Our new NFL Twitter mailbag features reaction from readers to former Lions draft bust Charles Rogers saying he used to smoke marijuana every day, and follows that up with an X's and O's look at the defenses of the Seahawks and the Cardinals.Your questions and comments, and my responses, are below.
emfleek: This explains why Charles Rogers was able to be such an elite superstar in the NFL.
In the past, when people searched for explanations for why Rogers was such a bad player in the NFL after looking so promising at Michigan State, we usually heard that it was either his broken collarbones (which obviously played a part) or the overall ineptitude of the Lions (which is true, but didn't stop Roy Williams and Calvin Johnson from developing into solid receivers).
But I think you're right, emfleek, that his drug abuse may have been the biggest contributor of all. There were red flags about Rogers heading into the 2003 NFL draft, but unfortunately for Lions fans, Matt Millen ignored those red flags.
GregDietz: Ridiculous. What a wasted talent.
The waste of talent is why I view Rogers as the single biggest bust in NFL draft history. Most people name either Ryan Leaf or Tony Mandarich as the biggest bust ever, but with the benefit of hindsight, I don't think either Leaf or Mandarich was as talented as Rogers.
Leaf looked talented in college, but in retrospect I think what he really had was a strong arm that could exploit subpar defenses: He never had the talent to throw accurate passes or read NFL defenses, which is what NFL-caliber quarterbacking talent is really all about.
And Mandarich looked talented in college, but in retrospect I think what he really had was a pharmaceutically enhanced body: He could overpower defensive linemen in college, but once he got to the NFL, where he faced bigger opposition and more stringent steroid testing, he just couldn't keep up.
Rogers really did have phenomenal athletic talent: Speed, leaping ability, great hands and so on. He just wasted it.
jordanbreen: The tweetbag needs less Farve and Plax and more of how grown Seattle's LB corps is and how real the Cards secondary will be.
You want some analysis of the Seahawks and Cardinals? I've got some analysis of the Seahawks and Cardinals, courtesy of the excellent Football Outsiders Almanac 2009.
First, here's a great summary of what you'll see from the Seahawks this season:
Seattle's linebackers, already the strength of the team, may be even better in 2009, and will certainly be younger. Fourth overall pick Aaron Curry is eight years younger than last year's starter, Julian Peterson, who was dealt to Detroit. ... Curry should immediately improve Seattle's coverage of opposing running backs, which has ranked near the bottom of the league for two years in a row. Leroy Hill, one of the league's top run defenders, signed a contract extension over the offseason that will keep him in Seattle through at least 2014. The previously consistent Lofa Tatupu had a relatively bad year in 2008, giving up big plays in both the run and the pass. He should benefit from the improvement of the defensive line. The best linebacker on the bench is D.D. Lewis, who started 12 games for Seattle's Super Bowl team of 2005.As for the Cardinals' secondary, the big question is whether Adrian Wilson is still one of the league's elite defensive backs. The FO Almanac tells us that Wilson missed a surprisingly high number of tackles in 2008, although he's also still a solid safety in run support. I think Wilson is the key to that defense.
The FO Almanac also says that as a rookie, cornerback Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie "showed flashes of brilliance, but struggled with consistency and often looked awful trying to tackle opposing runners." And it tells us that Bryant McFadden was the best cornerback in the league in run support. That's the kind of analysis you can't get anywhere else.
Want to be part of our next NFL Twitter mailbag? Post a question or comment on Twitter.com, and be sure to start it with @MichaelDavSmith.
