DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum What would you do with Tucker?

I think part of the answer is with Bentley as well.

I have no problems with telling Dorsey good bye.

I would not mind a rotation as well. DLines rotate, OL do not.

J/C

IMO Dorsey WILL NOT be the one to be released to make room for Tucker...U don't go releasing your #1 back-up Tackle...Butler's been Inactive every week...What's that tell u guys???

The PUNTER will prolly get the axe to make room for him and it prolly won't happen till NEXT WEEK...We have till Monday...Gives Z one more week to recoup...

One gets released and the other goes to Inactive Status every week because Shaffer's the back-up LT and Tucker or Shaffer the back-up RT...GOOD PROBLEM TO HAVE...

Tucker won't be inserted into the starting line up this week...NO WAY after missing 4 in a row...With the way this OL is currently playing I'm not so sure we even TOUCH IT right now...

Bentley can come back in a couple weeks also...What to do with him???

It ain't just a matter of saying Bentley goes to Center and Tucker to RG...Or Bentley to RG and Tucker to RT...

This is gonna be very interesting...GOOD PROBLEM TO HAVE...

nrtu

I believe it was during Training Camp that a discussion was ongoing concerning Dorsey. Some posters thought he looked much improved...some noted that he seemed to get more reps than Butler.

I can't remember where else I read something to this effect...BUT...Danielle66 posted that the Browns coaches were pretty high on Dorsey after he did some offseason conditioning program (read fat farm) to get in better shape and she commented that he is very intelligent.

I've read that more than just in Danielle66's post...plus...she's very guarded in what she says and certainly provides some input from an inside source.

Lastly, the fact that Dorsey has been active and Butler has not tells you something. I think Dorsey can be a backup LT while Butler cannot.

Of course, I came to these conclusions before the blocked FG.

Quote:

---

.Danielle66 posted that the Browns coaches were pretty high on Dorsey after he did some offseason conditioning program (read fat farm) to get in better shape and she commented that he is very intelligent.

---

I recall that as well.... and I recall her saying that (Danielle, please correct me if I'm remembering this wrong) Hank thinks he's got Pro Bowler written all over him once he learns his techniques.

We certainly haven't seen any of that yet, but it IS reason for hope.

IMO Dorsey WILL NOT be the one to be released to make room for Tucker...U don't go releasing your #1 back-up Tackle...Butler's been Inactive every week...What's that tell u guys???


They both suck?

Logical...but remember Shaffer plays LT also..


The PUNTER will prolly get the axe to make room for him and it prolly won't happen till NEXT WEEK...We have till Monday...Gives Z one more week to recoup...

I wouldn't bank on that yet..a punter with back problems is a iffy thing..back problems can be annoying and occur at any time..
Tucker won't be inserted into the starting line up this week...NO WAY after missing 4 in a row...With the way this OL is currently playing I'm not so sure we even TOUCH IT right now...

Right now it's not broke so U don't fix it..

Bentley can come back in a couple weeks also...What to do with him???

Probably the same freaking thing they shoulda done with Baxter..sit him till 08... ..waste of a roster spot if the guy can't go 100% or close to it..

I agree...there's no reason to rush either Baxter or Bentley out there this year. This year, we push...next year, we conquer.

Here's a thought to add to what Toad said. Say the Bucs want to offer us a 3rd or 4th rounder for Tucker, and you feel good about LCB coming back........do you take it?? I do, becuase KS showed he can be a decent RT so far and is much younger than Tuck. That gives us more ammo to move up if need be next year...hehhe.

As for this thread, no way I disrupt chemestry to insert Tuck..........and if I could get a decent pick for him HE'S the one I would move.

I like Tucker but given his age and the "issue" last year, if he's the starter we better have somebody competent as backup. So I agree if we were offered enough for a lineman Tuck is the one I'd move.That said as much misery as we've been through with the OL unless it was a great offer I rather have the depth. IMO With Tuck gone an injury to a starter would really put our offensive (QB) developement in jeopardy. I hope what I'm hearing about Dorsey is true but I can't shake the memories of defenders running right by him. Then there is the blocked FG so I'll just keep my fingers crossed that it all works out OK.

That's why I said it's dependent on where they think LCB is, but imo any trade should be dependent upon where LCB is. My point was if we are trading one Tucker is a much better option given the age and circumstances than Kevin Shaffer is........jmho

Me I think Tucker is a better RT and a better guard then the guys currently playing those positions. I hate like hell to mess with what has worked to this point in the season, so to me it really depends on what the coaches think is best for the line. i will say this tho how can you justify keeping a better player off the field. As for earning a starting spot that should have occured during TC, and did. Yes the Browns changed gears once it became public knowledge that Tuck was about to be suspended, but up until then Tuck was our guy??

I will say this up until last Sunday I was not at all impressed with the play of Shaffer, but he was solid Sunday, no question there. He has spent quite a bit of time on his fanny tho prior to Sunday, and his run blocking isn't up to snuff IMHO. We generally run to our left side, and on occasion we have even moved JT to the right side and run behind him. Now I ask if the guys that are playing those positions on the right side are as stout as you would hope, why would you move JT over there to run behind ?

No I can see Tucker being placed on the active roster this weekend even and perhaps get some playing time, it sure will be interesting tho. I can live with the decision of the coaches. RAC and Chud, certainly must have a handle on what they want to do, but if I was to bet the weak link on the right side will sit, and Tucker will play. I see the point that why mess with what works then again I truly believe that Tucker is the better player. Nice problem to have tho, I must say that !!!

I'm ok with any trade - Shaffer or Tucker - that brings us a Day 1 pick.

However...Tuck can play 4 of 5 OL positions. Yeah, he's old...but Friedman is in his 9th year and cannot play OT...its not like he is a youngster. (BTW, I really like Friedman...just using him as an example.) So this gives us something to think about.

IF LCB comes back, we will truly be loaded.

While Shaffer is younger, he is also muuuch more expensive..and probably not as good as Tuck is right now.

With Dorsey possibly in the wings (assuming the coaches don't hate the guy) and Sowells having been an OT in college (although he seems to be destined for G) I think we could trade either guy (Shaffer or Tuck) and be just fine.

If Shaffer would bring a 3rd and Tuck a 4th...I'm trading Shaffer.

.............and if you do in 09 your having to get a new RT. Whereas Shaffers money (when escalates to where he's making big money) will be in line with what RT contracts are going at that point, and will be an option until 2011 or 12. Noway in hell I trade Shaffer if he continues to prove he can handle the RT spot. Also Shaffer is a much better pass protector than Tucker, whereas Tucker is a better run blocker..............no where near as cut and dry as Tucker is better than KS.

However...Tuck can play 4 of 5 OL positions. Yeah, he's old
Since when?
He's played RT most of his years and played RG briefly with the Rams.
He's worked at RG this TC..
Lets not overrate a guy who doesn't have that many seasons left.
There are a lot who continually overvalue him..while he's a hard workwork and powerful his laterial movement is weak and his pass blocking suspect..

Would you trade Shaffer for a 2nd rounder then?

Who says Sowells or Dorsey won't end up better anyway?

BTW, I'm NOT trying to pee in your Wheaties...just thinking.

Where I'm going here is that we have not really had a tradeable player for a long time. I do not want to reduce depth...BUT...we've got a couple of developmental young guys on our roster...Tuck is more than serviceable...if Shaffer gets us a Day 1 pick and that pick(s) lands us a real DL...then...why not?

Let's see...he's played RT for us...RG for us and the Rams...I think he played C in college and possibly a little early in his career...and I'm sure a guy who can play RT could play LG in a pinch if we needed. (I've NOT researched it, just read several times about him being a C...I believe it was even talked about before Hank was signed.)

However, with Sowells and Friedman and maybe LCB, it is doubtful we'd ever need him at C or LG. But you've got to think he COULD do it.

The POINT is that Tucker is more versatile than Shaffer...or Friedman for that matter IMO. If they view Dorsey as the RT of the future - and I'm not saying that they do - then who do you keep? Think also of what you can get.

I say they work him into the rotation at guard and right tackle. He might be our best offensive lineman, and depth is Godly in the NFL. If you can afford to rest your run blocking maulers then you will have a energetic front five deep in the fourth quarter.

Let's see...he's played RT for us...RG for us and the Rams
Two positions in the pros thats it..
College days are behind him and we have two centers already so he won't be needed there.

The POINT is that Tucker is more versatile than Shaffer...
Maybe in your mind he is , but in all actuality he's not..he could never play LT and Shaffer has..even though he isn't that good at it..

If they view Dorsey as the RT of the future
If they View Dorsey as the RT of the future you cut Butler..
Thats simple ...isn't it?

We aren't talking about whether we NEED him in a certain position...we are talking about whether he COULD play a certain position...as depth and as a viable, versatile roster spot.


And he can't play center right now period.
He hasn't taken a rep there in how many years?
Even Steinbach played some center/LT with Cincinnati..thats makes him even more valuable than Tucker..
Bottom line Tucker is really a one and a half position player right now .

I don't think Shaffer plays LT for us ever again...under any circumstances
Tucker would NEVER EVER play LT..or LG or C ..so where's that gonna put him?
He isn't versitile.. just sounds like you're exaggarating his worth.

In a pinch Shaffer would mover there..there has never been any consideration to moving Tucker to any other spot except RG and that was this preseason.

However, IF they view Dorsey as the RT of the future...then keeping a younger Shaffer over an older Tucker is not necessary
First where did you hear this they view ND as the RT of the future?
I need something to see that.
And even if so, I'm keeping the younger Shaffer who is playing well at RT..
We have more invested in him than Tucker.
Dorsey has yet to prove he's a starter.

Who is talking about cutting someone here?
U the one who asked" who do U keep"?
Dang..keep up with your own questions.

Attack,

Go back and actually read my post before your last post...

If you still need to say something ...feel free...just try and make a point...ok?

I responded to your post and I made my point..what about it can't you decifer?
Tucker isn't versitile..theres the point.

I'm not an expert, but Tuck seemed to do pretty well in Camp at RG... Again, you have an opinion,, I don't agree.

Haha, your name suits your personality

It really isn't even a matter of opinion...it is simply a matter of what is and what isn't.

If you are looking at a bald man and someone says they have nice curly hair, I wouldn't call that their opinion.

Tucker played RT last year and RG through camp.

So what?
Did he play RG better than McKinney did in preseason?
Just because U place a player in a different position DOESN'T INSTANTLY make him versitile..he has to play there and get it right.
It's the opinion he's versitile..I wait to see if the guy actually plays good there.

But you said he's not versatile, I and others proved he is.

No big deal.

Yeah I said he isn't because he hasn't proved he is..

Lets use some examples ..
Is Shaffer versitile?
Is Cribbs versitile?
Is Chump Thompson versitile?
Is Bentley versitile?
Is Steinbach versitile?
If any are YES..why are they versitile?
Is it because they were given some MERE reps in a different position in TC?

Quote:

---

Did he play RG better than McKinney did in preseason?

---

Whats that got to do with it... Let's say that McKinney played better than Tuck in Preseason,,, does that mean that Tuck CAN'T play RG? And how does McKinney fit into a conversation about the versatility of Tucke/ I'm confused!

Whats that got to do with it... Let's say that McKinney played better than Tuck in Preseason,,, does that mean that Tuck CAN'T play RG?
Plenty..I asked a question..U guys bought in that Tucker is versitile because they put him in at RG in camp and preseason.

Now if he hadn't been suspended we would see how he plays there during a regular season game right?
Performance determines if you're verstile or if you're limited to one position.
Look at everyone of those examples and tell me if those players have proved they can play more than spot and why.

Are you STILL bashing on Tucker

We need to bring Tuck back on the roster, and let the best man win between him and Shaffer, or him and McKinney. The loser of the battles will be good depth. Something we have not had on the O-line since we came back in 99.

Quote:

---

U guys bought in that Tucker is versitile because they put him in at RG in camp and preseason.

---

What the hell are you talking about.. we BOUGHT,,,, what the hell did we BUY! For crying out loud,,, go find tapes of preseason and you will see that Tuck played guard pretty well.. Not just me and Peen saying it.. in fact, just about everyone on these boards that comments on such things thought he played RG pretty well,,

What that has to do with McKinney is beyond me... Maybe I missed it, but I don't remember anyone but YOU comparing or trying to compare McKinney and Tucker.. I didn't, Peen didn't,,, as far as I can tell.. Your imagination is running wild again Attack

It seems that YOU haven't BOUGHT into some basic history.. He did play RG in Preseason and he did a decent job of it..

So,, that DOES mean that he's versitile... you don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but you don't have to cast doubt on what someone else is trying to say.,. just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there.

He did play well in preseason. Looked like a beast while everyone else was getting up to speed. Looked big too.

What the hell are you talking about.. we BOUGHT,,,, what the hell did we BUY!
U buy and sell all the crap U guys are fed ..why the heck do i need to go back to preseason games when he took a few reps against first stringers but the majority was against second stringers?

ANYONE..I said ANYONE can look good in preseason..Frye did

Don't be so naive..I don't base overall performance on preseason but what they do when it COUNTS Daman..

U mad cuze I don't easily swallow the tea U and Peen and a few others indulge in..I hear the burps now
Go ahead start the bellyaching.."Attack is always disagreeing with us..blah blah.."

Since U can't respond to my examples..all those guys I listed have played multiple positions during the regular season and good chunks of games..not just practice and preseason..they're used to playing those other spots by now..
I 'm not calling Tucker versitile yet..for one he may not be around long enough to find out..
He should be good playing inside , whether he actually is for a long period remains to be seen.
Since U can't see how McKinney figures in..did Tucker well enough to become a instant backup there?

[
ANYONE..I said ANYONE can look good in preseason..Frye did



He did ?? I must have missed that snap !!!

There weren't many snaps

Tucker on course to reclaim Browns' spot
BY STEVE DOERSCHUK
REPOSITORY SPORTS WRITER

BEREA Ryan Tucker hit the ground running, but it appears he’ll spend Sunday sitting.

Indications are the veteran Browns lineman will regain a roster spot in the wake of a four-game, steroid-related suspension.

However, a Browns offensive line that hasn’t been allowing sacks figures to send out the same starters as in the first four games Sunday at New England.

Crennel seems enthused about Tucker’s level of execution and conditioning, which bodes well for line depth. There had been doubts because Tucker was banned from the team complex for a month.

“He moves pretty well,’’ Crennel said today. “It was encouraging to see where he was.’’

Tucker has spent most of this decade as a starting right tackle, for the Rams and, since 2002, the Browns. However, the Browns have been using a $36 million free agent there in Kevin Shaffer.

Shaffer started at left tackle last year but was bumped to the right side by rookie No. 3 overall draft pick Joe Thomas.

Is it safe to say Shaffer has fared better on the right side than he did on the left?

“It’s safe to say he’s done a good job for us on the right side,’’ Crennel said.

Tucker was the No. 1 right tackle in the preseason before his suspension was announced. He was allowed to stay with the team until the preseason finale, and he used the time to get some work at right guard.

Seth McKinney has started all four games at right guard. Crennel said Tucker’s Wednesday practice was restricted to playing tackle.

At this point, it appears Tucker will be the No. 3 tackle, with McKinney staying on as a starting guard. Tucker’s return puts backup tackles Kelly Butler and Nat Dorsey on the bubble.

Meanwhile, the Browns’ locker room was relaxed today, a calm before the storm against one of the league’s best-looking teams in recent memory.

Soothing music flowed out of defensive end Orpheus Roye’s locker stall. Players smiled and chatted in an easy manner as a mix of Lionel Richie, Peaches and Herb and The Temptations wafted softly out of Roye’s boom box.

Cornerback Leigh Bodden smiled when he walked in the room and glanced down to Roye’s stall. Then he talked about a serious matchup, against Patriots wideout Randy Moss.

Bodden covered Moss last year when the latter was a Raider, and was limited to one catch in a game at Oakland. “Everybody tells me it’ll be different,’’ Bodden said.

Moss has caught 31 passes for 505 yards and seven touchdowns.

Bodden seems unintimidated. “I look for to the challenge,’’ he said.

http://www.cantonrep.com