Rock or Nemo?

diehardskin2982 · 08-17-2005, 09:50 PM

Rock can play and has proven in the right system he can work it. I go with Rock

skinsguy · 08-17-2005, 10:16 PM

Nemo! I believe he's going to be automatic on those short yardage plays.

wolfeskins · 08-17-2005, 10:35 PM

i like rock but i voted for nemo, nemo is a bigger version of rock. nemo's extra size will help out in those short yardage and goal line situations.

itvnetop · 08-17-2005, 10:52 PM

nemo... he seems to have the same work ethic as rock- which will help compensate his lack of experience. what puts him over the hump is his size.

Luxorreb · 08-18-2005, 01:10 AM

I don't think there's any real comparison at this point. Nemo weighs 255 and Rock is around 210. Who's gonna have a better chance on 3rd and short? I think we should keep Rock if there's room, cause he a decent 3rd option if portis and betts go down. However we need a bruiser and well Nemo is that guy. I think both will be on the 53 man roster unless you see something crazy from Combs. BTW what ever happened to Sultan McCoulough? Skip Hicks? WR Justin Skaggs?

mooby · 08-18-2005, 03:02 AM

i would like to keep both, i like both of them. cut a safety. but pertaining to safeties, how many safeties do we currently have on the roster?

jamf · 08-18-2005, 03:39 AM

keep rock. he is one of the fastest players on the team(he ran the fastest 40 time the year he was at the combine). his speed allows him to get downfield fast on special teams where he will play.

btw, his size(lack of height) helps him on goal line runs, he can get lower than the defenders.

edit: fastest running back in that draft.

http://archive.profootballweekly.com...sis_032802.asp

That Guy · 08-18-2005, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luxorreb

I don't think there's any real comparison at this point. Nemo weighs 255 and Rock is around 210. Who's gonna have a better chance on 3rd and short? I think we should keep Rock if there's room, cause he a decent 3rd option if portis and betts go down. However we need a bruiser and well Nemo is that guy. I think both will be on the 53 man roster unless you see something crazy from Combs. BTW what ever happened to Sultan McCoulough? Skip Hicks? WR Justin Skaggs?

skip hicks led the nfle in yards two years ago i think... and sultan is on the browns roster at the moment, where he's slowly rotting away (he's #4 on the chart at best).

cpayne5 · 08-18-2005, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

I don't think so, the coaches told him they don't use FBs at all etc and when he showed up lighter they sasid it was a great sign of how dedicated he was, so its obvious they wanted him slimmer whether they said it beforehand or not.

"I knew with Coach Gibbs that my only shot at playing was as a running back," Cartwright said. "They don't need a fullback. So I kind of took it upon myself to lose the weight, come in to camp and show them I belong here."

firstdown · 08-18-2005, 12:17 PM

I think its to early to tell but if I had to vote it would be for Rock. An earlier threed talked about his 2003 season and he was very impressive that year converting 11 of 14 3rd downs and scored four TD's of less than three yards. Last year he was over looked and never given a chance to reproduce his 2003 season and grow more in that roll. That was an error on or coaching staff not given him the chance even after we strugled in short yardage. Short yardage is short yardage and does not change that much from one coach to the next so he should be productive for any coach. His size may be a plus because he's hard to find and has a low center of gravity.

monk81 · 08-18-2005, 07:34 PM

I too want to keep both of them......... we can't have a whole team of safeties can we
Also hard to judge after just ONE game, but Nemo looked great down at the goal line, we were just awful in the red zone last year, and I know Nemo could help in that area.

EternalEnigma21 · 08-18-2005, 09:25 PM

I haven't and can't vote on one of these guys. I have always liked Rock Cartwright. He played his ass off for us and was one of the better fullbacks in the league and can run the ball as well as a lot of halfbacks. He is undersized and all, but he seems like he could be a core player. I don't know much about Nemo. He did look impressive in the game, but based solely on that game I think I'd go with Cartwright. I want to see if he can catch, and if he has any speed. Rock can move a pile foreward impressively for his size, so I think that negates Nemo's upsides. Hell I just made up my mind. I'm voting for the Rock.

SkinsRock · 08-19-2005, 03:06 PM

Rock lost the weight because Gibbs doesn't use small (short) fullbacks (Joe does use players that are technically FB's, but as H-backs), so his best chance was at RB. Keep in mind a couple other things:
Rock is 210-215, but at 5'7" that is still very solid for his height.....he can go "under the pile" as opposed to stretching over it.
Nemo looks good (after ONE game), and has the size, but he is a rookie. Also, he was only a 7th round pick...I could see him on the practice squad this year and maybe getting called up if/when there are injuries.

Of course the best scenario would be to keep both, but I voted for Rock due to his experience and dependability.

View Poll Results: You're Joe Gibbs, there's one RB roster spot left, who gets the spot?
Nemo Broughton	46	80.70%
Rock Cartwright	11	19.30%
Voters: 57. You may not vote on this poll

08-17-2005, 09:50 PM	#31
diehardskin2982 Another Year, another mess. Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,581	Re: Rock or Nemo? Rock can play and has proven in the right system he can work it. I go with Rock __________________ That got ugly fast

08-17-2005, 10:16 PM	#32
skinsguy Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Greensboro, North Carolina Posts: 6,766	Re: Rock or Nemo? Nemo! I believe he's going to be automatic on those short yardage plays. __________________ "Fire Up That Diesel!"

08-17-2005, 10:35 PM	#33
wolfeskins The Starter Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: chesapeake,va. Posts: 2,160	Re: Rock or Nemo? i like rock but i voted for nemo, nemo is a bigger version of rock. nemo's extra size will help out in those short yardage and goal line situations. __________________ Hail to Allen/Shanahan .... bring in some baby hogs and load up on diesel fuel !!! (budw38)

08-17-2005, 10:52 PM	#34
itvnetop Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Los Angeles, CA Age: 47 Posts: 3,007	Re: Rock or Nemo? nemo... he seems to have the same work ethic as rock- which will help compensate his lack of experience. what puts him over the hump is his size.

08-18-2005, 01:10 AM	#35
Luxorreb ^21^ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Richmond, Virginia Age: 52 Posts: 1,630	Re: Rock or Nemo? I don't think there's any real comparison at this point. Nemo weighs 255 and Rock is around 210. Who's gonna have a better chance on 3rd and short? I think we should keep Rock if there's room, cause he a decent 3rd option if portis and betts go down. However we need a bruiser and well Nemo is that guy. I think both will be on the 53 man roster unless you see something crazy from Combs. BTW what ever happened to Sultan McCoulough? Skip Hicks? WR Justin Skaggs? __________________ ^21^

08-18-2005, 03:02 AM	#36
mooby Hug Anne Spyder Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 20,446	Re: Rock or Nemo? i would like to keep both, i like both of them. cut a safety. but pertaining to safeties, how many safeties do we currently have on the roster? __________________ Hail to the Football Team

08-18-2005, 03:39 AM	#37
jamf Pro Bowl Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: San Diego Ca Posts: 5,297	Re: Rock or Nemo? keep rock. he is one of the fastest players on the team(he ran the fastest 40 time the year he was at the combine). his speed allows him to get downfield fast on special teams where he will play. btw, his size(lack of height) helps him on goal line runs, he can get lower than the defenders. edit: fastest running back in that draft. http://archive.profootballweekly.com...sis_032802.asp

08-18-2005, 12:17 PM	#40
firstdown Living Legend Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: chesapeake, va Age: 60 Posts: 15,817	I think its to early to tell but if I had to vote it would be for Rock. An earlier threed talked about his 2003 season and he was very impressive that year converting 11 of 14 3rd downs and scored four TD's of less than three yards. Last year he was over looked and never given a chance to reproduce his 2003 season and grow more in that roll. That was an error on or coaching staff not given him the chance even after we strugled in short yardage. Short yardage is short yardage and does not change that much from one coach to the next so he should be productive for any coach. His size may be a plus because he's hard to find and has a low center of gravity.

08-18-2005, 07:34 PM	#41
monk81 The Starter Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: TEXAS Posts: 2,029	Re: Rock or Nemo? I too want to keep both of them......... we can't have a whole team of safeties can we Also hard to judge after just ONE game, but Nemo looked great down at the goal line, we were just awful in the red zone last year, and I know Nemo could help in that area. __________________ "It's absolutely criminal, in my opinion, that Monk has yet to be enshrined (in the Pro-Football Hall of Fame)" Dan Arkush PFW

08-18-2005, 09:25 PM	#42
EternalEnigma21 Assistant Regional Mod Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Carbondale CO Age: 44 Posts: 2,958	Re: Rock or Nemo? I haven't and can't vote on one of these guys. I have always liked Rock Cartwright. He played his ass off for us and was one of the better fullbacks in the league and can run the ball as well as a lot of halfbacks. He is undersized and all, but he seems like he could be a core player. I don't know much about Nemo. He did look impressive in the game, but based solely on that game I think I'd go with Cartwright. I want to see if he can catch, and if he has any speed. Rock can move a pile foreward impressively for his size, so I think that negates Nemo's upsides. Hell I just made up my mind. I'm voting for the Rock.

08-19-2005, 03:06 PM	#43
SkinsRock Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Crofton, MD Age: 55 Posts: 907	Re: Rock or Nemo? Rock lost the weight because Gibbs doesn't use small (short) fullbacks (Joe does use players that are technically FB's, but as H-backs), so his best chance was at RB. Keep in mind a couple other things: Rock is 210-215, but at 5'7" that is still very solid for his height.....he can go "under the pile" as opposed to stretching over it. Nemo looks good (after ONE game), and has the size, but he is a rookie. Also, he was only a 7th round pick...I could see him on the practice squad this year and maybe getting called up if/when there are injuries. Of course the best scenario would be to keep both, but I voted for Rock due to his experience and dependability.

Rock or Nemo?

Locker Room Main Forum