Stuart Schweigert has been talking about his recent release from the Raiders, according to the Saginaw News.
Here are two of his quotes:
''It was definitely something I was waiting for, something I've been expecting for two months,'' Schweigert said. ''Everybody knew it was coming, but I still had to go to the mandatory camps.
''It was terrible, sitting through the meetings and working on the defense they were putting in and all the time knowing I wasn't going to be a part of it. I wasn't into it mentally, emotionally or physically.''
Schweigert was drafted by the Oakland Raiders in the third round (67th overall).
In his rookie year, he put up 52 tackles (43 solo, nine assisted) and three pass deflections. The following year, he improved to 87 tackles (70 solo, 17 assisted), seven pass deflections and two interceptions (against the Dolphins and the Chiefs)
In 2006, he improved by putting up 107 tackles (86 solo, 21 assisted) and four pass deflections.
In 2007, Schweigert was injured and only recorded 69 tackles (56 solo, 13 assisted), four pass deflections and two interceptions.
Schweigert has received much criticism from the Raider Nation during the last couple years. Has he deserved much of the blame for some of the Raiders losses?
When he was drafted, he was compared to Rod Woodson by many. Those are pretty big shoes to fill! Will Schweigert become the player many expected, with a fresh start?
Here is another quote he made:
''I would make a bunch of tackles, but the highlight on (ESPN) SportsCenter would be the one that I missed because that was the one that went for a touchdown. The Raiders are the only team in the NFL that uses the cover-0 defense, which puts eight men in the box and man coverage on the receivers.
Some teams will use the cover-0 as a gimmick defense on rare occasions, maybe to blitz. But nobody uses it as their standard defense like the Raiders do.''
''When the runner gets to me, eight guys have already missed him. The highlight, though, would only show me. The disappointing thing is that I was held up to criticism and nobody defended me after everything I've done for the Raiders. I didn't miss any camps. I did everything they asked me to do, on the field and in the community.''
Is the Raider defensive philosophy the real problem? Stu sure seems to think so. The Raiders rely on the DB's to cover man-to-man more than any other team. This has been the "Raider way" as long as I can remember. Is is an outdated way of thinking like Stu is implying? It requires great cover DB's.
The fact is, Stu has never lived up to the Big Hitting, Intercepting Freak; the Raiders hoped for when he was drafted. Time will tell if the Raiders were wrong in their release of the much criticized player.
It is now up to Michael Huff to prove his first-round value. Will Huff end up being the next Stuart Schweigert? His expectations are certainly much higher than Stu's ever were.
Okay Nation, what do you think of Schweigert's comments? Is he correct in his comments or just another bitter ex-Raider? It's time to hear what you think.
comments (17) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
First off comparing Stu to rob woodson is stupid to say the least. Second Stu is a safety he is the last line of defense. If an opposing player breaks 3 or 4 tackles before getting to him that is no excuse for him to miss the tackle. I think Stu was an ok player and could have played back up his injury didnt help him much. But the guy wasnt a play maker and thats what the raiders went out and got. The teams tackling wasnt worth a $hit last year and Stu could have been used as and example by the team. I wish him the best but dont complain about the system.
4 months ago
Hey Raidersteve,
I don't know how much Eugene is making, but Stu was due 2.5 million. I'm sure Eugene is is not even close to that amount. We still have to sign our future superstar RB, and it won't be cheap.
4 months ago
Stuart was a team player for sure, unfortunately he was a little small and a little slow. Good luck Stu.
4 months ago
Hey Stu, part of your job was to make the tackle when the other guys missed. That is why you made the big bucks. Also, where were you on anything deep? No help coming over from the the free safety as long as Stu was in coverage. He never understood his job. Go play zone coverage, but you still have to make the tackle.
4 months ago
SOUR GRAPES!!! HE GOT BENCHED BECAUSE HE WAS OUTPERFORMED BY EUGENE AND BECAUSE HE IS MAKING ENTIRELY TOO MUCH MONEY. IT'S THAT SIMPLE
OUR CORNERBACKS HAVE BEEN PERFORMING JUST FINE IN THE COVER 0....WHY COULDN'T HE???
from 4 months ago
Hey Jon. I never heard of anyone getting benched because they made too much money. Its not like they don't get paid when they're benched
4 months ago
Stu was never supposed to be a big hitter - he was compared to Rod Woodson coming out of college only because he broke Rod's career int record at Purdue, where they both played. Stu was supposed to be a ball hawk, but you can't be a ball hawk playing 1 deep or cover 0, whatever you want to call the (cough) scheme. He ran a 4.5 40 at the combine, so he was fast enough, but probably not for this (cough) scheme where he had to cover the entire field. It will be interesting to see where he gets a shot next, obviously it will be with a team that plays a normal scheme with their safety's (cover 2 or some type of predominantly zone/mixed scheme). He may be only a backup/special teamer in the NFL, or he may be a good starter, you never know until he gets a shot in a normal defense.
4 months ago
Jedi,
In this league of copycat (cough) schemes, there is no such thing as (cough) normal defense. Quit swallowing the jiz and that COUGH might just let up.
4 months ago
stu stu stu....i new he was getting cut, he missed a lot of tackles, he really dissapointed me in the SD games couldnt even tackle LT =( well good luck stu...GO RAIDERS!!!
4 months ago
sometimes what doesnt work on one team can work in another system. maybe he just wasnt cut out for our system. i did see Eugene do a nice job on some hits. someone remarked about him being too small, thats not true, for a safety hes alot bigger than alot of other big name safeties, hes 6'2 210 or so. i like that height in DBs, you need it against the bigger WRs but it didnt matter much with him, too bad. well see if hes telling the truth when he goes to another team.
4 months ago
After hearing STU complain like every other player in the NFL upon being released, I am wondering how james Trapp is doing.
The point is this: players who dont produce are shown the door. Lane Kiffin has been weeding out players who dont fit in or buy in. Remember Kiffin showed Moss the door. I am all for team players and not crying babies.
No scholarships any more...no more Alvis Whitteds or James Trapps or Jerry Porters. Kiffin is a real coach with a real plan. He had every right to evaluate Rob"cheerleader" Ryan and their Al Davis defensive scheme.
Their defense has great youn linbackers and cover men but they coudnt stop the run. STU was taken to high on the draft. You cant say the Raiders dont give playersand coaches opportunities. Now they have a coach that will finally make them accountable!
Kiffin shows poise beyond his years. I like to point out that he calls a good game.
4 months ago
I would have to agree with some of the previous comments, and disagree with some. Stu was taken to high in the draft and never exhibited big hitting capabilities nor a consistency in pass deflections or intercepting the ball. He blew many coverages in our 0 coverage scheme as well as many tackles. Stu looked lost many times during the game and was best known for making the tackle instead of breaking up the play. His many tackles each season was a direct correlation to his blowing coverage and allowing the receivers to catch the ball, then making the tackle instead of preventing receivers from catching the ball in the first place. At best Stu was in the bottom 5 free safety's in the NFL. He did not make big hits or help the defense gain momentum in anyway on defense. My honest opinion of Stu was, Al Davis drafted him as a favor for one of his buddies.
4 months ago
Stu is a good guy but he is 3rd string at best anywhere in the NFL besides Oakland. True, our Defense sucks! We have not had a decent Defense since the days when Flores coached. Gruden made us competitive but he had a retarded Defensive Coordinator too that later went to the Bengals. The main reason Gruden never won it all in Oakland was because our Defense sucked then too but obviously not as bad as the past 5 or 6 years. Stu did well enough for what he has physically but I don't think he should have ever been a Raider without being with another team proving himself first. Perhaps if the Defensive scheme was better, Stu would have looked a lot better than the sissy he appeared to be.
4 months ago
Cover-0 sounds so ominous. But, when the Raiders generated a decent pass-rush in 2006 with Derrick Burgess and Warren Sapp, Schweigert looked good. Once that pass-rush disappeared, Schweigert got burned. So I'm inclined to believe that it's a problem from both ends. The Cover-0 is from the days when a 4.3 d-back was practically unstoppable, but is now just above-average. However, if the d-line is able to disrupt the backfield, then the Cover-0 can work. Which leads to Oakland's biggest need: DT. I opined that Oakland should select RB Darren McFadden because I believed that their offense was so bad that it was creating an unfair perception of the defense. When the D has to stay on the field for extended periods of time, they gas-out. So if you only have one pick in the first round: Who do you take? Do you bolster a D that is already talented, or do you take the best offensive player in the draft to infuse some great talent into an anemic offense? My answer was: Offense, because that will help the defense by allowing them to rest.
4 months ago
What's with that advertisement in the middle of the article? Kind of annoying...
4 months ago
a
4 months ago
I think that the players being relesed have a valid point. When Jerry Porter was on the Hot Loist (ESPN) he basically critisezed Al Davis for not giving any of the coaches a chance , therefore the teams couldnt mesh or prove themselves in the system. The Bottomline is that Al Davis is the problem, and ahs been the problem for the last 25 years. When he traded Jon Gruden is was a huge mistake. If he chases Kiffin out of town like he has done with every coach of the last twenty years he will be making another cructial mistake. I havent seen a Raiders team that played with the enthusiasim the last years team did in a while , 4-12 or not. Kiffin is going to be a great coach, if Al ever lets him. There is a reason that No One want to coach the raiders, because Al Davis' football philosophy is out of wack and outdated to say the least. Stu's comments about the scheme are correct. it is rediculus to play a cover zero this day in age. How is Lane Kiffin staff suposed to mesh if Davis wouldnt let Kiffin fire who he wanted to. Bottomline the Raiders are in trouble as long is Davis is in charge, I'm am fed up with MR. Davis, he is an owner not a Coach! LEt Kiffin Stay or he will regret it, he is talented.
write a new comment