|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125
Practice Squad
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125 |
Quote:
You brought up Marecic's production, I was just comparing that.
Funny thing is...
2010 Statistics
Player A: 5 rush attempts for 11 yards and 4 receptions for 15 yards
Player B: 6 rush attempts for 12 yards and 5 receptions for 14 yards
Player A is Lawrence Vickers. Player B is Mike Karney (the only FB on STL roster last year according to http://www.stlouisrams.com/tea...torical-roster.html).
Vickers was as productive as Mike Karney (Shurmur's WCO fullback last year) and better at in run blocking than a Karney and Marecic double team block.
Vickers will be missed every time Marecic misses a block, drops a pass, and doesn't put someone on their butt when on the field.
And if Marecic doesn't improve quickly, Clutts will be missed as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
This is just another variation of the Rogers versus Taylor argument.
Is Vickers as a 6th year players better than a rookie who didn't have an offseason to learn the offense? Yes.
Were we trying to get younger on this team? Yes.
Will we have a better idea of what Marecic can bring to the table after he has been in this offense for more than 8 weeks? Yes.
I miss Vickers ... but to suggest Marecic should have missed the cut because of what he has done so far isn't far off from being the same logic as saying Peyton Manning should be cut for having a nonexistent pre-season or cutting Brandon Jackson because he won't contribute right away (injury). We are building a good team for the FUTURE.
In 3 or 4 years Marecic could very well be a solid blocking back while still adding 25 to 30 catches per year with spot duty as a solid special teamer and as a goal line back. In 3 to 4 years Vickers will be 31 or 32. Why not make the transition now and find out which kids want to play with this team for the next decade instead of (once again) putting a band aide over an axe wound?
Like I said I miss Vickers and wish we could have kept him ... but for a league continuously transitioning into more and more of a passing emphasized offense ... it makes sense to get younger and more athletic.
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682 |
Good reply.
Vickers won't be missed a few weeks from now.
I think we are going to find that Hillis lines up at fullback alot.
With this team, fullback doesn't mean blocker first and foremost.
It will mostly mean swinging out in to the flat to catch a pass or take a fake handoff one way while the other back gets the ball going the other.
If people would think in terms of Mack and Byner, they will begin to understand.
Mack was the fullback, and he didn't make his name blocking for Ernie.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,482
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,482 |
While I completely agree with the point you are trying to make, Marecic will never EVER be in the same category as Kevin Mack. He's a decent blocker who might become really good. He's a decent pass catcher who might become a really good pass catcher for a FB. He's a below average runner who we hope some day becomes at least serviceable to average.
Loads of potential. Great fit for our offense. Deserves to stick AND play. Two years from now we'll laugh about people wanting to cut the kid. But, Kevin Mack he ain't.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/GraffZ06/browns_factory_sig.jpg) Fear us, for we are the BROWNS, led by the mighty BM! Only in Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517 |
i dont think you read his post. he was talking about hillis, not marecic
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682 |
Quote:
i dont think you read his post. he was talking about hillis, not marecic
Thanks. 
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
My comparison was about Vickers preseason and Marecic's.
I could care less about St Louis' FB.
Vickers was a blocker, that's what I said. The other poster brought up production in the preseason. All I did was show a comparison. I put up the career stats just because I found them.
I loved Vickers just as much as the next fan, but all the trashing of Marecic to me was a little over the top. The kid had no prep time for the NFL. He has potential, but around here you would think he was the worst player ever drafted.
My point in the beginning was that in Vickers' first couple years, he was not the player he was when he was let go. Yes he was a great lead blocker, one of the best. But to sit here and say that Marecic could never be a player like him is just bull. Nobody knows, and that's my point.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,482
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,482 |
Ah ok my bad I misunderstood. Partly because if Hillis = Mack as you suggest then who the EFF is our Byner? Surely you're not suggesting Hurtesty.
If he gets more than 50 carries for us this year I'll be flat out shocked.
Fear us, for we are the BROWNS, led by the mighty BM! Only in Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Figured after their release.
Good, English flashed a little in the preseason with the back ups.
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125 |
Quote:
This is just another variation of the Rogers versus Taylor argument.
Is Vickers as a 6th year players better than a rookie who didn't have an offseason to learn the offense? Yes.
Were we trying to get younger on this team? Yes.
Will we have a better idea of what Marecic can bring to the table after he has been in this offense for more than 8 weeks? Yes.
I miss Vickers ... but to suggest Marecic should have missed the cut because of what he has done so far isn't far off from being the same logic as saying Peyton Manning should be cut for having a nonexistent pre-season or cutting Brandon Jackson because he won't contribute right away (injury). We are building a good team for the FUTURE.
In 3 or 4 years Marecic could very well be a solid blocking back while still adding 25 to 30 catches per year with spot duty as a solid special teamer and as a goal line back. In 3 to 4 years Vickers will be 31 or 32. Why not make the transition now and find out which kids want to play with this team for the next decade instead of (once again) putting a band aide over an axe wound?
Like I said I miss Vickers and wish we could have kept him ... but for a league continuously transitioning into more and more of a passing emphasized offense ... it makes sense to get younger and more athletic.
A few things...
1) I don't see how this is like a Rogers vs Taylor scenario. Rogers was let go because of his price tag, durability, and lack of production. Can't say the same about Vickers. It also seemed like Rogers didn't want to be here. Vickers was very public about his desire to remain on the team.
2) The "Vicker's can't be a WCO fullback" argument doesn't work. Mike Karney, the Rams starting FB, touched the ball 19 times over the past two seasons. It would be crazy to say that Vickers couldn't duplicate that production.
3) The "Marecic could grab 30 receptions and goto the Probowl" argument doesn't work here. Again, I repeat, Mike Karney touched the ball 19 times in 2 seasons. The fullback simply doesn't touch the ball often in Shurmur's offense. It would be crazy to say that Marecic gets 30+ receptions in any one of his first 4 years, when he actually may struggle for 30 in all four seasons combined. Heck, he didn't get 30 receptions in college:
RUSHING Stats
YR TEAM ATT YDS AVG LNG TD
2007 STAN 5 6 1.2 4 0
2009 STAN 8 15 1.9 5 4
2010 STAN 23 46 2.0 6 5
RECEIVING Stats
YR TEAM REC YDS AVG LNG TD
2007 STAN 4 26 6.5 8 0
2008 STAN 4 25 6.3 12 0
2009 STAN 8 132 16.5 34 1
2010 STAN 9 75 8.3 15 0
4) The "youth movement" and "building for the future" arguments are weak. Vickers is less than a year older than D'Quell Jackson (who was resigned after failing to log a regular season snap in 2 seasons), and he his a few years younger than Tony Pashos (who also has a long injury history).
5) Is Marecic more athletic than Vickers?
6) Do you really think people are going to forget Vickers this season? I guess you must have forgotten the number of Tim Couch sightings there were after he left.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825 |
The biggest question I have with the Marecic/Vickers situation is this: Why use a 4th round draft pick on a fullback when you have a very capable fullback on the roster and a team full of other holes and lacking depth? I can't tell for certain, but I got the feeling that Vickers would have re-signed if the Browns had just given him an offer. Having to waste a 4th rounder on a FB (bad value no matter how you slice it) when you already have a capable FB was dumb in my opinion. I've liked the way Heckert has run things so far, but that was his one decision so far that left me scratching my head. Will Marecic prove to be a better player than Vickers? Possibly. It's early, but I haven't been impressed by anything I've seen from him so far in preseason. Looks very slow and unathletic compared to other players, he's hesistant to find and open a hole for the RB, and he looks uncoordinated when catching passes (kinda like Vickers, I blame the bigger shoulderpads  ) It still doesn't change the fact that it was a bad value draft pick.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622 |
@ anyone still pissing and moaning about:
Vickers, Vickers, Vickers... He's gone, let it go already.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Quote:
@ anyone still pissing and moaning about:
Vickers, Vickers, Vickers... He's gone, let it go already.
And will be available next year, because he's a back up Full Back.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
Quote:
2) The "Vicker's can't be a WCO fullback" argument doesn't work. Mike Karney, the Rams starting FB, touched the ball 19 times over the past two seasons. It would be crazy to say that Vickers couldn't duplicate that production.
Maybe Karney is a bad receiver? Vickers had 17 touches over the past two years, so maybe not
By the way, Vickers is a back-up for Houston. You would think a "pro bowl" caliber FB would be just the guy to lead for Foster.
\ 
Last edited by eryze19akaBT58; 09/05/11 09:35 PM.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125 |
Quote:
You would think a "pro bowl" caliber FB would be just the guy to lead for Foster.
It did take him a year to beat out Terrelle Smith. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 |
Quote:
The bottom line is that we let a good player walk for an unproven one who, given his position, can't offer much more than the guy we already had. Even if Marecic's ceiling is the same as Vickers', it was a waste of a pick, because the pick could've been used to fill a spot of actual need.
Bingo! But these are the decisions that Pat Schurmur's career is going to live and die on. ( Even if it Was Heckert or Holmgrens decision).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
Its strange to the me the value of Lawrence Vickers...
We seem to really be lamenting the loss of this kid. Im not doubting that Lawrence Vickers provided this team with good value. But when you take him away from Cleveland, his value is to be that of a backup. He's not even the starter in Houston right now and we're clamoring that this guy was the best FB in the NFL here in Cleveland...what happened on his way out?
In addition, we're moving to a style of football that does not rely on having a FB. Our head coach was an OLer in his career in football, and his teams to this point, have been very good in blocking (ie SJax has been good the last 2 years despite his YPC being slightly down).
Vickers was expendable, and weve now added a guy who has a chance to be molded into the type of player that Shurmur wants, and is also a guy who will contribute on special teams...something Vickers didnt do. Yes he is unproven, yes he hasnt shown a whole lot, and yes he is a rookie, but we have a FB on our roster already that will play a lot in 2 back sets in Peyton Hillis.
But to think we cant replace Vickers production is silly. between Owen, Hillis, Evan Moore, Jordan Cameron, and Jordan Norwood/Josh Cribbs/Greg Little is just funny.
With Less Vickers we have infinitely more versatility on offense. Think of it that way and lets forget about him...and if you must remember him, go check the Texans depth chart and then we can relax again...
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Cribbs always mentioned Vickers first as being one of the key blockers for him on KRs. So, it is not fair to say he did not contribute on STs.
I'm not ready to throw dirt on Marecic because of a bad preseason (he is a rookie without OTAs and FB is a tough position), but let's give Vickers credit for how much he helped when he was here.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
Until (and unless) Marecic does the things he is supposed to do better than Vickers does, we SHOULD be lamenting the loss of Vickers.... and Marecic has yet to come close to stepping up to that level.
What Vickers' place in Houston means jack-squat... his place here would easily be as a solid starter and he'd be making us better.
Sugar coat or twist it any way you want, but as of right now, we ABSOLUTELY down-graded. That said, the book isn't written... Marecic can definitely improve and make all of the talk stop, but until he does, it won't.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Wasn't Vickers an un-restricted Free Agent?
Who says he even wanted to be here?
Who says Vickers didn't say behind closed doors "I won't be here next year"
Then we found a replacement.
This isn't Madden, you can't just always keep the guys you want to keep.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
He's not even the starter in Houston right now and we're clamoring that this guy was the best FB in the NFL here in Cleveland...what happened on his way out?
I kinda have been thinking for a while, at least since it became clear we weren't going to resign Vickers, that there must be another reason that we aren't seeing,
If you look at what he did for us, he plowed the way for Hillis last season. I mean he made some serious holes for Hillis to run through. He did some blocking as well.
He did those things, from my vantage point, extremely well.
So why would the Browns not want him back?
Skills seem to be there! So what was it?
My guess is that there is something wrong that they aren't and won't talk about. Another team brings him in and he's not the starting FB?
To me that says there were other issues.. what? I have absolutly no idea.
Basically, I believe that there is more to the story than we'll ever know.
Have you guys noticed that the biggest benefactor of Vickers skills was Hillis and he hasn't said a word... I grant you, he's probably not the type to throw a teammate under a bus, But I do believe he's the type that would lobby the FO to keep him and I think he'd be vocal about it.. And he hasn't!
What's that saying?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,099
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,099 |
Quote:
In addition, we're moving to a style of football that does not rely on having a FB.
I think this aspect had a lot more to do with letting 47 go than most folks are crediting. Last year under Mangini, we'd send Hillis behind Vickers and dare any team to stop us. Smashmouth. Grinderball. Undoubtably, there will be much less of this in 2011. This makes a "pure" FB less valuable to the new Browns, not because he wasn't good at what he does, but because he's a less comfortable fit for the new direction the team is heading.
Look- this FO collectively has more football knowledge than pretty much all of us put together. If we can see how good Vickers was, I'm sure they could too. It's not like Heckert one morning used his 'Dr. Brainzapp's Home Lobotomy Kit', slipped on his Bad Idea© jeans, and said: "duuh- Vickers sucks. Let's dump him."
We should keep in mind two things:
1. UFA's like LV cost money to keep, and Marecic comes in at league minimum. That's not to say thet we got Vickers' performance for bargain basement prices- clearly that hasn't been the case to date. But they must have seen enough potential in OM's college film to suggest he'd be worth the changeover.
2. 47 wasn't 47 when he was a rookie, either. I distinctly remember thinking to myself: "Well- TSmith's job is safe- this kid needs a lot of work." In fact, I was surprised to see him make the team after the few looks he got during that preseason. He looked a lot like Marecic does now: deer in the headlights, missed blocks, blown assignments- the whole package.
So... even though Heckert's decision may seem likea head-scratcher right now, there's every chance that in time we'll see why Vickers was allowed to walk. Sometimes value is calculated differently in the FO than it is in Fanville - for reasons we may not be privvy to.
Vickers was great at what he did, and I'll truly miss seeing him knocking LB's into the middle of next week. Noone on this board was a bigger fan of his than I. At the same time, I'll freely admit that I don't know football like Tom Heckert and Mike Holmgren, so I'm willing to see what may come of this move. I'm leaving myself open to the suggestion that we all may be pleasantly surprised, going forward.
I guess opinion and speculation are the hallmarks of fandom, but I'mm holding off on both- and taking a wait/see approach this time.
.02
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,007
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,007 |
Quote:
My guess is that there is something wrong that they aren't and won't talk about. Another team brings him in and he's not the starting FB?
To me that says there were other issues.. what? I have absolutly no idea.
Basically, I believe that there is more to the story than we'll ever know.
I was a huge Vickers fan. I think what you said above is correct.
Joe Thomas #73
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
General reply.
Vickers wasn't resigned because he was either injured or sucked for over 2/3's of the season. His play was in decline and we sought to upgrade the position. Now he is gone and he went to a team that was in need of a fullback and he is the backup. Life goes on. Soon as Marecic has a couple monster blocks the Vickers legend will die just like the legend of Terrelle Suggs and all the other decent fullbacks we have had.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
In addition, we're moving to a style of football that does not rely on having a FB.
Pat Shurmur is from Andy Reid's coaching tree, who is from Mike Holmgren's coaching tree, who is from Bill Walsh's coaching tree. That "tree" is known for the West Coast Offense. Each of those guys used fullbacks extensively. Walsh had Roger Craig (at the beginning of his career) and Tom Rathman. Holmgren had William Henderson and Mack Strong. Andy Reid has had a whole bunch of different guys, but always had a fullback.
So if all the people Shurmur learned from (directly and/or indirectly) what does that tell you about him? He's probably going to use a fullback.
Quote:
and is also a guy who will contribute on special teams...something Vickers didnt do.
Huh?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
I think OM will cover kicks, among other things...Vickers did block for kick returns, but not much else...i dont really remember seeing 47 cept on KRs and offense...
When i wrote doesnt rely...i was hoping there would be more emphasis on the word rely...FBs are used in the WCO and i wasnt debating that...but they dont rely on them. They arent used as exclusively lead blockers they serve other purposes...and arent relied upon to make the running game or offense go
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
Quote:
A few things...
1) I don't see how this is like a Rogers vs Taylor scenario. Rogers was let go because of his price tag, durability, and lack of production. Can't say the same about Vickers. It also seemed like Rogers didn't want to be here. Vickers was very public about his desire to remain on the team.
I accept that, but it's sill pretty much the same thing. Out with the old, in with the new. The details are obviously different but not by much.
Quote:
2) The "Vicker's can't be a WCO fullback" argument doesn't work. Mike Karney, the Rams starting FB, touched the ball 19 times over the past two seasons. It would be crazy to say that Vickers couldn't duplicate that production.
I never used the Vickers can't be a WCO fullback argument ...
Quote:
3) The "Marecic could grab 30 receptions and goto the Probowl" argument doesn't work here. Again, I repeat, Mike Karney touched the ball 19 times in 2 seasons. The fullback simply doesn't touch the ball often in Shurmur's offense. It would be crazy to say that Marecic gets 30+ receptions in any one of his first 4 years, when he actually may struggle for 30 in all four seasons combined. Heck, he didn't get 30 receptions in college:
The 2011 Cleveland Browns are not the 2010 or 2009 St. Louis Rams. We might see a lot of similarities ... but then again we might not. Like I said, I like Vickers, but your last two arguments were skewed saying what Vickers could do *if* ... and then what Marecic can't do because he didn't.
Compare Apples to Apples. Stats from college and previous seasons from an archaic offense are meaningless.
Quote:
4) The "youth movement" and "building for the future" arguments are weak. Vickers is less than a year older than D'Quell Jackson (who was resigned after failing to log a regular season snap in 2 seasons), and he his a few years younger than Tony Pashos (who also has a long injury history).
Right ... so because we kept one player who is 27? we aren't going to a youth movement. Use your eyes here. Or look at the fact that we had 46 players in camp under a 90 man roster who were 24 years or younger .... Don't make your assumptions based on keeping one player, because maybe we just didn't address the linebacking position this year?
Quote:
5) Is Marecic more athletic than Vickers?
I honestly don't know. Looking up combine stats I recall that for the 40, 3 cone, 20 shuttle, broad jump, vertical, and bench press reps they were pretty even and pretty split. I assume Vickers has grown more into an NFL body over the last few years, but I also don't trust a fullback in the middle who is almost 30. Will he be a great player for years? Yes. But will he be around in 4 years? I can't bet on it. In 4 years, Marecic will only be at the peak of his career or he will be gone, however. And for the record, I think in 4 years D'qwell will be gone as well. *Here's for looking at addressing the linebacking core next draft*
Quote:
6) Do you really think people are going to forget Vickers this season? I guess you must have forgotten the number of Tim Couch sightings there were after he left.
I don't know. Did I ever say people would forget him? Oh that's right ... I didn't but thanks for putting words in my mouth.
I even said I like Vickers. But you don't look to build through the future by having a team full of 28 to 30 year olds. If the franchise decided the best move was to get younger, then that's what we are doing. They drafted Marecic based upon their expectations of his entire career ... not based upon whether or not he would be better than Vickers by day 1. If he was that good then he probably would have been drafted even higher.
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 292
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 292 |
The Bears just signed FB Tyler Clutts off the Browns practice squad. LINK
[color:"red"]"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication."
---Leonardo daVinci
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Hate to lose him but good thing for him.. he'll get to play and I think he deserves it.
Just wondering, has anyone picked up Jerret Brown yet?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
The Bears just signed FB Tyler Clutts off the Browns practice squad.
LINK
I really wish him the best, though I am sorry to see him get away.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,448
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,448 |
Good news for the young man ...This being the the one I liked better in Pre Season ! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Hate to lose him but good thing for him.. he'll get to play and I think he deserves it.
Just wondering, has anyone picked up Jerret Brown yet?
I haven't seen any of our cuts (before Clutts) signed to another teams regular roster or PS.
We signed FB Eddie Williams (cut from the Bears) to replace him on the PS.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 09/07/11 01:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
I'm all for bringing back Hank Fraley and cutting Vallos loose. Yes hank is 5 years older (going off of memory) but iMO Vallos is never going to be more than depth and Hank already knows the offense having played under Shurmer last season, and he would be a huge addition and help when it comes to helping teach the young guys on the O-line.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
I'm all for bringing back Hank Fraley and cutting Vallos loose. Yes hank is 5 years older (going off of memory) but iMO Vallos is never going to be more than depth and Hank already knows the offense having played under Shurmer last season, and he would be a huge addition and help when it comes to helping teach the young guys on the O-line.
Is Hank available? I thought he was still with the Rams?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
He was cut on the 5th 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
He was cut on the 5th
Pick up the phone already.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png) "Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
He was cut on the 5th
I was completely unaware of that.. damn, I'd love to have him back to be a backup Center/Guard.. I seem to remember he has played some guard right?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Roster Moves
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
