Carlos Rogers: By the numbers

[Smoot Point Really]

One of the most frustrating things on this board is that people would rather be right about a player being a failure than see him succeed.

That is quite a statement... You changed your mind about Carlos once... However, I'm assuming you changed your mind because you thought he couldn't cover... I never thought his coverage ability was bad enough for me to criticize it. My problem was his lack of play-making ability. He hasn't proven that he can make plays, so why should my opinion of him change?

He had the talent to put himself into position to make those plays. IF he starts making plays, all this criticism of Carlos Rogers goes away. There is no "wrong or right" here... It's clear to everyone (even those who support him to the point of saying others want him to fail because of their ego) the man has a problem as a playmaker. We can debate the value of being a playmaker, but then we should also debate the value of picking a non-playmaker at #9... I've always supported Carlos Rogers and I definitely want to see him remain a Redskin and live up to the stature of the position he was picked. HOWEVER, if he can't make plays he won't ever do that in my book. He'll be below Tom Carter, but somewhat higher than Tory Nixon.

[redskins59]

BTW, the data shows Rogers was "charted" as being thrown at 92 times... Our 3 other CBs combined for 114... It's also interesting to note that as a team, we were only thrown at 512 times. 40% of our opponents passes went in the direction of a CB and about 40% of the time that CB was Carlos Rogers. It should be also noted that Right-handed QBs usually have to throw across their body to throw at Carlos Rogers. This means a slower release and a QB has to be more deliberate when throwing in his direction.

While it's true that Rogers got thrown at 92 times, that number means nothing because most of those throws were incompletions(more than 60% were incompletions). Rogers was statistically a top 10 CB in 2007 as well, before he went down because of torn ligament.

[Smoot Point Really]

Fred Smoot's second stint with the Redskins wasn't as good as his first stint (he led the team in INTs his first four years, if my memory is correct), but he is a capable cornerback, a good tackler, and a good person to have as a Redskin. I think some of our limitations in play-making comes from our system, but if the player is in position to make plays they should.

[Smoot Point Really]

While it's true that Rogers got thrown at 92 times, that number means nothing because most of those throws were incompletions(more than 60% were incompletions). Rogers was statistically a top 10 CB in 2007 as well, before he went down because of torn ligament.

What is Fred Smoot's success rating when the ball is thrown at Carlos Rogers?

[gorebd82]

For the people suggesting that we trade Carlos, do you really believe that we can get anywhere near fair value? In today's NFL, everyone is a little over-obsessed with draft picks. And this transfers over to the fans. Why would you trade a proven CB for a second round pick (and we probably wouldn't even get one that high)? Draft picks are 50-50.

On top of that, so many ESers are critical of our FO and the ability to scout/draft, but you want them to trade one they got right for a chance to miss on another prospect with a lower draft pick. People need to stop regurgitating the stuff they hear on SportsCenter and really think.

The NFL is a copycat league, but the copycats never win. It's the innovators that win. Pittsburgh has been successful for so long because when everyone was running 4-3, they were getting 3-4 players for the cheap. NE won their first bowl, but picking up everyone's trash after June 1 and getting production out of vets for a year or two. I cite this example to say that if the Skins just start loading up on draft picks and trading away players cause everyone else is doing it, we will be a team full of potential and no production.

[elkabong82]

That is quite a statement... You changed your mind about Carlos once... However, I'm assuming you changed your mind because you thought he couldn't cover... I never thought his coverage ability was bad enough for me to criticize it. My problem was his lack of play-making ability. He hasn't proven that he can make plays, so why should my opinion of him change?

He had the talent to put himself into position to make those plays. IF he starts making plays, all this criticism of Carlos Rogers goes away. There is no "wrong or right" here... It's clear to everyone (even those who support him to the point of saying others want him to fail because of their ego) the man has a problem as a playmaker. We can debate the value of being a playmaker, but then we should also debate the value of picking a non-playmaker at #9... I've always supported Carlos Rogers and I definitely want to see him remain a Redskin and live up to the stature of the position he was picked. HOWEVER, if he can't make plays he won't ever do that in my book. He'll be below Tom Carter, but somewhat higher than Tory Nixon.

Agreed, so long as by "make plays" you mean "catch INTs." Rogers makes plays by making solid tackles, deflecting passes (because a dropped INT is still a deflected pass), jamming the WR at the line when the play actually calls for it (and it should more often, I'm not a fan of the leeway our D system gives CBs at the LOS), etc. If Carlos could haul in about 6 of those drops each season, he's elite. Hopefully he'll continue to improve and that will come around, but for a CB who had a success rate on par with the best in the league when he was targeted twice as much or more, we could do a hell of a lot worse. In fact, and this is just a speculation-type statement, nothing of fact, one COULD even say that Rogers dropping INTs is a good thing, as he is targeted so much more and yet still has a great success rate. In other words, Rogers is focused on more because of the lack of INTs, but this keeps weaknesses of other DBs less exlpoited, and Rogers still has a great success rate, so while the other team doesn't have to worry about turnovers as much, their drive is more likely to fail because they are consistently targeting a CB with a great success rate.

[33]

Vinny and co. will probably look at his off-the-field work habits in tandem with his on-the-field contributions. They'll do this, I'm sure, with the notion that corners, at the NFL level, take a little while to develop, at the fore.

Taking time to develop and taking until you're ready to cash in to start studying game film are two entirely different things.

We have absolutely zero reason to believe that this was about development as much as preparation. It wasn't rare for there to be quotes from Blache about his improved study habits. It's obviously up to the Skins FO to decide whether they think that preparation will continue if he gets a new deal.

It's been said on this site that Carlos was thinking about top 5 CB money halfway through the year when we signed Hall, and that instead of using the competition to his advantage he started ****ing and moaning. Obviously, we don't know this as fact, but it makes a whole lot of sense when looking at the situation objectively.

EDIT: I'm going to try to add some of the quotes as I find them, as my post is relatively useless without them

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2008/10/greg_blache_fills_the_notebook.html

"Carlos has grown more in the last three weeks than he did in his first three years," Blache said. Blache went on to say that the corners have "been the strength of the defense," and that after bucking the advances of veteran corners Shawn Springs and Fred Smoot in the past, Rogers is welcoming their hints and information. He has matched his football intellect with his athletic prowess, Blache said.

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/NFC/NFC+East/Washington/WWHI/default.htm

Defensive coordinator Greg Blache has praised his defensive backs often, but he especially has liked what he has seen from Rogers. There was a question of whether Rogers even would be ready to start playing before Week One following offseason knee rehab, but he not only got back in training camp but also retained a starting spot.

One difference for Rogers has been his improved film study, which has allowed him to read routes and tendencies of receivers better, and he’s not relying on his athleticism only. Teams used to beat Rogers deep with a series of double moves, and he often would flinch or bite on the first move and fall way behind in coverage. Blache said that hasn’t happened this season.

Here's a direct quote from rookie Carlos Rogers from an ES interview he did.

I think, like I said, recognizing things. I think the most difficult thing probably for me is that so much time is devoted to studying film and you’ve got to be in your playbook. I studied film at Auburn and I was ahead of the game a lot more because of the level of play that I played at. But up here, I’m a rookie, I’m back to my freshman year and it takes a lot of studying. Studying not only while we’re up here, the 10 or 11 hours we’re up here at practice, the time that I’m at home. That’s taking a lot of my time by studying. So I think that was kind of different for me at first, but after going through, listening to the older guys, seeing that studying a lot like they do, I’ll continue to improve every week.

[DCsportsfan53]

As for those asking why trade a proven CB for a 2nd round pick it's simple. It seems obvious that, right or wrong, the organization has decided Carlos will not be receiving a blockbuster deal and will be allowed to walk after the 09-10 season. If that's the case, the 2nd rounder is worth more than 1 year of Carlos. Now if Hall walks this year everything changes. Also, by the end of next season, should there be no CBA extension, Carlos will be a RFA, not UFA. At the very least, it's not yet prudent to give him a contract extension and if they re-sign Hall and decide they won't commit another contract like Hall's to the CB position then trading Carlos this offseason is the best move.

Not saying I agree that we should get rid of him necessarily but if they've chosen to put their eggs in the Hall basket I understand. Hard to devote that much $ to one position when the lines need so much work. Personally, I think Hall will cash his bonus check and go back to inconsistent, moody Hall but that's another discussion.

On a final note, if the last few years have taught us anything it's that smart but not uber talented CBs who will take chances and make plays but are backed up by excellent pass rushes produce dynamic results. The Giants don't have great CBs, the Steelers don't have great CBs, The Ravens played excellent defense with Samari Rolle banged up and McAllister on IR. Pass rush and scheme make up for a lot of it. You won't one shutdown type corner and the rest to be smart and aggressive. I think, based on the things we've been hearing, the FO has started to understand that a $1 on the DL goes further than a $1 in the secondary. :2cents:

[redskins59]

What is Fred Smoot's success rating when the ball is thrown at Carlos Rogers?

As the article implies, Smoot is one of the worst starting CB's in the league. This is not what I'm saying, this is what the article is saying. Guy just can't tackle.

[Pounds]

Taking time to develop and taking until you're ready to cash in to start studying game film are two entirely different things.

I don't fault Rogers, or any player for that matter, for finding motivation in playing for a new deal; money serves as the proverbial dangling carrot for many people. Are his motivations pure? Who knows? Who am I to judge?

The point behind this thread, thoug, was to not only draw attention to Carlos' on-field contributions, but to quantify them. Carlos has now demonstrated his abilities over the course of a season, with more than adequate results; he's vital to our secondary.

[Pounds]

The problem is, he's SOOO terrible at catching the ball.

It's hard to argue with you here, so I won't.

I totally agree, if Carlos didn't brick so many INTs he'd be going to a pro-bowl. That's the one fact that, in my mind, keeps him from elite status and will play a determining whether he gets max dollars, or not; something I'm certain he is fully aware of.

[NewCliche21]

That is quite a statement... You changed your mind about Carlos once... However, I'm assuming you changed your mind because you thought he couldn't cover... I never thought his coverage ability was bad enough for me to criticize it. My problem was his lack of play-making ability. He hasn't proven that he can make plays, so why should my opinion of him change?

He had the talent to put himself into position to make those plays. IF he starts making plays, all this criticism of Carlos Rogers goes away. There is no "wrong or right" here... It's clear to everyone (even those who support him to the point of saying others want him to fail because of their ego) the man has a problem as a playmaker. We can debate the value of being a playmaker, but then we should also debate the value of picking a non-playmaker at #9... I've always supported Carlos Rogers and I definitely want to see him remain a Redskin and live up to the stature of the position he was picked. HOWEVER, if he can't make plays he won't ever do that in my book. He'll be below Tom Carter, but somewhat higher than Tory Nixon.

My point wasn't that I bashed Rogers, he sucked and I don't regret a word, but I recognized his turnaround. A very disturbing trend on this board is that people would rather see a player fail so that they can say "I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!!!!!" rather than say "He's played a hell of a season, I was wrong about him." I've been here for three years, and I've seen that from an increasing number of posters.

[NewCliche21]

It's hard to argue with you here, so I won't.

I totally agree, if Carlos didn't brick so many INTs he'd be going to a pro-bowl. That's the one fact that, in my mind, keeps him from elite status and will play a determining whether he gets max dollars, or not; something I'm certain he is fully aware of.

That pretty much sums it up right there.

[33]

I don't fault Rogers, or any player for that matter, for finding motivation in playing for a new deal; money serves as the proverbial dangling carrot for many people. Are his motivations pure? Who knows? Who am I to judge?

I'm not faulting him being motivated by money. I'm applauding the FO and defensive staff if they take a measured approach with a player whom they aren't sure is motivated enough with full pockets. We've been burned by players looking to cash in before.

While you may not want to judge Carlos' motives, the FO has to judge them if they're considering making an investment in him.

The point behind this thread, thoug, was to not only draw attention to Carlos' on-field contributions, but to quantify them. Carlos has now demonstrated his abilities over the course of a season, with more than adequate results; he's vital to our secondary.

I don't see how you could say he's vital to the secondary when he hardly played in the final quarter of the season. I'm not prepared to say one season of statistics makes him vital or not. I don't see how anyone can doubt that he is a blank page waiting to be written. His career will be defined after his next contact more so than before it.

[SkinsRMoney06]

Something that i would love some clarification on:

You constantly hear people ***** and moan about Rogers giving the receiver a 10 yard cushion. As i understand it, the cushion given to a receiver by a corner is dictated by the play that is called, and the corner does not make that decision for himself. Is this true? Isnt one of Rogers' strengths press coverage anyway?

[Pounds]

I don't see how you could say he's vital to the secondary when he hardly played in the final quarter of the season.

To start, I didn't summarily hurl an opinion at you; the stats bear out Carlos' importance.

Secondly, while he didn't start, he did play; he was our nickel corner when Springs played free safety and at other times he rotated with Smoot at nickel.

However, had he started there is no reason to assume he would've played so poorly so as to statistically undo what he had done three quarters of the way through.

I'm not prepared to say one season of statistics makes him vital or not.

Based not only on his perfomance, but the surrounding talent that comprises our CB depth, Carlos is vital.

[Pounds]

As i understand it, the cushion given to a receiver by a corner is dictated by the play that is called, and the corner does not make that decision for himself. Is this true? Isnt one of Rogers' strengths press coverage anyway?

Often, when the coverage is zone, the cushion given is generally defined by the corner's responsibility (i.e., the area of the field - and any offensive player who enters it - he is defending).

In a man coverage scheme, the player generally has more input and can play "off." Man coverage schemes, more or less, are designed with the corner's skillset in mind. For instance, Shawn Springs will press his man, whereas Carlos Rogers will play "off" and offer a free release while following the QBs eyes, hoping to make a break on the ball. Much of this is predicated on what the corner is seeing from his opponent. Typically, faster receivers are played in off-man, while bigger receivers are pressed. Of course, there are other variables.

While Carlos is good in man coverage, Springs is our best corner in that regard. Carlos isn't really a bump-and-run corner, in the way that Springs is, but he's gotten much better in playing physical.

[33]

To start, I didn't summarily hurl an opinion at you; the stats bear out Carlos' importance.

Secondly, while he didn't start, he did play; he was our nickel corner when Springs played free safety and at other times he rotated with Smoot at nickel.

However, had he started there is no reason to assume he would've played so poorly so as to statistically undo what he had done three quarters of the way through.

Based not only on his perfomance, but the surrounding talent that comprises our CB depth, Carlos is vital.

I've got no beef with your OP, the thread, or your opinion. I just don't get the impression that the coaching staff sees Carlos as being quite as vital as you or the stats you've posted might.

Personally, I can see why that might be. I've posted a few reasons. His motivation, his pouting with the acquisition of DHall, etc.

Why other than the Eagles game (coaches say he was sick that week, he says he was fine on Sunday) do you think the coaches demoted him starting w/ Cincy (a game we needed to win against two big time WRs)? Obviously Springs was healthy, but Hall starting over Rogers was a pretty big message, imo.

I will agree that Rogers played very well last season, I myself was impressed after being disappointed with the earlier part of his career, but why the disconnect between your opinion and the coaches? Do you have an opinion for that?

[The Mountain Mama]

And at some point guys like Asomougha were targeted a lot too. Then opponents stopped targeting them as much the next season. It's one if the signs of a CB's transition from good to great. The sad thing is, you're too busy hating on a player and trying to get everyone else to hate along with you to realize that claiming someone isn't good because they were targeted a lot is stupid as hell when that person had similar success rates to top tier CBs who were targeted much less.

Like I have said before I think Rogers is one of the best cover 2 corners in the game. Definitely top 3. But as a cover corner he is just ok, if hes not getting safety help he gives a huge cushion allowing 4 and 5 yard gains(hints his 5.7 ypc avg). Top corners or elite corners don't do this, they man up and shut players down without safety help on most downs. So if you think we should pay him top CB money to play in a scheme that doesn't best fit his talents or let him play out this year and hit the market and possibly get nothing for him then you are dumb as hell. Oppenents stopped targeting Asomougha because he not only shuts the WR down from line of scrimmage but also because he will catch the ball when given the oppurtunity. Nobody's "hatin" so calm your happy *** down.

P.S. Why was he benched by one of the best secondary coaches in the league if he's so damn good then?

[Pounds]

I've got no beef with your OP, the thread, or your opinion.

I didn't mean to come across as defensive or rude. So if I did, I apologize.

I just don't get the impression that the coaching staff sees Carlos as being quite as vital as you or the stats you've posted might.

You may be right about this.

Why other than the Eagles game (coaches say he was sick that week' date=' he says he was fine on Sunday) do you think the coaches demoted him starting w/ Cincy (a game we needed to win against two big time WRs)? Obviously Springs was healthy, but Hall starting over Rogers was a pretty big message, imo.

I will agree that Rogers played very well last season, I myself was impressed after being disappointed with the earlier part of his career, but why the disconnect between your opinion and the coaches? Do you have an opinion for that?[/quote']

This is a great question and one, unfortunately, I do not have an answer for. There seems to be some dissention on the staff with regards to Carlos; this may have been further exacerbated by Hall's acquisition.

On the surface, though, one could point to the fact that, after we acquired DeAngelo and Springs got healthy, we had three starting corners, but only two spots; so someone has to get benched. In this case, the coaches benched Rogers in favor of Hall likely because of the turnovers Hall makes. Anything more is, at best, speculative.

[NewCliche21]

On the surface, though, one could point to the fact that, after we acquired DeAngelo and Springs got healthy, we had three starting corners, but only two spots; so someone has to get benched. In this case, the coaches benched Rogers in favor of Hall likely because of the turnovers Hall makes. Anything more is, at best, speculative.

Benching Rogers just seems so stupid, though. He performed very well when Springs was out. Rogers is young, Hall is even younger, and Springs is, at this point, not head and shoulders above either of them. Bench him and give Rogers the playing time. He's earned it at this point.

[The Mountain Mama]

One more thing on these great and meaningful "success rate" statistics.

Rogers gave up 515 yards to recievers this year.

Of the 10 CB's at the bottom of the "success rate" list only 3 gave up more yards then Rogers.

You dont wanna give up the big play but you also dont wanna let the offense sustain drive after drive with 5 yard passes. 7 yard cushions dont help to much.

[Pounds]

Of the 10 CB's at the bottom of the "success rate" list only 3 gave up more yards then Rogers.

Rogers was targeted 12 times more than the next closest corner on that list, in terms of targets, thereby offering more chances for yardage gained. The fact that his sample size is 15% larger casts, coupled with your stat, casts Carlos in an unfavorable light. That is why the more empirically sound success rate better quantifies Carlos' impact.

[elkabong82]

One more thing on these great and meaningful "success rate" statistics.

Rogers gave up 515 yards to recievers this year.

Of the 10 CB's at the bottom of the "success rate" list only 3 gave up more yards then Rogers.

You dont wanna give up the big play but you also dont wanna let the offense sustain drive after drive with 5 yard passes. 7 yard cushions dont help to much.

Yet you again ignore how many more times Rogers was targeted than those guys. That's why the success rate is shown, to put it into context. You should stop trying to debunk a statistic when you clearly don't understand them as a whole.

[Pounds]

Benching Rogers just seems so stupid, though. He performed very well when Springs was out. Rogers is young, Hall is even younger, and Springs is, at this point, not head and shoulders above either of them. Bench him and give Rogers the playing time. He's earned it at this point.

Yeah, there was probably some discord amongst the coaches that ultimately resulted in Carlos' reduced playing time.

I've read that Jerry Gray is a Springs supporter and that many of the coaches liked the turnover generating style of Hall, leaving Rogers benched and miffed.