Lorenzo Neal released by Raiders!

**808 Raven** · 08-20-2009, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by RavenTD

I still get goose bumps thinking about Neal and McClain in the I formation last year. Just put yourself in the LB's mind for a second. Looking over the LOS at those monsters waiting to run you into the turf.

Yup. One of my favorite memories from last season was week 16 against the Cowboys when Neal just bull rushed LB Bradie James to the ground and McClain took it 82 yards for the TD. Simply awesome.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-h...s-Cowboys-2008

**ace2die** · 08-20-2009, 10:14 AM

I hear that our rookie free agent fullback Cook isn't lighting the world on fire should we even consider bringing him back? He was a positive addition this time last year. I think if he's healthy we should consider.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afcwest/0...-cut-Neal.html

**Jeremiah W** · 08-20-2009, 10:23 AM

I thought Lo Neal was still great last year and was sort of suprised he signed with the Raiders instead of skipping camp and coming back. His run blocking was better than McClain's, and I think that was the reason Laron ws the top rusher. That swing pass where he trucked a LB in the open as well as the knck down and escort to the endzone on the knockout run in Dallas were awsome and well worth the investment even if that was all he did.

He and a lot of the older vets like Stover and Derrick Brooks have to wait until week 1 a lot of times because they have such a high min vet salary that is gauranteed if on a roster week 1.

**camdenyard** · 08-20-2009, 10:45 AM

We released him for a reason. I would assume that reason is still valid.

**Jeremiah W** · 08-20-2009, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by camdenyard

We released him for a reason. I would assume that reason is still valid.

His one year contract expired.

Then he got more money from the Raiders than the Ravens would have given him.

I do not know why the Raiders cut him, but I do not know why Big Al does anything he does.

**caliraven** · 08-20-2009, 11:30 AM

I disagree with the occasional assertion that Leron Mclain isn't a "true fullback." OZ drafted him to be a true FB after watching him in college be a true FB. Now that we know he can run, many are discounting his blocking ability, which showed well in his rookie season.

**caliraven** · 08-20-2009, 11:34 AM

I don't think money was the issue with LoNeal. I think Harbs even specifically stated that we let him walk because the team is looking for a player that can do more than one thing, especially at the FB spot. He's a specialist and that's a luxury for the 53. It's almost the same reason Stover wasn't re-signed.

**Jeremiah W** · 08-20-2009, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by caliraven

I disagree with the occasional assertion that Leron Mclain isn't a "true fullback." OZ drafted him to be a true FB after watching him in college be a true FB. Now that we know he can run, many are discounting his blocking ability, which showed well in his rookie season.

I think Laron is a very solid blocker, but Lo Neal was better last year at 37 or 38 years old at taking on LBs and clearing a hole.

McClain is way more versatile and agile than Neal ever was, but Neal was maybe the best blocking FB of all time. It looks like McClain learned a lot from him, enough so that the Ravens let him go, but Neal still looked like he can help us, even on special teams in the return game. He knocks guys down at an astounding rate, and showed that he still has decent hands and speed.

**B-more Ravor** · 08-20-2009, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by Jeremiah W

Then he got more money from the Raiders than the Ravens would have given him.

Neal received a one-year minimum salary deal in Oakland, just like the one he played on here in 2008 and just like the one that the Ravens would have given him to re-sign here.

At least, at that time, they weren't interested. Perhaps, times have no changed, so we shall see.

**Rochardrik** · 08-20-2009, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by caliraven

I don't think money was the issue with LoNeal. I think Harbs even specifically stated that we let him walk because the team is looking for a player that can do more than one thing, especially at the FB spot. He's a specialist and that's a luxury for the 53. It's almost the same reason Stover wasn't re-signed.

Keep waving the colors out there!!!!

**Lee Van Cleef** · 08-20-2009, 01:13 PM

Do the Ravens think he's past it? I thought that was why they didn't bring him back...

**Jeremiah W** · 08-20-2009, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by Lee Van Cleef

Do the Ravens think he's past it? I thought that was why they didn't bring him back...

I think it is a Stover type of situation. They would like to have him available, but not on the roster right now at a huge (relativly) for a vet min salary.