Give Ced a Shot

by John Morgan on Sep 29, 2009 4:18 PM PDT Comment 34 comments

Those muscled forearms lead to hideously deformed doll hands. Cedric Peerman has compensated for his deformity with great speed, athleticism and virtue true. He was off the charts in Rob Rang's name-the-saints metric. Peerman may not make it in the NFL, but around his parish, he's invaluable for his ability to get that last Gurken.

Browse more photos »

Cedric Peerman fumbled in the first preseason game of his career. It is a wonder he wasn't cut that second. Ced has small hands. Could he wrap his hands around a mayonnaise jar? Maybe, but scouts aren't convinced that skill will translate to ball security. It's a savage, kinky, esoteric world scouts live in. He was productive at Virginia - a good player on a horawful offense. But he wasn't healthy. Peerman was injured enough to scare off scouts and teams and that knocked him way back in the draft. A free agent after being cut by the Baltimore Ravens and Cleveland Browns, his draft position looks, well, accurate.

I was high on Peerman before the draft. I bristle when scouts project some physical limitation onto a skill. If Peerman had fumbling problems at Virginia, his hands would deserve scrutiny, but Peerman did not have fumbling problems at Virginia. He fumbled at the Senior Bowl and fumbled away a win against Miami last November. That fumble was his first lost fumble of his career. Fumbles happen so infrequently, I sometimes wonder if it's a meaningful stat. The sample size is tiny, tinier even than Peerman's gloves, and the difference between a fumble and a tackle often a matter of fractions of a second. Maybe his Ken-sized mitts keep him from being a pro, but I think a few fumbles only confirmed scouts built-in bias. No one took a ruler to Adrian Peterson's hands when he was dropping balls like an adolescent boy.

Peerman is a change of pace back that could eventually become a feature back. Seattle has that player. His name is Justin Forsett. And unlike Peerman, he has performed at the professional level. Peerman might have better upside, but I won't go to war defending that. What Peerman does have and Seattle is in desperate need of, is the ability to return punts and kicks without endangering a vital position player. Nate Burleson hurt himself returning last season before his knee gave out entirely. Josh Wilson hurt himself returning this season. Seattle could stick with Forsett and Ben Obomanu, but that's a less than tantalizing return duo. Peerman is free. Peerman is disposable. Peerman has upside. Most importantly, Peerman has practice squad eligibility.

Give Ced a shot, Tim Ruskell. He's a deacon, y'know?

0 recs | Comment 34 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Sure. Give him a shot.

The return game needs a boost, and we don’t need Wilson doing double-duty anymore. My only question is who gets the axe to add him?

Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevan Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer

by Misfit74 on Sep 29, 2009 4:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

D.D. Lewis could get the axe.

The linebacker depth seems to be holding up and Tatupu is coming back soon.

by MFAN on Sep 29, 2009 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wouldn't hurt my feelings if they cut their losses with Edge.

by Nate Dogg on Sep 29, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, Edge hasn't really been an impact to the running game.

He’ll pick up 2-3 yards, but won’t break any tackles nor speed through any lanes.

by Wilder. on Sep 29, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nope, me either.

Edge is a has-been. I still don’t understand cutting Duckett and signing him.

It's Great to be a Florida Gator!

09/05
Terminated contracts
S Brian Russell

by Wayward Llama on Sep 29, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would think Lewis too

I would say Edge, but I am sure Seattle is thinking he just isn’t in game shape yet. Seattle might try and slip one of Reed or Bennett through waivers, too. Bennett may not clear, but I think Reed does.

by John Morgan on Sep 29, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hamstring issues can linger

Mike Wahle(OG), Walter Jones(LT), Chris Spencer(C), Marcus Trufant(CB), Deion Branch(WR), Sean Locklear(OT), Brandon Mebane(DT), Leroy Hill(LB), Lofa Tatupu(LB), Josh Wilson(CB), Justin Griffith(FB), Matt Hasselbeck (QB)

by ninjasocks on Sep 29, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even if Tatupu is out, Hawthorne and Herring are doing well.

I think Lewis was brought back just in case one of them couldn’t handle starting, both are proving they can’t. Lewis would be the one to go IMO.

by MFAN on Sep 29, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Both are proving they can.

by MFAN on Sep 29, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If he has fumbilitis (big if),

do you want to give him the ball near your own endzone (on PR/KR duty)?

Also, I’m wondering why both the Browns and the Ravens signed dropped him and why he hasn’t been signed to a PS yet.

And a h/t might be due diehard82 who posted this fanshot two days ago:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2009/9/27/1056949/the-browns-officially-announced.

by ninjasocks on Sep 29, 2009 4:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think he has inflamation of the fumble, but the trainers can check that out.

And I don’t speculate on why another team drops him. With respect to diehard’s fanshot, I don’t think I need to give a hat tip to him for pointing out a player I wrote 1,000+ words on this April. I was aware Peerman was cut. I do appreciate you enforcing internet etiquette though.

by John Morgan on Sep 29, 2009 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry for "enforcing internet etiquette"

Your house and all that.

You didn’t source the news that Peerman had been cut and I assumed you learned of it from the fanshot posted earlier this week. I remember reading about Peerman on FG leading up to the draft, but diehard82’s fanshot seemed to be a new piece of information plucked out of a sea of noise that many of us might have missed had he not mentioned it. But I shouldn’t assume that you learned about it from that post.

by ninjasocks on Sep 29, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

For the purposes of clarification

Many day old transactions do not need a source. A beat reporter isn’t working hard, building contacts and following up leads on Cedric Peerman’s contract status. Teams announce personnel moves and that information becomes common property. More and more, reporters are simply distributing information available to anyone.

by John Morgan on Sep 29, 2009 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thus the death of newspaper.

by thebyron on Sep 29, 2009 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure I'd agree

This is your place, so you have the freedom to write however you want, but I think one always need to cite a source for your information unless you witnessed it personally.

Reporters still cite people they talked with and people that helped them. Blog writers commonly cite not only the original source of material, but the person that made them aware of the material.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems like you might not have heard about Peerman being released unless diehard82 posted a fanshot about it. If that is true, this piece would not have been possible without his keen eye. It seems like a simple “h/t to diehard82” wouldn’t be out of order.

In this internet age, no one has a monopoly on facts, especially widely-available ones. There is no great honor in being the first guy to post a fanshot on an item that will become big news and widely-known several hours later. The guys that do the important work are guys like diehard82 who pulled a little nugget out of a larger piece on minor personnel moves on the Browns and links it to our Seahawks.

But, like I said, its your house and your writing and your rules. I’m just an anonymous internet commenter with no responsibility to create content and no great insight into the game.

by ninjasocks on Sep 29, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good heavens what are you doing here?

Your netiquette and citation knowledge are wasted within the confines of this terrible blog. These people need your help more than we ever will.

by BrianL on Sep 29, 2009 9:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't see how anything alike

I apologize if I’m sounding like a self-righteous a-hole or the guy with a sandwich board yelling at strangers on a corner. Like I said, this is your blog and I’m not going to try to tell you what do with it.

by ninjasocks on Sep 29, 2009 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ha, I took an LSAT practice test last week talking about this same thing.

Seems like a lot of reading comprehension sections talk about copyright law, the internet, intellectual property and the like.

by LantermanC on Sep 29, 2009 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

My wife is sick and I'm making her GF chicken noodle soup so I'll keep this short.

If this is that important to you, email me. I will try and write you back tomorrow.

Until then, you are thread-jacking. Stop.

by John Morgan on Sep 29, 2009 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It couldn't be any more terrifying than Burley returning kicks

He always looks like he’s about to fumble.

by Nate Dogg on Sep 29, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought I was the only one who thought that....

As much as I love Burley, I agree.

by skwid206 on Sep 29, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So why did a team as bad as the Browns cut Peerman?

It doesn’t make a lot of sense considering he costs basically nothing and Jamal Lewis is injured.

by aerozeppelin on Sep 29, 2009 5:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Bad teams make bad decisions

Maybe drafting Peerman was a bad decision, maybe cutting him was. Theres more than enough reason to bring him in and find out.

by Nate Dogg on Sep 29, 2009 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Except the Ravens

A team known for having one of the smartest front offices in the NFL, was actually the team that drafted Peerman. They cut him, and then the Browns picked him up and then cut him.

by Brendan Scolari on Sep 29, 2009 9:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

James Harrison was cut by Baltimore after he was cut by Pittsburgh

Obviously that doesn’t mean Cedric Peerman is James Harrison but he might be Justin Forsett.

by Nate Dogg on Sep 29, 2009 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry

I wasn’t trying to say that because Baltimore cut him he can’t be good. Certainly he can, every team makes mistakes, but if you are going to point out that a very bad/dumb team cut him, it’s only fair to point out that a very good/smart team also cut him.

by Brendan Scolari on Sep 29, 2009 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Baltimore is pretty deep at RB

McGahee, Rice and Matt Lawrence, who was a sleeper UDFA-type that a lot of people were high on last year. And they have a fairly decent return guy with Carr. So, IMO, it’s not a knock that he couldn’t make that roster.

And the Browns may have cut him simply because they have a numbers crunch at other positions.

For most the guys floating around the practice squads and fringes of rosters, their career hinges on a lot more than just their individual talent. They can do their job and still get cut because the 4th string WR tweeked a knee or the K has to go on IR. It takes a little bit of good fortune to find the right situation and get an opportunity.

"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg

by jteckmann on Sep 30, 2009 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice

“No one took a ruler to Adrian Peterson’s hands when he was dropping balls like an adolescent boy.”

Real nice.

by jeager on Sep 29, 2009 6:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Heh.

When I first read this I was thinking “yeah, adolescent boys would fumble a lot”. WHOOSH

by John Edwards on Sep 29, 2009 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forsett a feature back?

I don’t really understand that line of thinking, his size alone should prevent that from happening, even disregarding whether he is good enough to be that guy. Darren Sproles and Jerious Norwood have been great on a per-carry basis but they can’t get lead roles. Forsett could be like them but I don’t see how he becomes a guy who gets 300+ carries a year.

As for Peerman, I thought he was a sleeper too, but being cut by two teams already dims his light a little. The Browns may not be very smart but the Ravens are and they cut him to keep Jalen Parmele as the 4th string RB. He could still be something but the odds are very low.

by Brendan Scolari on Sep 29, 2009 9:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Maurice Jones-Drew is a featured back and he is smaller than Forsett.

by Wilder. on Sep 29, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

MJD is much bigger than Forsett

At least according to Wikipedia (I know, I know). MJD is 5’7", 208 lb. Forsett is 5’8", 194 lb.

So Forsett is an inch taller but still 14 pounds lighter. He’s got a lot less meat on his bones.

by Brendan Scolari on Sep 29, 2009 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Especially in the thighs

that’s what makes the diff. I’m still not ready to buy Forsett as a feature back.

by jacobstevens on Sep 30, 2009 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I get why people are down on a guy cut twice by two teams.

But at the same time, it seems to me that now that we are running the ZBS, what we look for in a RB might be very different than what those two teams want. It’s really early to be making judgements, but Julius Jones seems to be working out pretty well for us, but at the same time, would the Browns or Ravens really want him? The Cowboys and their fans seemed to think he wasn’t worthwhile. As the old saying goes, “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.”

Although the debate is probably pointless given that Louis Rankin was just signed.

by Mind of no mind on Sep 30, 2009 2:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs