Browns TE Jordan Cameron out for Jets game

The Jets will have their hands full with Browns WR Josh Gordon, but it sounds as if they won’t have to deal with Jordan Cameron, who has been ruled out for this weekend’s game in New York. Per Nate Ulrich of the Akron Beacon Journal on Twitter.

Brian Bassett, TheJetsBlog.com

Cameron missed practice all week of practice after a concussion last week. Gary Barnidge and MarQueis Gray will likely play in Cameron’s place, but their presence will make life that much easier for the Jets secondary which has struggled of late. No Jordan Cameron means the Jets defense can focus on stopping Josh Gordon.



10 comments
a57se
a57se

This game has all the makings of a real snoozer.......I picture something like the Arizona game last season. Bent is probably going to get his low scoring defensive struggle though the ineptness of the respective offenses might be the most likely cause!

levi
levi

Even a backup TE can catch wide open passes. Milliner on Gordon?

Ceifus Hornswoggle
Ceifus Hornswoggle

Unless the entire Cleveland defense somehow misses the game, I think we can assume this will be a loss.  No way the Jets put up more than 14 points.  I'm not saying Cleveland is any good either.

levi
levi

@jaygo I dont understand your reasoning for starting Simms.

t__k
t__k

@a57se How many catches, yards and Td's for Gordon this week?

Bent
Bent

@t__k @a57se Yeah, I was gonna say, Gordon will probably account for 3 TDs on his own.

SackDance99
SackDance99

@Brendan@Ceifus HornswoggleThe Browns defense is no. 23 per FO; the Jets is 12 and no. 1 against the run.  The Browns have no running game.  Their passing game took a hit with Cameron out and their defense might not have Haden.  The Browns offense is at no. 26 and the Jets are at 31.  Given the Jets are 5-2 at home and the Browns have a 1-5 road record, the Jets may have a decent chance on Sunday...no reason to "assume a loss."

levi
levi

@jaygo Ok, but I think evaluating Geno and letting him gain experience is more important. But I do understand your reasoning now.