Yardbarker: Charles Rogers

Vikings to Workout Charles Rogers?

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:36:24 -0500

The Vikings are not altogether happy with their receiver corps…which would explain why they have reportedly elected to workout former Detroit Lions wide-out Charles Rogers. The news comes via Rogers' former high school coach Don Durrett, who said: He's had a couple workouts with some teams and has a workout with the Minnesota Vikings. He's getting caught up [with playing in the NFL again]. I tell him to play where he can play and enjoy it. People get caught up on where the best spot for him is. The "best spot" for Rogers was supposed to be Canada - the CFL's Montreal Alouettes to be precise - but Rogers apparently backed out before signing a contract. Well, if Rogers can score workouts with NFL teams, then it makes sense for him to hold off on signing a deal in Canada. Obviously there are NFL teams who feel they have big holes at receiver…and the Vikings are among them. Then again, this could just be another case of the team being thorough. Brad Childress says this all the time…that he's always on the look-out for players, regardless of position, and we shouldn't read anything into the team's interest in one particular player. Yeah right. Fact is, receiver is still an issue for this team. I'm all for taking a look at Rogers. Yes he was a bust with the Lions, but sometimes guys blossom late. Plus, Rogers on the Vikings would have nothing like the pressure he had when he was drafted by Detroit. He would only be a #4 receiver on the Purple. Maybe we could squeeze something out of this guy. At the very least he would be jacked-up to play those two games against the Lions…not that we need any extra help against those Detroit pansies.

Vikings to Workout Charles Rogers?

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:36:24 -0500

Matt Millen Knows How to Pick'em

Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:51:47 -0500

His teams have won thirty-one games compared to eighty-one loses. He's never built a team that has won more than 7 games in a season. His continued employment has inspired an "Angry Fan March", a halftime walkout and a stadium full of fans to wear a visiting team's colors. Is Matt Millen a terrible General Manager? Yes Is his penchant for selecting wide receivers in the first round and subsequent inability to do so successfully evidence of his inabilities to run a franchise? Not necessarily…. Consider the subjective observation first. We tend to forget that each of the wide receivers Millen drafted (Charles Rogers, Roy Williams, Mike Williams and Calvin Johnson) was chosen in the widely-regarded appropriate slot. He never reached. It's true there were questions surrounding Mike Williams concerning his year off from football and potential weight issues. However, if not for those concerns Williams would not have even lasted until the tenth pick where the Lions selected him, the latest they drafted any of the four wide receivers. To be honest, I must admit that as a Titans fan I was upset when Tennessee chose Pacman Jones over Williams. In hindsight, disregarding off-the-field issues (And the troubles both players have had can be attributed to "off-the-field" issues. Pacman loves strip clubs so much he eats his meals there and Mike Williams treats every meal with the enthusiasm of a trip to the strip club.) the decision between Jones and Williams was like choosing between Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears. Once one got kinda fat and the other went crazy you suddenly wished you had given Mandy Moore a longer look. The other three were highly praised picks. Furthermore, all indications are that Calvin Johnson will join Roy Williams as a successively used high draft pick, giving Millen a 50% Success Rate when it comes to drafting 1st Round Wide Receivers. Is this Success Rate acceptable or further evidence that Millen belongs in a broadcast booth? To answer this question we need to determine what characterizes a successful first round wide receiver. Then we must determine a way to objectify whether or not a player meets those criteria and compare Millen's Success Rate against the league's average. First off, for a comparison I used the 1st Round Wide Receiver classes from 1995 to 2005 as my data set. This eleven year period works well as it gives us a representative sample of current trends while allowing enough time to evaluate selections to determine their success or indications of success to come. It should be noted now that the remarkable "1996 First Round WR Class" is included in the sample. A class featuring Keyshawn Johnson, Terry Glenn, Eddie Kennison, Marvin Harrison and Eric Moulds—all of whom proved themselves to be worthy first round selections by the metric of this study. During this stretch forty-eight wide receivers were drafted in the first round by a total of twenty-nine teams (Dallas, Oakland and San Diego were the three who did not make such a selection). Now, back to the question of what personifies a successful first round wide receiver. After considering the matter, I determined that an NFL team expects two attributes from a wide receiver it selects in the first round: impact and duration. Teams don't draft wide receivers that highly in the hopes that they will merely contribute nor do they select players hoping to get one or two good years out of them. A successful first round wide receiver is one that produces at a high level for an extended period of time. With this in mind, I set out to uncover a simple metric that would indicate if a player had achieved an acceptable level of impact and duration. Immediately upon reviewing the stats one number jumped out and it proved itself to be an appropriate metric after further analysis: 60 receptions. A player with 60 catches in a season averages 3.75 per game, or nearly one per quarter—which would demonstrate a wide receiver of notable value to his offense. Furthermore, since 1995, players with 60 grabs have a median ranking of 41st for receptions on the year (mean = 40.923). It's safe to assume that NFL teams selecting a wide receiver in the first round expect that player to become a top 40 receiver at some point in their career. For a better understanding of what 60 receptions is, and the level of player that typically achieves the mark, consider a listing of some of the wide receivers who just topped 60 catches last year and some who fell just short. 60+: Andre Johnson (60), Santana Moss (61), Reggie Brown (61), Roy Williams(63) <60: Amani Toomer(59), Joey Galloway (57), Ronald Curry (55), Roydell Williams (55) Given that Johnson, Moss and Roy Williams missed multiple games, this list also demonstrates the conservatism of 60 receptions as a benchmark. I wanted this quality in such a simple metric because if Matt Millen's Selection Success Rate is 50%, as I claim, I would like to give other GMs every benefit of the doubt and err on the side of caution. In fact, the benchmark could even be dropped as low as 56 catches without changing any of the conclusions of this analysis. However, given the above argument, 60 receptions is a reliable metric for determining a "successful" wide receiver season. Sixty receptions signify significance but how many times must a player achieve this standard in order to demonstrate duration? Looking at the data the magic number seems to be three. Three years of 60+ receptions separates guys like Eddie Kennison (3) and Ike Hilliard (3) from Peter Warrick (2 …. really?). And this works well across the board. So the standard for a Successful First Round Wide Receiver is at least three years of at least sixty receptions—with one exception. Some of the players in this data set haven't been in the league long enough to require three successful years for justification. A simple solution: any player drafted since 2004 only needs one year of at least 60 catches to make it upon the successful selection list. This allows for the inclusion of guys who have demonstrated an indication of future success while leaving off the players who can't reasonably be considered a justified first round wide receiver. Michael Jenkins is the personification of the young guys who didn't make the cut; four seasons with a single season high of 53 snags. On the flipside, this unfortunately leads to Michael Clayton's inclusion—this truly is a conservative standard of success. However, between 1995 and 2005, only twenty-one of the forty-eight receivers drafted in the first round achieved the 60 receptions in three years (or one) benchmark, 43.75%. And while other examinations would have to be performed to determine the success rate at other positions, the fact that less than half the receivers taken in the first round since 1995 can be declared successful is truly telling of the risk a team undertakes by selecting a wide receiver with their first pick in the draft. If this percentage seems unusually low, then you might question the validity of the "60 x 3 Metric." However, it proves to have done a pretty accurate job of separating players who have proved themselves worthy of their draft position versus those who fell short. Guys who just made the list: Eddie Kennison, Ike Hilliard and David Boston. Kennison and Hilliard have never been anything special but have put together careers which justify their presence of the list of successful choices. And although Boston might seem as though he doesn't belong, a review of his short career reveals otherwise; over a four-year period he was a highly effective wide receiver. 2005: Games:5 Receptions: 4 Yards: 80 Touchdowns: 0 2003: Gms:14 Rcpts: 70 Yds: 880 TDs: 7 2002: Gms:8 Rcpts: 32 Yds: 512 TDs: 1 2001: Gms:16 Rcpts: 98 Yds: 1598 TDs: 8 2000: Gms:16 Rcpts: 71 Yds: 1156 TDs: 7 1999: Gms:16 Rcpts: 40 Yds: 473 TDs: 2 Then, those guys who just missed the list: Peter Warrick, Travis Taylor, Rod Gardner and Javon Walker. The first three clearly never justified their high selection and the fact that they just missed the list once more highlights the conservatism of the "60 x 3" metric. Arguments could be made for Walker's inclusion but he really hasn't accomplished as much as you initially think—at least not yet. Aside from one strong year and one Pro Bowl level one, he's been barely more than a replacement level receiver, granted he lost a year to an ACL tear. Regardless, no metric will be perfect and Javon Walker's exclusion is more than made up for with Michael Clayton's inclusion. The proportionality of successful picks is maintained. So assuming Calvin Johnson proves himself to be worthy of his high selection—the great assumption of this analysis—Matt Millen's 1st Round Wide Receiver Selection Rate of 50% is above the league average of 43.75%. While the difference is certainly not enough to declare that Millen has been "better" than the rest of the league in his selections, the numbers indicate that he is at least as good as other general managers. Indeed, only five teams who have selected multiple receivers in the first round since 1995 have a higher success rate: the Jets, Rams, Colts, Bills and Cardinals. By this standard, the worst team at selecting receivers early is not Detroit but Jacksonville. Despite these numbers, the argument could still be made that Millen's mistake is not in which receivers he drafted but in his selection of receivers at all. And this is a valid point. A position in which the majority of first round picks fail… might be a position to avoid with your first round pick. Or perhaps you should limit yourself to two wideouts per decade rather than four every five years. Just a little rule of thumb for Millen to consider. At the same time, the data shows that wide receivers picked in the Top 10 have faired relatively well (52.38% Success Rate), certainly better than those selected lower down in the first round (37.04% Success Rate). Perhaps this in some way justifies Millen's selecting four wide receivers with Top 10 selections—if you're going to draft a receiver in the first round, make sure it's within the first ten picks. Just more than half of these players pan out and of the four chosen by the Lions it appears as though two will do so. I guess Nick Bakay is right. However, I would still say that Millen's mistake has not been the players he's chosen but agree with the common opinion that his mistake lies in his affinity for choosing receivers. But enough with Matt Millen. Regardless of his "Receiver Selectionability" he still sucks. What else can the numbers from this study tell us? After all, a review of forty-eight first round wide receivers should tell us a little more than, "Millen's ok." For starters, the higher success rate of Top 10 picks versus lower first round picks begins to address an assertion that has become popular the past few years, that high expectations lead to the (perceived) failure of first round receivers. However, Top 10 picks have higher expectations than lower first round picks yet have been more successful as a group. That's why is was such a big deal when Dwayne Bowe outperformed Calvin Johnson last year—we weren't expecting it. Johnson was the higher pick, he should have done more. Nevertheless, typically the Top 10 guys do outperform the guys picked in the 11th-32nd range, seemingly indicating that Superior Ability and Greater Opportunity trump Better Team Talent and Lower Expectations. Forget pressure. They're all first round draft picks, they feel the pressure. Just ask Robert Meachem. Continuing in this theme, the general consensus is that it takes three years for a wide receiver to truly "get it" and begin producing at a high level. While this may be true in regards to a player reaching his potential, or eventual, level of production, it doesn't seem to be true that a team has to wait for three years to see what it has in a wide receiver. Of the players who ever met the "60 x 3" metric, nearly 40% caught 60 balls in their first season and two-thirds did so within their first two seasons. Lastly, the data revealed an interesting pattern—the extremely high likelihood that the 3rd receiver selected in the first round will fail. Of these eleven players in this position, only one made the list of successful picks. Eddie Kennison; the receiver on the successful list who came the closest to being left off. Kennison is a combined eleven receptions over the successful threshold. Honestly, I couldn't come up with any logical explanation why this might be. There is always the probability that this finding is nothing more than a statistical anomaly but if you can come up with some rational reason, please share. Regardless, it's quite bizarre. I set out to answer a simple question, "Just how bad is Matt Millen at selecting wide receivers?" The answer was quite surprising, albeit unprofound. If nothing else, perhaps this study has uncovered a simple metric for determining receiver success and given some further insight into the uncertainty of 1st Round receiver selections. Or perhaps it reveals something different altogether, that the Detroit Lions don't select receivers that are doomed to fail but that the receivers they select are doomed to fail once they become Lions. I'm sorry Detroit fans. My "Fire Millen" shirt is in the mail. By: Parker Woodard Pwoodar1@utk.edu

ESPN's Top 50 BUSTS

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:09:33 -0500

Number 1 may be obvious but the rest are in a pretty good as well click the link for indepth Analysis 1. Ryan Leaf, Chargers (1998) 2. Lawrence Phillips, Rams (1996) 3. Art Schlichter, Colts (1982) 4. Heath Shuler, Redskins (1994) 5. Charles Rogers, Lions (2003) 6. Keith McCants, Buccaneers (1990) 7. Johnny "Lam" Jones, Jets (1980) 8. Mike Junkin, Browns (1987) 9. Bo Matthews, Chargers (1974) 10. Jerry Tagge, Packers (1972) 11. Jim Drukenmiller, 49ers (1997) 12. Andre Ware, Lions (1990) 13. Reggie Rogers, Lions (1987) 14. Joe Profit, Falcons (1971) 15. Huey Richardson, Steelers (1991) 16. Peter Warrick, Bengals (2000) 17. David Klingler, Bengals (1992) 18. Derek Brown, Giants (1992) 19. Tim Couch, Browns (1999) 20. Curtis Enis, Bears (1998) 21. Steve Niehaus, Seahawks (1976) 22. Blair Thomas, Jets (1990) 23. Kelly Stouffer, Cardinals (1987) 24. Tony Sacca, Cardinals (1992) 25. Tim Worley, Steelers (1989) 26. Jack Thompson, Bengals (1979) 27. Walt Patulski, Bills (1972) 28. Tony Mandarich, Packers (1989) 29. Todd Blackledge, Chiefs (1983) 30. Aaron Gibson, Lions (1999) 31. Todd Marinovich, Raiders (1991) 32. Andre Johnson, Redskins (1996) 33. Leeland McElroy, Cardinals (1996) 34. Craig Powell, Browns (1995) 35. Mike Elkins, Chiefs (1999) 36. Russell Erxleben, Saints (1979) 37. Patrick Bates, Raiders (1993) 38. Dan McGwire, Seahawks (1991) 39. Trezelle Jenkins, Chiefs (1995) 40. Cade McNown, Bears (1999) 41. Reggie Rembert, Jets (1990) 42. Akili Smith, Bengals (1999) 43. Mike Mamula, Eagles (1995) 44. Jonathan Sullivan, Saints (2003) 45. John Clay, Raiders (1987) 46. Alex Van Dyke, Jets (1996) 47. Maurice Clarett, Broncos (2005) 48. David LaFleur, Cowboys (1997) 49. Jon Harris, Eagles (1997) 50. Michael Westbrook, Redskins (1995

Top 10 Draft Busts of the 21st Century

Fri, 04 Apr 2008 20:05:55 -0500

If you were a #4 pick and you now work at Applebees, you might be a draft bust.

Top 5 Reasons to Draft Charles Rogers For Your CFL Fantasy League

Mon, 20 Aug 2007 23:58:48 -0500

You should definitely draft Charles Rogers in your CFL fantasy league

Bucs And Lions Swapping First Round Picks?

Mon, 09 Apr 2007 19:30:32 -0500

ESPN's John Clayton is reporting that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers are leaning towards trading up to the No. 2 pick to get Georgia Tech wide receiver Calvin Johnson. Apparently the Bucs, who currently hold the No. 4 pick, are concerned that other teams may try to jump ahead of them to snag Johnson, who is widely regarded as a sure-fire star and the draft's top player. Tampa Bay coach Jon Gruden is known to be enamored with Johnson and appears willing to do whatever it takes to draft him...

NFL Draft 2007: What Would Matt Millen Do?

Sat, 10 Mar 2007 06:14:47 -0500

With talk of the NFL Draft increasing, the Detroit Lions may have the largest amount of ground to make up. After another season of sub-par football played well below expectations and hopes set by people across Detroit, Matt Millen may finally see his job is in jeopardy. Which position will the Lions take with the #2 overall selection?

Patriots Sign Jabar Gaffney

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 19:29:00 -0500

Big News? Not really, unless you're a team that was only carrying three receivers. New England might have the worst receiving corps in the history of the NFL. Gaffney will fight for time over an aging Troy Brown and castoffs Doug Gabriel and Reche Caldwell. None of those three WR are on pace to finish the season with over 600 yards. Currently the team's leading receiver is TE Ben Watson. The Patriots also tried out Charles Rogers and Kevin Johnson, but decided to go with the 25 year old Gaffney. Gross. The Patriots are going to have trouble against teams that can defend against the run.

Charles Rogers has solid workout with the Dolphins

Thu, 14 Sep 2006 01:12:38 -0500

Saban wont commit to whether Rogers will join the Dolphins or not. He wasnt in practice with the team today. I really want to believe that Rogers is going to come around and be a productive player in the NFL. Since the Lions cut him for reasons surrounding his work ethic (and not any phsyical ailments) its possible that he was not in the right environment and could be successful elsewhere. If you have a deep bench in your fantasy league, it might be worth stashing Rogers away for a rainy day. He is going to land somewhere.

Dolphins' Saban Wants Rogers?

Wed, 13 Sep 2006 08:55:18 -0500

There were rumors about Miami's interest in the former Lions' First Rounder when he was first released. They're no longer just rumors. Charles Rogers worked out for the team on Tuesday. Personally I'd like to see Rogers get a chance somewhere. Let's see what this kid can do when healthy. We've only seen glimpses.

Help wanted: Bears work out WRs Gardner/Watts

Wed, 06 Sep 2006 12:44:51 -0500

Former high draft picks Rod Gardner and Darius Watts worked out at Halas Hall along with rookie Greg Lee as general manager Jerry Angelo and coach Lovie Smith got a look at what's out there that might help a roster that has not been able to achieve any consistency at wide receiver since training camp opened. With Charles Rogers not in the group, it's a sign the team does not have interest in the former No. 2 overall pick of the Detroit Lions.

Charles Rogers to Miami?

Tue, 05 Sep 2006 13:03:40 -0500

Drew Rosenhaus, the agent for former Detroit Lions receiver Charles Rogers, said on WSVN-TV the Dolphins have shown interest in his client.

Lions 2003 First Round Pick Rogers Cut

Sat, 02 Sep 2006 17:05:23 -0500

The new regime in Detroit had not seen enough out of Charles Rogers. The former second-overall pick did not make the 53-man cut on Saturday. For his career, Rogers played 15 games with nine starts. He caught 36 passes for 440 yards and four touchdowns. With a $14.2 million signing bonus, Rogers has been a huge bust for a Lions team that couldn't afford to squander draft picks. Let's see if he lands with another team.

Matt Maiocco Takes His Stabs at the 49ers' 53 Man Roster

Fri, 01 Sep 2006 01:13:15 -0500

Maiocco has covered the 49ers for 12 years and here are his thoughts about who will make the final roster for the season opener against the Cardinals. I like his idea about Norris over Heatherington at the FB position because of the idea that Delanie Walker could line up as an H-Back and take that position as well. I love Walker... It also interests me that we traded away Mike Rumph to the Redskins for a receiver who is mediocre at best and considered by Maiocco as a "bubble" player.