqure they would have went after Rey Rey

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 1, 2009 5:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Robo does look like a bad choice at the moment. As I said, I would prefer not drafting WRs at the moment, but not much we can do now.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 1, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Perhaps Mangini thought whoever he brought in on defense was adequate.

And maybe they were. We won’t find out, with all the injuries with had.

by skipkirk on Dec 1, 2009 6:40 PM EST up reply actions  

Laurinitis and Maualuga are very different players, though. Were they going after the one, that doesn’t mean that they’d definitely be interested in the other.

by golanbatrac on Dec 1, 2009 6:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Even being different players they both could have helped us.

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 1, 2009 10:23 PM EST up reply actions  

I think Laurinitis could have helped, but Maualuga? I doubt it. He’s too dumb not to ultimately be a liability at ILB..

by golanbatrac on Dec 1, 2009 10:27 PM EST up reply actions  

this is pretty much my feeling.

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 1, 2009 11:34 PM EST up reply actions  

But he is producing this year while Robo is not playing. It would take some convincing for me to believe that Robo learning his position and becoming a number 2 and that Maualuga being dumb and becoming a liability are both certain enough to say Robo was a better pick than Maualuga.

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 1, 2009 11:41 PM EST up reply actions  

“Producing” this year should not be the main goal of our draft picks. While it is completely valid to be worried about Robo, that doesn’t mean that Maualuga was a good long-term pick.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 8:52 AM EST up reply actions  

Producing this year isn’t my main goal either nor was my point that Mauluga was a good pick. My point was that it’s just as likely that Robo won’t end up doing anything as it is that Mauluga will become a dumb liability.

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 2, 2009 4:36 PM EST up reply actions  

so it also isn’t certain enough to say it was a worse pick.

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 2, 2009 10:24 AM EST up reply actions  

I still don’t understand all the love for Maualuga. Is it just because he went to USC and was on ESPN all the time making big hits with announcers fawning over his “intimidation” skills? Because everything I’ve read from people who scouted him said he wasn’t going to be an impact player in the NFL because he wasn’t fundamentally sound. He would roam the defense looking for big hits but he couldn’t cover anyone, which is why he was taken off the field so much at USC on third down.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 2, 2009 11:19 AM EST up reply actions  

This.

Big hits on ESPN. Everyone loves big hits.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 2, 2009 8:37 PM EST up reply actions  

I agree with this, but he is making an impact for the Bengals. Nabbing a starting LB in the 2nd round is a good choice. But I thought as you did before the draft that he wasn’t worth taking.

by Cols714 on Dec 3, 2009 11:15 AM EST up reply actions  

He’s been about what I expected. No impact in the passing game, and has been a serviceable run stopper.

Still not upset about passing on him, which is to say nothing about my feelings on Robsiskie.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 3, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions  

At the time, with Lauranitis gone, I was hoping we would take Maualuga with our first pick in the 2nd round and I still struggle to understand why after taking Robiskie we then take Mass in the 2nd round, unless we thought Mass was the best player on the board at the time. I just find it hard to believe we really intended to rely on 2 rookie wr for much this year, so why not address another positional need with one of those two picks. Also i had a serious Jones for McCoy and Greene and felt either would have been intriguing there in the 2nd although getting Davis made me feel a little better and hopefully we will eventually get to see him play in a Browns uniform.

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 1, 2009 10:22 PM EST up reply actions  

I still struggle to understand why after taking Robiskie we then take Mass in the 2nd round

Here’s why:

Kokinis: I’m on the phone now Mango, we’re confirmed? All set to go? The WR right?
Mangini: It’s Mangini you blockhead. Yes. Go ahead.
Kokinis to Commish: Yes, we pick Brian Robiskie out of OSU.

Pick is confirmed. Later:

Mangini: WTH? Who’s Brian Robiskie?
Kokinis: You said go for it!
Mangini: Massaquoi you idiot! Mohammed. Massaquoi!
Kokinis: Oh shit. Well we have another pick coming up…

That is also why Kokinis was fired.

by skipkirk on Dec 1, 2009 11:14 PM EST up reply actions   2 recs

Unfortunately that doesn’t sound too weird.

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 1, 2009 11:35 PM EST up reply actions  

LOL coulda been that way…

http://prideofcleveland.blogspot.com/

by Red-Right-88 on Dec 2, 2009 8:57 AM EST up reply actions  

I think it was a terrible choice to draft these players, who have essentially the same style and limited skill set, right after another so closely together in the first place. So while Rey Maualuga, Lauranitis and Bulter are solidifying their defenses, we’re stuck with two WR’s who can’t do anything for us now, and possibly in the future. I place the full blame on the scouts, not the general consensous. There have been times where scouts have passes up on highly regarded players before.

And most draft boards I saw taking Robiske that high had him going to offensively solid teams like the Pats and Colts. If they wouldn’t have taken him I wouldn’t be surprised if he dropped to the fourth or third round

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 1, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Thing about Robiskie is…he’s slow. We saw it in college…and now we’re seeing it in the pro’s…

by johnnyphoenix on Dec 1, 2009 2:16 AM EST reply actions  

No, you aren’t seeing it in the pro’s because he isn’t playing.

Speed is very low on the list of things a receiver needs to be successful. My guess is that Robo is struggling with getting off press coverage and various other things that must be done to see the field.

by gahnki on Dec 1, 2009 10:51 AM EST up reply actions  

I only agree to the extent that if you don’t meet a certain speed threshold, then you can’t be successful as an NFL receiver. I don’t think Robo is below that threshold, but he is slow enough that he needs to excel at other things to be a good pro. Some guys can use great strength or leaping ability to make up for it. Route running only works insofar as you can get off of the line of scrimmage in press coverage.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 1, 2009 11:10 AM EST up reply actions  

I wouldn’t say its very low. IMO you either have to be physical or have speed. If you can’t fight for the ball against these DBs then you better be able to leave them behind.

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 1, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Zone coverage, pattern reading, and press make speed very unimportant as long as you meet the threshold that Dorn speaks of above. Ask Heyward-Bey how important his 4.3 is when the defensive backs have a 15 yard head start on him.

Robiskie’s problem was never speed at OSU; it was getting off press coverage. He struggles with the hand-fighting aspect of it.

by gahnki on Dec 1, 2009 5:49 PM EST up reply actions  

If he couldn’t fight off college dbs, what would make one think he would be able to do it in the NFL?

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 1, 2009 10:31 PM EST up reply actions  

which is why I said you have to have speed for be physical. That doesn’t mean that if you have speed you’re going to be successful as with any natural attribute

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 2, 2009 11:23 AM EST up reply actions  

So now let’s hear about Veikune’s excuse for being drafted waaay too high…

by johnnyphoenix on Dec 1, 2009 2:18 AM EST reply actions  

He´s a dark horse at 4-3 middle linebacker that the Browns can project as better than Maualuga.

by mooncamping on Dec 1, 2009 8:01 AM EST up reply actions  

I am more disapointed about Veikune than I am Robo.

I thought that Veikune was going to be a pass rusher at OLB. All we heard during training camps was that Veikune was picking things up well and Robo was far ahead of MoMass at WR. So much for that.

I don’t think you draft projects (Veikune) in the second round.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 1, 2009 5:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Well, you think different than most teams in the league (or at least those who run a 3-4). Hybrid linebackers/ends are the most important players on a 3-4 defense. It’s been a long time since the Charles Haleys of the world were still there in the fourth round. Every hybrid linebacker is a project (even the one’s taken early in the draft aka Chris Long). A lot of teams are willing to take the risk because the reward is so high and the position is so vital.

by golanbatrac on Dec 1, 2009 5:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Well, you think different than most teams in the league (or at least those who run a 3-4). Hybrid linebackers/ends are the most important players on a 3-4 defense

You’re right. I don’t agree. A NT is 10x more important in a 3-4. Without a big man, it doesn’t matter who your OLB’s are. Look at what has happened to the Jets defense this season since Kris Jenkins has gotten injured. Same for San Diego’s run defense when Jamal Williams went down.

Don’t get it twisted, OLB’s are very important, just not the center cog of the defense.

Every hybrid linebacker is a project (even the one’s taken early in the draft aka Chris Long). A lot of teams are willing to take the risk because the reward is so high and the position is so vital.

Long played 3-4 in college. The Rams now run a 4-3 so I don’t understand why he matters.

Aside of that, it is false to say every one is a project. Suggs and Merriman both won ROY as hybrids. Clay Matthews is doing very well in GB. Plus did you watch SNF and see rookie Paul Kruger make the big INT?

I am not asking Veikune to be a world beater. But to expect a second rounder, whose main draw coming out of college was his pass rush, to be on the field every Sunday isn’t a reach. In fact, it should be a red flag. I can see why a WR may not be on the field, but a LB should be able to help in ST.

In the NFL teams take projects at one position. That is QB. There isn’t one other position in which a player sitting out a full season could be viewed as a good thing. Yes some hybrids can’t get on the field because they suck (Gholston) or because there are veterans ahead of said player (Larry English and even he has 2 sacks!). But too assume that it is normal for a hybrid player to be invisible for his rookie season is a normal thing, you are crazy.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 1, 2009 9:25 PM EST up reply actions  

We could have had Kruger instead of Veikune. sigh

by TheRealSlimShady on Dec 1, 2009 9:36 PM EST up reply actions  

On top of all this, everything I’ve read has the Browns ‘projecting’ Veikune as a MLB. Why would you draft a project MLB in the second round? I dug up this article by Terry Pluto from May 2nd:

“A real test of the new regime’s talent evaluation will be Veikune, whom most draft experts had in the third round or lower… If the Browns’ scouts are right, this guy becomes a pass rusher from the outside linebacker spot. If others are correct, he helps mostly on special teams… The Browns also have mentioned Veikune possibly playing some inside linebacker.”

So Pluto’s worst case scenario was that Veikune only contributes on special teams. Problem is, he doesn’t even do that, as he’s been inactive most (all?) games this year. With this team having so many holes to fill, drafting Veikune appears to have been a major mistake.

by bbstirrd on Dec 1, 2009 10:11 PM EST up reply actions  

becomes

This is the key word from Pluto.

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 1, 2009 11:37 PM EST up reply actions  

Right. These guys are still rookies. It’s way too early to start predicting failure for any of them.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 2, 2009 11:24 AM EST up reply actions  

Right. Troy Polamalu looked completely lost in his rookie year and Lawrence Timmons didn’t start or play much his rookie year (but he was a good ST guy).

The thing about OLB projects is that they should at least be helping on ST. If you aren’t helping there, you may have a problem.

by Cols714 on Dec 3, 2009 11:17 AM EST up reply actions  

Merriman, Matthews and English were linebackers in college and are linebackers in the NFL. It’s much harder for a college DE to transition to linebacker or even to learn to drop into coverage from the line than it is for a college linebacker to learn to learn to play a percentage of snaps as a down lineman.

Kruger is the only one you list who is a reasonable comparison to Veikune. Kruger has one tackle, 3 assists and an interception on the year. One. Tackle. Three. Assists. One. Interception. And the Brady Quinn fan club is sighing?

So if we get Veikune a tackle and an INT wil he suddenly be a good pick?

by golanbatrac on Dec 1, 2009 10:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Kruger’s entire season really was that one interception which you could even attribute to a nice defensive play call.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 1, 2009 10:49 PM EST up reply actions  

Larry English was a DE in college. He was All-MAC as a DE. Hell Kamerion Wimbley had his best season as a rookie going from DE to OLB. I’m not here to split hairs about college positions.

But my point still stands. These players were not projects. This is the NFL. Other than QB, teams do not draft projects. Coaches and GM’s have a limited time to show that they are worth keeping around. Anyone who is taken in the first and second rounds better damn well be ready to help that team ASAP. If the Browns thought he was an ILB, then there was no freaking way they should have taken him in the second. Projects are for late in the draft (See: Hall, Alex) not a 2nd rounder.

As you say all the time, if Phil Savage left a thin roster why in the sam hell are we drafting a project at ILB? ILB is an easy postion to find in the draft. It, like RB, is a plug and play position. It is beyond foolish to waste a second rounder on a guy that is not going to see the field.

Kruger is the only one you list who is a reasonable comparison to Veikune. Kruger has one tackle, 3 assists and an interception on the year.

The point about Kruger was not his stats. But the fact that his team was in OT versus a division rival in a game that had massive playoff implications, and his team trusted him enough to put him on the field. Our boy couldn’t find the field with a map.

So if we get Veikune a tackle and an INT wil he suddenly be a good pick?

Hell yes he will be! Anyone who can have an INT and a tackle from the bench isn’t just good, they are magical!

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 1, 2009 11:43 PM EST up reply actions  

I wish I could agree about RB being a plug n play, but I am still waiting on the Browns to do this once since the return.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 8:54 AM EST up reply actions  

Lee Suggs!

Fess up. Someone on this board has a Lee Suggs jersey. I’m looking your way Chris.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 2, 2009 8:40 PM EST up reply actions  

I do have a William Green jersey!

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 2, 2009 9:23 PM EST up reply actions  

My jerseys:

Winslow (got for 20 bucks after his motorcycle crash)
Edwards (gift)
Quinn (gift)

I honestly am afraid to wear the Quinn jersey around, and the other two don’t play on the team anymore. If we draft Berry, I will make my first full priced purchase of a jersey.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 9:27 PM EST up reply actions  

I have a feeling that Eric Berry would be a big seller.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 3, 2009 2:07 AM EST up reply actions  

i’ve got the following:
Eric Metcalf
Tim Couch
BQ (got it for $7 because the number is printed a little low on the front)

anyone want to guess which one i wear on sundays?

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 4, 2009 11:05 AM EST up reply actions  

bingo. its the only one that gives me any kind of joy or feeling of pride.

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 6, 2009 11:55 AM EST up reply actions  

Understood! Although keep that BQ jersey. There may be hope!

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 7, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions  

might consider wearing it thursday. but maybe i’ll jinx things. hmmm. what to do, what to do?

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 7, 2009 10:02 PM EST up reply actions  

I have Joe Thomas and Alex Mack.

What can I say, I love the big uglies.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 3, 2009 2:07 AM EST up reply actions  

The red flag went up for me as soon as I heard he was switching to MLB primarily. That still makes no sense to me.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 1, 2009 10:48 PM EST up reply actions  

Right. This is what makes it unlike every other transition to LB. It is almost always either OLB to ILB or DE to OLB. DE to ILB is pretty rare. If nothing else it makes his development really slow.

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 1, 2009 11:40 PM EST up reply actions  

Right. My original point was that you do not take projects in the second round.

In fact I am having a hard time figuring out any player that has gone from DE in college to ILB his rookie year. I know that Tedy Brushci has been tossed around, but even Tedy was a 3rd rounder.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 1, 2009 11:54 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, Bruschi is the obvious example and the guy who Mangini compared Veikune’s skill set to. Fluid and quick enough to cover and pass rush, and big enough to stop the run.

Bruschi had 10 tackles his rookie season.

by golanbatrac on Dec 2, 2009 12:14 AM EST up reply actions  

You’re selling our man Tedy short. Bruschi also appeared in every game his rookie season. He had 4 sacks. He also had two sacks in the Super Bowl.

Also according to profootballreference.com, Bruschi was an OLB until 2001. So once again, I cannot find one instance to where a college DE was switched to an ILB as a rookie.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 2, 2009 1:31 AM EST up reply actions  

I thought your point was that teams only take projects at quarterback?

by golanbatrac on Dec 2, 2009 12:18 AM EST up reply actions  

You can take a QB project at any round. The amount of QB’s that were drafted and sat the bench for an entire season are all over the NFL. Brady, Henne, Palmer, Garrard, Schaub, Rivers, Cassel, Romo, Rodgers, Favre, Delhomme and Hasselbeck are all QBs that are starting QBs that were/are projects at one point in time.

Other than that, it is foolish to draft a “project” of any other position, especially an easily filled one as ILB, in the first two rounds of an NFL draft.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 2, 2009 1:40 AM EST up reply actions  

my conclusion is that anyone who didn’t pan out so far is considered a “project” by the eyes of apologist browns fans.

Mangini flubbed the first 2 rounds of the draft. Simple as that. We were in a great position with 3 2nd round picks to really fill this team up with difference makers and at this point in time we got very little compared to what we could have had.

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 2, 2009 11:13 AM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, and after his first season Mario Williams looked like a dumb pick, too. How is that working out now?

It’s way, way, way too early to start judging our draft picks. These guys have only played a half of a season. Let’s give these players time to see what they can do.

Also, you think everyone besides yourself is an apologist so I don’t give much regard to what you say.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 2, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Mario was drafted with the tools necessary to be a dominant player. He has the fastest DE(probably ever), one of the strongest, and had tremendous success in college against good competition. Veikune, Robo, and Momass lack those phyisical tools so their more risky without those tools to fall back on or the higher reward payout

by The Licensed Pessimist on Dec 2, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions  

That’s why none of those players were the #1 pick.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 2, 2009 1:15 PM EST up reply actions  

Williams’s success in college was fleeting which is why the pick got panned. He would have some monster games and then stretches where he did nothing.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 1:37 PM EST up reply actions  

Mario Williams started every game as a rookie, totaling 47 tackles and 4.5 sacks. If Veikune had half that production this year, we’d all be thrilled. He doesn’t even contribute on special teams. How can a rookie linebacker not even contribute on special teams?

by bbstirrd on Dec 2, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions  

He was also the #1 overall pick. Veikune was selected about 50 picks later so the expectations were much different. The point is that you can’t judge a draft pick after one half of a season.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 2, 2009 1:15 PM EST up reply actions  

Expectations for a second rd pick, like Veikune and Robo, are to be on the field and demonstrate improvement as the year progresses. Going into the draft, we all knew the team had needs at OLB and WR; unfortunately two of our second rd picks used to address these needs can’t even find the field this year. IMO that is a significant factor in the Browns’ 1-10 record.

And BTW, you were the one who brought up Mario.

by bbstirrd on Dec 2, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions  

I know I brought up Mario Williams, as an example of a draft pick which was initially universally criticized but later proved to be a good pick, thus demonstrating that you can’t judge a draft pick after a few games or even one season.

You were comparing Williams’ production his rookie year to Viekune’s production, which has nothing to do with my point. That’s what was wrong with your comment.

by Buckeye Brad on Dec 2, 2009 5:32 PM EST up reply actions  

What I said is that if Veikune had half the production that Mario had his rookie year, we’d all be happy. You really think it’s unreasonable to expect a second round pick to have half the production of a first round pick? At this point, even making it onto the field would be an improvement.

by bbstirrd on Dec 2, 2009 8:00 PM EST up reply actions  

DBN trend:

differing opinion = apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 2, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions  

If I disagree with you, does that make me an apologist apologist?

Is this the whale section?

by sarcasmdave on Dec 2, 2009 2:36 PM EST up reply actions  

Just a regular apologist. An apologist apologist is someone who apologizes for the apologists.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions  

I apologize for sarcasmdave’s definition of apologist apologist. He didn’t mean it. He’s just kidding. Maybe it’ll take a couple of years for his definition to grow into the role we expect from it…..

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 2, 2009 4:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Congrats, you are now an apologist apologist

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 4:30 PM EST up reply actions  

shame on you RDC. you’ve become a “guy who defines apologist apologist” apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 4, 2009 11:08 AM EST up reply actions  

I disagree with this assertion.

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 2, 2009 2:48 PM EST up reply actions  

you must be an apologist of some kind.

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 2, 2009 2:59 PM EST up reply actions  

Of that I’m certain, DN.

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 2, 2009 4:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Every last bit of this made me laugh. If I weren’t so damned lazy, you’d all get Rec’d.

by golanbatrac on Dec 2, 2009 5:04 PM EST up reply actions  

you’re nothing but a laziness apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on Dec 4, 2009 11:10 AM EST up reply actions  

I am not saying that Veikune will never end up being a contributor to the Browns.

I am saying that it was dumb for the FO to draft a DE and try and switch him to ILB.

And it is a bad sign in my eyes that Veikune cannot get on the field in any capacity. The Browns claimed Arnold Harrison off waivers in mid November. Harrison has played in the three games since. A guy off the street is better equipped for the field right now than a second rounder? That is alarming.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 2, 2009 8:46 PM EST up reply actions  

Agree, anyone not really concerned about Veikune is turning a blind eye. I understand the development time, but it should be extremely concerning.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 9:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Vaikune went from DE in college to prognosticated DE/OLB hybrid, to having his skill set reevaluated to now count as a protege at MLB, albeit in a 4-3 schematic. It´s an honest appraisal of his talent. He could play as a run stuffer at ILB in our 3-4 schematic, but lacks the mobility to cover a significant area in pass or run situations.
We´re hoping other franchises have seen enough glimpses of him, to make him a hot commodity eventually, so redesignating him MLB (not ILB!) from hybrid DE/OLB makes sense, as well as the dark horse comparison to Maualuga, which if he does turn out better makes him a smart pick in the 2nd round.
We are not seeking a hybrid DE/OLB. We consider it a trend that has burnt out rather quickly, no one will run it straight at you. Those who have played football, would agree, that OLB is a demanding position, to include speed and agility. The OLB is the best athlete on the team, those hybrids are not, the special skill set is very limiting.

by mooncamping on Dec 2, 2009 8:35 AM EST up reply actions  

Anyone know how fast Gerhart is?

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 1, 2009 11:43 PM EST reply actions  

I was under the assumption that Gerhart does not need speed.

When you run over every single defender that gets in front of you, speed is not an issue.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 1, 2009 11:55 PM EST up reply actions  

I just saw the replay of the ND game and he looked like a beast. Granted it was ND, but from what i’ve been reading he’s been doing it all year. I just couldn’t tell how fast he was because he preferred to run players over.

"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"

Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle

http://www.cardchronicle.com/

by Villeslgr on Dec 2, 2009 12:02 AM EST up reply actions  

He said today on the Scott Van Pelt show that he expects to run in the high 4.4s or low 4.5s in the combine.

fka "DaytonDogg". Now a contributor to SBN's Dawgs By Nature. www.dawgsbynature.com

by Ryan Kelsey on Dec 2, 2009 12:40 AM EST up reply actions  

Well we currently need DB’s, LB’s, DL’s, OL’s, RB’s, WR, TE’s, and QB in the upcoming draft. Did I miss anything? it should be a fun offseason and what a wild draft day for us….oh I guess we still need a GM.

http://prideofcleveland.blogspot.com/

by Red-Right-88 on Dec 2, 2009 9:10 AM EST up reply actions  

Final Gerhart for Heisman video

by palcal on Dec 2, 2009 1:05 AM EST reply actions  

As I predicted, Mangini said in today’s press conference how pleased he was that we haven’t turned the ball over in 2 games. Makes me sick actually

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 11:29 AM EST reply actions  

As a coach you have to stay positive, look for the things your team is doing well. Sure its spin but what do you want him to say?

http://prideofcleveland.blogspot.com/

by Red-Right-88 on Dec 2, 2009 12:52 PM EST up reply actions  

My point is that I think the offense is being geared around not turning the ball over instead of trying to make things happen and I think it is a huge error.

by Roger Dorn on Dec 2, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions  

And we wonder why our QB has shown reluctance to throw the ball down field? I think Quinn is finally starting to try to open things up a bit now, but this fear of failure can take a toll on you and bring about overbearing conservatism.

by Western Reserve on Dec 2, 2009 2:39 PM EST up reply actions  

I support ball control offenses, but it would be nice to be able to score once in a while.

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 2, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions  

That requires a running game. And I’d be fine with it, too, if we could do it.

by Western Reserve on Dec 2, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions  

Very true. But hey, we can say goodbye to Jamal and say hello to…. DeDe Dorsey?

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 2, 2009 4:28 PM EST up reply actions  

I am a huge fan of DeDe. Would like to see him in here and get some totes.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 2, 2009 8:51 PM EST up reply actions  

ProFootballTalk has backed off a bit from the “Browns sign Dorsey” story, but apparently we gave him a workout and the signs are still good. Stay tuned!

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Dec 2, 2009 9:55 PM EST up reply actions  

I think we like to pretend we do given the amount of times we start a series off with Jamal up the middle for 1 yard.

by johnnyphoenix on Dec 2, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions  

My point is that I think the offense is being geared around not turning the ball over instead of trying to make things happen and I think it is a huge error.

Almost as if the only goal is to not get blown out.

by Bernie19Kosar on Dec 2, 2009 8:50 PM EST up reply actions  

Grossi reports that Lewis may be shut down.

by palcal on Dec 2, 2009 1:11 PM EST reply actions  

Prog-RESS’ should be part of the ‘pro-CESS’…no?

by johnnyphoenix on Dec 2, 2009 11:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.

Community Guidelines
Send us a Scoop

Start posting about the Browns »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Dbn_small
DBN Community Announcement

Recent FanPosts

Logo_ksu1_small
How About A Hardesty Vent Thread?
Dave_small
OT: 2010 SB Nation Madden 11 Online Season for Xbox 360
Small
Soccer-style Kickoffs are Offsides
Alex-mack_small
Predictions. Let's hear them.
Biggamebob_small
¿So What Do We Think We Know About 2010 Browns?
Grimm_small
Thoughts on Week 1 vs. TB
Clay1_small
"Eagle" Defense (2-5-4)
11031_act_small
Browns OR Buckeyes?
Pygmy_marmoset_small
Expanded Season - Will They or Won't They and Should They

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Browns Links

Local Media Sources
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal

Browns Communities/Blogs
The Watercooler
Waiting for Next Year
Dawg Scooper
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board

free hit counter javascript

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

SBNation.com Recent Stories

FILE - In this Aug. 28, 2009, file photo, Arizona Cardinals quarterback Matt Leinart looks to throw against the Green Bay Packers during the third quarter of a preseason NFL football game. Leinart seems to be passing the challenge to his role as No. 2 quarterback. Passing would be the operative word. He threw for 360 yards in the second half against the Packers.  (AP Photo/Paul Connors, File) +8 updates

NFL Roster Cuts: Leinart, Houshmandzadeh Among Players Cut As Teams Trim To 53 Players

St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford warms up before the start of a preseason NFL football game between the St. Louis Rams and the Minnesota Vikings Saturday, Aug. 14, 2010, in St. Louis. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson) link

Rams Pencil In Rookie Sam Bradford As Starting Quarterback

New York Giants wide receiver Steve Smith, right, catches a 25-yard pass for a touchdown as Kansas City Chiefs safety Jarrad Page looks on during the second quarter of an NFL football game Sunday, Oct. 4, 2009, in Kansas City, Mo. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson)

Report: Chiefs Trade Jarrad Page To Patriots One Day After Signing Him

More from SBNation.com >


Executive Editor

Dbn_small Chris Pokorny

Minions

Alex-mack_small Bernie19Kosar

Dsc00156_small Ryan Kelsey

Rufiohookgrin01_small rufio

Moderators

Pryor_small Buckeye Brad