#7 is pretty cut-and-dried if the Browns don't trade out of that spot. The best available overall talent should coincide with a (legitimate and not hallucinated) team need. And I still say that if Clausen is there and Mike likes him, he'll be it. And I won't argue.
Otherwise, it would be Berry or Haden, either of whom would transform the secondary. I would hope for Berry.
If you argue for an offensive tackle for this team at #7 overall, please get back on your medication or turn yourself in.
OK but at #38? Well, need-wise, we're probably still talking QB (even if Mike goes with Quinn and they grab an old vet), a fast wide reciever (per Heckert), and in reality not much else, but let's say right tackle and running back---in that order.
What's that? Well now, Quinn couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, and Massequoi was the only viable target. Robiskie is still here, along with a boatload of young/growing linebackers, we have Harrison, Davis, Vickers, and Moore, and the offensive line (inc. RT in point of fact) did pretty well the last six games. THAT'S why.
Anyway, somebody will always slide. But the most realistic best available there is Ryan Matthews, who led the NCAA in rushing. He is ranked fourth among the running backs, but is in reality the best running back period.
CJ Spiller can't be expected to block, nor to carry the load. He is a role-player. He is ranked at the top because of his big play ability, but an NFL offense would need to be modified to get him on the field.
Matthews just clocked 4.41. He looks very much like Jamal Lewis; a 5'11" ball of fat-free muscle. He's 220 lbs--so maybe he's Lewis-light. Steuber says his running style would probably get him hurt in the NFL, because he's very physical and doesn't sweat contact.
He's a good reciever and a good blocker. He could be a workhorse, but the Browns could instead platoon him, and have him share the backfield with the much-different Harrison to help keep both healthy.
I checked his highlight films. I know that these of course were only his BEST plays, but I was more interested in what Steuber was talking about, and you can see that early in the plays...
I say early, because too often after the first two seconds it was Matthews outracing the defense for the end zone. Fortunately, there were also some where he actually got tackled, which was instructive.
Anyway, I repeatedly saw him hopping over guys diving at him in the trenches, or alternately hunching down and running through arm tackles. Steuber might have meant that the secondary guys all went for his legs because he was too strong to take down otherwise.
I bet Steuber saw the one take-d0wn where a safety got him on the side of his knee and it bent inward. The tackler almost fell on his calf...hurts to think about.
However, this goes for any big back. In the tape I watched, Matthews did avoid contact when he could. It's just that every single front I saw was stacked, and everybody was zeroed in on him from the get-go; sometimes even on dump-off passes.
If he's there at 38, they gotta consider it. He'd bump Davis to the back seat, and the backfield would be admirably deep even for a 2-back. (Don't forget--Cribbs can play there too, ok? And he's actually a really strong, tackle-breaking dude).
But then, I haven't really studied all the recievers much yet, and there might be a good one there. This draft isn't as deep at that position, so...maybe you can't go exclusively best available...
...and there are other big, servicable backs who'll be there in the third...
There's even one 6'1" , 222 lb. tight end who posted freakish speed numbers, and should go very late, if at all. He could play fullback, and be a deadly recieving threat out of the backfield. I doubt that he's a running back--you need swivel-hips for that and most tight ends are stiffer there.
I heard Dez Bryant interviewed. I won't pick on the guy, but I doubt that he's a good candidate for a complex offense. 'Nuff said.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Browns Have Talent
Let's try this: Pretend that the Browns 2009 season started when they dominated the Stoolers, okay?
What do you see?
1: A dominating running game; offensive physical domination.
2: (With the exception of KC of course) A dominating defense. Sacks, pressures, interceptions, stone walls on third and fourths, and in the red zone.
In point of fact, they weren't all crappy teams. They came close to beating the Chargers the week before the Stoolers. Even if all those teams HAD sucked, the Browns would have sucked less.
The second half Browns were significantly better than the first half Browns. Moreover, the fourth quarter Browns were better than the third quarter Browns DO YOU U N D E R S T A N D?
Why are you so obsessed with lynching Mangini that you ignore reality? That's called psychosis, ya know? It's delusional. Why do you think everything Holmgren says about him has to be a lie--or that HE'S wrong too?
SEE A SHRINK!!
Adam Caplan never changes. In talking about the Browns hallucinated need for another edge-rusher (which itself is based on whole-season stats, without regard to the glaringly obvious progress made--a lazy, shallow non-analysis), he called Roth "really just a backup"--dismissively.
You have to remember this every time you read Adam's player evaluations: Roth WAS a backup, and Adam will never accept him as a starter until he has started for a season.
Adam is unwilling or unable to extrapolate. He can't see a player emerging, or demonstrating marked improvement. He only admits it after the fact.
Game after game, Roth got sacks, pressures, tackles for losses, etc. Not just on one or two games. Not just in flashes. But every game, all game long.
THAT'S NOT A BACKUP.
Holmgren (most recently) amended his predictably misinterpreted remarks about getting a running back to "depth at running back". You see, he had not intended to imply that Jerome Harrison really was a ghost, or that Vickers would no longer be used, or that James Davis isn't a solid/complete Earnest Byner-like back.
Chris Jennings did some good stuff, but sort of faded. I still like him, but certainly if you can upgrade, you must. Based on current presonnel, and assuming that the staff will make the most of it, they'll use a lot of two-back offense, so they'll need more running backs than teams that use one back.
When you have a guy like Vickers, you need this human bowling ball on the field. He's the reason that Harrison reached the second level on a number of carries. He can protect the quarterback (so that 'lil Jerome doesn't have to, and can catch a pass instead). He can catch passes himself.
The way running backs get hurt and worn down, certainly you need depth. Especially since at times you'd replace Vickers for another running back, in addition to spelling resting Harrison.
I suppose I have to concede that Grossi is partly right about it being a big guy. I've read some idotic posts talking about drafting Spiller seventh overall so we can have an even smaller Harrison, and a mock draft predicting that the Browns would draft another shrimp back in the second round...
"The Browns need offensive firepower". Yeah--but not at running back! What the hell does Harrison have to do!?!
Anyway, the hitch is that this offense WILL BE predominantly West Coast, and every back will have to be a capable reciever. Most of these big guys haven't shown any recieving skills, mostly because of their college schemes.
It can be taught...did anybody but me notice that Jamal Lewis suddenly became a pretty nifty reciever when he came here?
With that in mind, I personally like Lagerrette Bount, who is 6'1", 245. He got suspended for most of last season for punching an enemy player. I believe this is much ado about little. So he lost it once. Big deal!
Anyway, he's quite fast for his size, has good instincts and vision, uses his blockers well, can block himself, and is a slasher rather than just a smasher. And averaged like 7 YPC. He did quite well at the Senior Bowl against elite competition, too.
Anthony Dixon is about the same size and is a better reciever--but HE needs work on blocking. He's just a smasher, and maybe even stronger than Blount.
I can't get much info on Charles Scott, but he's 5'11", 235 and averaged 5.7 YPC as a junior. They switched him to fullback as a senior, then he got hurt for much of the season. This guy might not get drafted at all, but could be a sleeper; specificly for the Browns.
Dwyer would be great, but probably won't last til the third.
At WR, Arrelious Benn is rated at number seven. After a stellar junior year, Illinois had actually re-written it's playbook to feature him, including in the running game. He got a high ankle sprain and two concussions, but never came off the field.
However, the injuries kept coming, so his stats were pretty ordinary. He's 6'2", 214. Despite what I said about concussions, the fact is that he didn't miss time, and I heard him interviewed and heard an extra-smart dude. There are different types of concussion--I bet I had several of his type and hardly noticed (no comments from the peanut gallery, of you please)...
Anyway this is a reliable super-YAC guy. It might or might not show up on the clock...he'll go pretty low, and we got eleven picks.
Oh yeah--and he's a good citezen, a captain, a natural leader, and TOUGH.
This is just a thought: If Mikey decides that Bradford is "all that", the only way he could make sure to get him would be to trade up with the Rams.
#7+Rogers+Quinn+ a fifth?
WHAT? The HELL they wouldn't! They gotta rebuild their whole damn team! They draft Bradford they have to PAY him! If they keep him on the bench, the fans will lynch them. If they play him, he's DOA. If they draft a DT instead, the fans want their asses again.
Rogers is better than both these guys and costs less too. He's got at least two seasons left, and when he slows down he'll become a run-stuffer who can still be an elite nose tackle for maybe two more years.
Quinn can be thrown to the wolves to make the ignorant fans happy, they can still get a stud of some sort at number seven, and have the extra fifth for a sevicable DB or possession guy or something. They save money.
Dammit why don't you hear me? If Rogers were in this draft where would he rank? Get it?
And I think Bradford IS all that!
But this is probably going no where. Holmgren has come right out and plainly said that he believes he can turn any reasonably talented quarterback into a star. In Quinn's case, he'll have to find out if he CAN hit the broad side of a barn again if he sets up right, etc. (that being part of "talent")--since he does everything else well.
Yeah, Mike knows best, and if it's Quinn please don't make an ass of yourself. But I still think he could surprise everybody with McCoy, or not so much with Pike, or even Clausen...
Speaking of which, the only thing wrong with him is that he was a concieted asshole. I say "was", since he might not be any more.
Grossi asks "what did he ever win?" Here we go again: what about the rest of his team? In twelve games, he engineered four fourth quarter comebacks, and almost got a fifth. (Hmm...ya think his defense was...nevermind--I'm more into minutiae than Tony, I guess).
Mikey will need to talk to the kid. If he's a permapunk, he'll find out. If he's not, and if he's smart, Holmgren WILL absolutely consider him (if he doesn't do something else).
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
What do you see?
1: A dominating running game; offensive physical domination.
2: (With the exception of KC of course) A dominating defense. Sacks, pressures, interceptions, stone walls on third and fourths, and in the red zone.
In point of fact, they weren't all crappy teams. They came close to beating the Chargers the week before the Stoolers. Even if all those teams HAD sucked, the Browns would have sucked less.
The second half Browns were significantly better than the first half Browns. Moreover, the fourth quarter Browns were better than the third quarter Browns DO YOU U N D E R S T A N D?
Why are you so obsessed with lynching Mangini that you ignore reality? That's called psychosis, ya know? It's delusional. Why do you think everything Holmgren says about him has to be a lie--or that HE'S wrong too?
SEE A SHRINK!!
Adam Caplan never changes. In talking about the Browns hallucinated need for another edge-rusher (which itself is based on whole-season stats, without regard to the glaringly obvious progress made--a lazy, shallow non-analysis), he called Roth "really just a backup"--dismissively.
You have to remember this every time you read Adam's player evaluations: Roth WAS a backup, and Adam will never accept him as a starter until he has started for a season.
Adam is unwilling or unable to extrapolate. He can't see a player emerging, or demonstrating marked improvement. He only admits it after the fact.
Game after game, Roth got sacks, pressures, tackles for losses, etc. Not just on one or two games. Not just in flashes. But every game, all game long.
THAT'S NOT A BACKUP.
Holmgren (most recently) amended his predictably misinterpreted remarks about getting a running back to "depth at running back". You see, he had not intended to imply that Jerome Harrison really was a ghost, or that Vickers would no longer be used, or that James Davis isn't a solid/complete Earnest Byner-like back.
Chris Jennings did some good stuff, but sort of faded. I still like him, but certainly if you can upgrade, you must. Based on current presonnel, and assuming that the staff will make the most of it, they'll use a lot of two-back offense, so they'll need more running backs than teams that use one back.
When you have a guy like Vickers, you need this human bowling ball on the field. He's the reason that Harrison reached the second level on a number of carries. He can protect the quarterback (so that 'lil Jerome doesn't have to, and can catch a pass instead). He can catch passes himself.
The way running backs get hurt and worn down, certainly you need depth. Especially since at times you'd replace Vickers for another running back, in addition to spelling resting Harrison.
I suppose I have to concede that Grossi is partly right about it being a big guy. I've read some idotic posts talking about drafting Spiller seventh overall so we can have an even smaller Harrison, and a mock draft predicting that the Browns would draft another shrimp back in the second round...
"The Browns need offensive firepower". Yeah--but not at running back! What the hell does Harrison have to do!?!
Anyway, the hitch is that this offense WILL BE predominantly West Coast, and every back will have to be a capable reciever. Most of these big guys haven't shown any recieving skills, mostly because of their college schemes.
It can be taught...did anybody but me notice that Jamal Lewis suddenly became a pretty nifty reciever when he came here?
With that in mind, I personally like Lagerrette Bount, who is 6'1", 245. He got suspended for most of last season for punching an enemy player. I believe this is much ado about little. So he lost it once. Big deal!
Anyway, he's quite fast for his size, has good instincts and vision, uses his blockers well, can block himself, and is a slasher rather than just a smasher. And averaged like 7 YPC. He did quite well at the Senior Bowl against elite competition, too.
Anthony Dixon is about the same size and is a better reciever--but HE needs work on blocking. He's just a smasher, and maybe even stronger than Blount.
I can't get much info on Charles Scott, but he's 5'11", 235 and averaged 5.7 YPC as a junior. They switched him to fullback as a senior, then he got hurt for much of the season. This guy might not get drafted at all, but could be a sleeper; specificly for the Browns.
Dwyer would be great, but probably won't last til the third.
At WR, Arrelious Benn is rated at number seven. After a stellar junior year, Illinois had actually re-written it's playbook to feature him, including in the running game. He got a high ankle sprain and two concussions, but never came off the field.
However, the injuries kept coming, so his stats were pretty ordinary. He's 6'2", 214. Despite what I said about concussions, the fact is that he didn't miss time, and I heard him interviewed and heard an extra-smart dude. There are different types of concussion--I bet I had several of his type and hardly noticed (no comments from the peanut gallery, of you please)...
Anyway this is a reliable super-YAC guy. It might or might not show up on the clock...he'll go pretty low, and we got eleven picks.
Oh yeah--and he's a good citezen, a captain, a natural leader, and TOUGH.
This is just a thought: If Mikey decides that Bradford is "all that", the only way he could make sure to get him would be to trade up with the Rams.
#7+Rogers+Quinn+ a fifth?
WHAT? The HELL they wouldn't! They gotta rebuild their whole damn team! They draft Bradford they have to PAY him! If they keep him on the bench, the fans will lynch them. If they play him, he's DOA. If they draft a DT instead, the fans want their asses again.
Rogers is better than both these guys and costs less too. He's got at least two seasons left, and when he slows down he'll become a run-stuffer who can still be an elite nose tackle for maybe two more years.
Quinn can be thrown to the wolves to make the ignorant fans happy, they can still get a stud of some sort at number seven, and have the extra fifth for a sevicable DB or possession guy or something. They save money.
Dammit why don't you hear me? If Rogers were in this draft where would he rank? Get it?
And I think Bradford IS all that!
But this is probably going no where. Holmgren has come right out and plainly said that he believes he can turn any reasonably talented quarterback into a star. In Quinn's case, he'll have to find out if he CAN hit the broad side of a barn again if he sets up right, etc. (that being part of "talent")--since he does everything else well.
Yeah, Mike knows best, and if it's Quinn please don't make an ass of yourself. But I still think he could surprise everybody with McCoy, or not so much with Pike, or even Clausen...
Speaking of which, the only thing wrong with him is that he was a concieted asshole. I say "was", since he might not be any more.
Grossi asks "what did he ever win?" Here we go again: what about the rest of his team? In twelve games, he engineered four fourth quarter comebacks, and almost got a fifth. (Hmm...ya think his defense was...nevermind--I'm more into minutiae than Tony, I guess).
Mikey will need to talk to the kid. If he's a permapunk, he'll find out. If he's not, and if he's smart, Holmgren WILL absolutely consider him (if he doesn't do something else).
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
More Browns Corrections
1: Colt McCoy and Jimmy Clausen are not too short or small to play in the NFL because they are only two inches taller than Drew Brees.
2: Sam Bradford is too skinny for the NFL, but (I know to the amazement of many) it's natural for males to fill out at his age, and NFL strength and conditioning coaches know this, even if you don't.
3: Pike broke his left forearm. The bone was probably not fully healed when he re-broke it. A metal plate was installed, and left there. His joints and everything else are fine, and this does not make him "Injury-prone".
4: Bradford's injury, which is much less serious than Drew Brees's was, was the only one he had. You need to get hurt at least twice to be "injury-prone". And I know that if he plays for four years in the NFL and then gets hurt, some of you clowns will talk about "concerns about his durability".
If Bradford is healthy, and available to the Browns, he will be the pick. It's a no-brainer. And I wouldn't even put it past them to trade up for him.
They needn't neccessarily throw away their draft picks, as they have ammo in Shaun Rogers, Corey Williams, and/or their many, many surplus outside and inside linebackers...which is why they don't need any more of those.
I have a hard time finding out what's really wrong with Clausen, aside from the fact that he couldn't single-handedly win all his games, and is an inch shorter than about a dozen NFL QB's.
Tony Pike could be Plan B--and the reason why Holmgren would NOT trade up for Bradford. Pike shows much promise. There are even a couple more sleepers in this draft, both of whome are named Brown.
NOBODY is as accurate as Bradford. You can stay stuck on arm-strength, but first and foremeost in a QB is accuracy. Bradford has a good but not great arm (like Brady Quinn, as anybody with a three digit IQ knows), with superior accuracy.
Pike has a gun, and is pretty accurate--but not like Bradford. Accuracy can be coached, of course. It's a matter of forcing the QB to position his feet the same way in relation to the target each time he throws, bucket drills, etc. But natural accuracy is precious. A born sharpshooter will never regress.
"Leadership": So many sportwriters think leadership is about hollering at people and grabbing facemasks. They wonder if the quiet, calm Bradford can be a leader, as he has never been seen urinating on anybody's shoes to mark his territory.
Shut up. I mean, just shut up. Yeah. Tom Landry was a real weak sister. What a sissy that Drew Brees is! Hey do you see how that pussy Peyton Manning has a guy drop a pass and doesn't even yell at him? Bill Belichick is no leader. Just stands there, like that sissy Landry...
I repeat: Shut up.
Academic all-american. Heard him interviewed, and he actually deviated from the prepared script without getting himself in trouble! Another thing I noticed was that he wasn't nervous at all.
Well, I've probably got my hopes up too high anyway. There are two teams that might take him ahead of the Browns, and several others in range to trade up ahead of them for him.
Mike Mayock is, in my opinion, the best of the draft gurus. He's suggested that the Browns might be wiser to draft WR Dez Bryant instead of Haden with the seventh pick.
The cornerback depth in this draft is extremely deep. and the fans have blown the needs in our secondary all out of proportion (as usual.) There are even at least two corners who could be excellent coverage safeties, ranked way low among the corners.
Dez Bryant is Edwards-sized; a little bigger and stronger, and with much better hands (goes without saying, no?). But he's not really a deep threat, and I have to wonder if he's really that wise a choice.
I mean, the running back could count on his blocking downfield, and the QB could throw to him whether he's technicly covered or not. He DOES turn into an instant running back with the ball...ok I changed my mind good call, Mike.
IF a version of the west coast is installed (or more accurately enhanced, as Daboll had already put in some elements of it), Bryant would be the absolute perfect X, with Massequoi now the number two guy (well not immediately but say half way through the season).
A big target who can run with the ball and block. A RELIABLE reciever who won't make quarterbacks look worse than they are in the myopic eyes of ignorant fans. Who won't drop three touchdown passes and lose at least two games all by themselves...then go to the Jets and do the same stuff and bash the Browns...
I was gone for awhile but am back now. Anyway, of they take Haden that's fine, since no matter how deep the position is, Haden is a rare talent, and the best cornerback tandem in the NFL does have a ring to hit. Remember Dixon/Minnifield? Mmmm...
But if they take Bryant that'll work too, although I believe that if they could trade down they could still get him.
But Plan A is if Bradford is there go get him ASAP. Hey do you think Seattle needs any slightly-used defensive linemen all pre-signed and ready to go? And maybe an extra fifth rounder?
"Holmgren has never drafted a quarterback that high". So what? So he never will?
Another unusually sentient poster brought up how Holmgren traded for another gunslinger and turned him into a pretty good west coast QB. It's just possible--for the few of us who are objective--that DA could stick around.
I know that already you might be having epileptic siezures.
Well, I watched one game with Eman. Each time DA threw an incompletion, I asked him "who's fault was that?", and "how many was that?", and 4/5 of the time, he admitted that the reciever was probably responsible.
He tried to squirm out of it a few times, saying that the reciever had just barely turned around and it was too hard for his tender lil hands and stuff, but I forced him to admit that it had hit the guy in his hands.
By the way: At the CORE of the west coast offense is the ball being in the air BEFORE the reciever breaks off his route...got that?
Anyway, it didn't matter. Eman says "Yes, yes, yes, yes"--then starts objecting to my campagning for DA, then goes back to hallucinating inaccuracy and exhaggerating lack of touch. All DA's fault.
See? If you guys got your minds made up, even looking with your own eyes with a virtual seeing eye-dog asking you to note and remember who's fault the incompletions were, it just won't stick.
If your mind is made up about either Quinn or DA, NOTHING will change it. If Homgren were to keep DA, you'd be calling HIM an idiot!
The difference: Mike can look at films, and see who did what. If you guys HAD to be objective or get fired for using the wrong players, you would be. I suggest you pretend your livlihood depends on seeing what is actually there, and not what you want or expect to see.
Kevin Kolb would be nice, but the Eagles want him to either be the man or the heir apparant. Vick aint that, and Kolb might not be available at any price.
McNabb would probably be too expensive, and nix the deal.
Scott Brunner...hmmm.....
2: Sam Bradford is too skinny for the NFL, but (I know to the amazement of many) it's natural for males to fill out at his age, and NFL strength and conditioning coaches know this, even if you don't.
3: Pike broke his left forearm. The bone was probably not fully healed when he re-broke it. A metal plate was installed, and left there. His joints and everything else are fine, and this does not make him "Injury-prone".
4: Bradford's injury, which is much less serious than Drew Brees's was, was the only one he had. You need to get hurt at least twice to be "injury-prone". And I know that if he plays for four years in the NFL and then gets hurt, some of you clowns will talk about "concerns about his durability".
If Bradford is healthy, and available to the Browns, he will be the pick. It's a no-brainer. And I wouldn't even put it past them to trade up for him.
They needn't neccessarily throw away their draft picks, as they have ammo in Shaun Rogers, Corey Williams, and/or their many, many surplus outside and inside linebackers...which is why they don't need any more of those.
I have a hard time finding out what's really wrong with Clausen, aside from the fact that he couldn't single-handedly win all his games, and is an inch shorter than about a dozen NFL QB's.
Tony Pike could be Plan B--and the reason why Holmgren would NOT trade up for Bradford. Pike shows much promise. There are even a couple more sleepers in this draft, both of whome are named Brown.
NOBODY is as accurate as Bradford. You can stay stuck on arm-strength, but first and foremeost in a QB is accuracy. Bradford has a good but not great arm (like Brady Quinn, as anybody with a three digit IQ knows), with superior accuracy.
Pike has a gun, and is pretty accurate--but not like Bradford. Accuracy can be coached, of course. It's a matter of forcing the QB to position his feet the same way in relation to the target each time he throws, bucket drills, etc. But natural accuracy is precious. A born sharpshooter will never regress.
"Leadership": So many sportwriters think leadership is about hollering at people and grabbing facemasks. They wonder if the quiet, calm Bradford can be a leader, as he has never been seen urinating on anybody's shoes to mark his territory.
Shut up. I mean, just shut up. Yeah. Tom Landry was a real weak sister. What a sissy that Drew Brees is! Hey do you see how that pussy Peyton Manning has a guy drop a pass and doesn't even yell at him? Bill Belichick is no leader. Just stands there, like that sissy Landry...
I repeat: Shut up.
Academic all-american. Heard him interviewed, and he actually deviated from the prepared script without getting himself in trouble! Another thing I noticed was that he wasn't nervous at all.
Well, I've probably got my hopes up too high anyway. There are two teams that might take him ahead of the Browns, and several others in range to trade up ahead of them for him.
Mike Mayock is, in my opinion, the best of the draft gurus. He's suggested that the Browns might be wiser to draft WR Dez Bryant instead of Haden with the seventh pick.
The cornerback depth in this draft is extremely deep. and the fans have blown the needs in our secondary all out of proportion (as usual.) There are even at least two corners who could be excellent coverage safeties, ranked way low among the corners.
Dez Bryant is Edwards-sized; a little bigger and stronger, and with much better hands (goes without saying, no?). But he's not really a deep threat, and I have to wonder if he's really that wise a choice.
I mean, the running back could count on his blocking downfield, and the QB could throw to him whether he's technicly covered or not. He DOES turn into an instant running back with the ball...ok I changed my mind good call, Mike.
IF a version of the west coast is installed (or more accurately enhanced, as Daboll had already put in some elements of it), Bryant would be the absolute perfect X, with Massequoi now the number two guy (well not immediately but say half way through the season).
A big target who can run with the ball and block. A RELIABLE reciever who won't make quarterbacks look worse than they are in the myopic eyes of ignorant fans. Who won't drop three touchdown passes and lose at least two games all by themselves...then go to the Jets and do the same stuff and bash the Browns...
I was gone for awhile but am back now. Anyway, of they take Haden that's fine, since no matter how deep the position is, Haden is a rare talent, and the best cornerback tandem in the NFL does have a ring to hit. Remember Dixon/Minnifield? Mmmm...
But if they take Bryant that'll work too, although I believe that if they could trade down they could still get him.
But Plan A is if Bradford is there go get him ASAP. Hey do you think Seattle needs any slightly-used defensive linemen all pre-signed and ready to go? And maybe an extra fifth rounder?
"Holmgren has never drafted a quarterback that high". So what? So he never will?
Another unusually sentient poster brought up how Holmgren traded for another gunslinger and turned him into a pretty good west coast QB. It's just possible--for the few of us who are objective--that DA could stick around.
I know that already you might be having epileptic siezures.
Well, I watched one game with Eman. Each time DA threw an incompletion, I asked him "who's fault was that?", and "how many was that?", and 4/5 of the time, he admitted that the reciever was probably responsible.
He tried to squirm out of it a few times, saying that the reciever had just barely turned around and it was too hard for his tender lil hands and stuff, but I forced him to admit that it had hit the guy in his hands.
By the way: At the CORE of the west coast offense is the ball being in the air BEFORE the reciever breaks off his route...got that?
Anyway, it didn't matter. Eman says "Yes, yes, yes, yes"--then starts objecting to my campagning for DA, then goes back to hallucinating inaccuracy and exhaggerating lack of touch. All DA's fault.
See? If you guys got your minds made up, even looking with your own eyes with a virtual seeing eye-dog asking you to note and remember who's fault the incompletions were, it just won't stick.
If your mind is made up about either Quinn or DA, NOTHING will change it. If Homgren were to keep DA, you'd be calling HIM an idiot!
The difference: Mike can look at films, and see who did what. If you guys HAD to be objective or get fired for using the wrong players, you would be. I suggest you pretend your livlihood depends on seeing what is actually there, and not what you want or expect to see.
Kevin Kolb would be nice, but the Eagles want him to either be the man or the heir apparant. Vick aint that, and Kolb might not be available at any price.
McNabb would probably be too expensive, and nix the deal.
Scott Brunner...hmmm.....
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Browns Draft: Corrections and Rational Thoughts
RESPONSES TO DUMB STUFF I HAVE READ:
"I'm concerned about the right side of the offensive line": Womack filled in surprisingly well at right tackle (this from a guy who said Womack can't play right tackle).
All the same, I stipulate to Womack being less than ideal there, and that an upgrade would be in order. A guy named Capizzi who the Browns got from Pittsburgh is 6'9", used to be 315. He's athletic, and scouts felt he could play left tackle.
Entering his fourth season, he's at the stage where many offensive linemen emerge. The Stoolers, who are located in PA, dug him up as a left tackle for NCAA powerhouse Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
Yeah, he was released. But he's athletic and 6'9" (he has the ability period).
Might not work out-might be a depth guy. But you folks pretend he and his potential don't exist. It's inconvenient to think that hard, aint it?
So yes, drafting a right tackle is a good idea. "I say we use #7 on a right tackle".
WOW! Let's draft a left tackle to play right tackle and pay him more than Joe Thomas! Brilliant!
In this draft, a right tackle can be found into the third round. An exceptional right tackle has the feet to play on the left side as well, but more commonly they're tall right guards.
And right tackle is not the right side. The Browns do NOT need a right guard. Hadnot's passblocking has improved, and changes in the blocking scheme favor him. Womack is a good right guard in any system. Typicly, a lot of fans throw out the baby with the bathwater, and mindlessly repeat crap they hear.
You can't fake it.
"We need a playmaking tight end". In other words, all those catches Devon Moore made were flukes. He just came into an unfamilar scheme and kept fluking. He was a wide reciever in college and is at least as fast as Jurevicious but that doesn't matter either.
After about eight games and 25 or so catches and a bunch of touchdowns, I trust it will dawn on some of you that we already have a playmaking tight end.
"We need a number one and number two reciever". OK here we go again: You've already got Robiskie in a grave and are shoveling dirt in his face because he didn't do anything as a rookie.
I know that, being a coach's son, smart and polished, we expected more up front. It didn't happen, therefore it never will? Jeez.
I'm pretty sure that at least part of Robiski'e problem is that he's not a fast-twitch athlete; he's not explosive. He's a glider, so it's hard for him to separate from cornerbacks who are often faster and always quicker than he is.
He's not alone. If he were a little guy, he'd be DOA, but Robiskie is 6'3", has good top-end speed and excellent hands. He can return from the offseason a little bigger and stronger and simply be a Jurevicious type. Jurevicious, of late Ohco Cinco, and other big recievers rarely get much separation, but they make the catch anyway because they can wall off, out-reach, and out-leap the defender.
Some clown after the season called Massequoi a number three or four reciever. Excuse me, but he was the X-reciever for the Browns, beat double coverage, and did what he did later in his rookie season. Don't tell me about drops--I didn't see any in the last six games, and those are all that count.
For vertical systems, you ideally want a Braylon Edwards (I mean if Edwards could catch)--type deep flyer to keep a safety back and open up the shorter stuff, but it looks a whole lot like the new Browns will be predominantly West Coast.
That's not a vertical system, and Massequoi is ideal for it. A lot of the yardage in a West Coast system is YAC, and that's Massequoi's game. Jerry Rice wan't even AS fast as Massequoi, and over 90% of his receptions travelled less than 15 yards in the air. (I'm not positive of/can't prove that, but the knowlegable reader won't try to pick a fight over it).
I would like to see better depth, and frankly Robiskie shoved to the third spot; A speedy/dangerous guy would be great...but the Browns don't NEED both a number one and number two reciever. If they can find an X-reciever who can knock Massequoi to Y, I'm all for it.
Hey how bout Randy Moss, that Fitzgerald guy, and Steve Largeant? Great! But coaches and GM's have to live on THIS planet.
"We need a big running back to complement Harrison": Hey Jerome! You're awesome, man! There. I just comlimented Harrison. Let's move on now.
But seriously, the Browns have one of the two best fullbacks in the NFL, James Davis will be back, and Chris Jennings weighs in at 218--a whopping five or six pounds heavier than Harrison!!!
I really like this one 245-pounder in the draft that they don't know if he's a running back or a fullback...sounds like Mike Alstott--that would be great, but the premise of NEED is false.
What do Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes, Kiki Barber, Joe Morris, Barry Sanders and 30 or so other superstar running backs have in common? They were all shrimps who outlasted the big guys. They were smaller targets and instinctively avoided big hits.
You want a change of pace? James Davis is just a grinder; much stronger than his weight indicates, and he breaks tackles. Reminds me a lot of Earnest Byner. I mean, like a Byner CLONE! And Byner blocked for Kevin Mack!
Short yardage? Did you see what the Browns did the last five games? "Okay we're going to run. Harrison will get the ball and Vickers will lead-block for him, so all you guys just key on Vickers and try to stop us. Ready?"
That went for short yardage (no pun intended) too. A small waterbug can pick up tough yards too. He just does it a different way. THINK!!!
But like I said, that monster running back would be sweet...actually there are two of these in this draft, and niether will go in the first round.....
Thank God nobody is dumb enough to think we need defensive linemen. And I stipulate to needing a safety and a cornerback. ONE safety and ONE cornerback. Adams is excellent depth and a nickel back, McDonald may not be a starter but can fill in, and Furrey is okay too.
They could USE another safety who's better than Elam, but don't NEED one.
Poole? He says he's coming back, but I hate those concussions. I mean, you're re-injuring old damage, and compounding the damage each time. Poole is very talented (and you don't know what you're talking about if you think he isn't), but the concussions won't go away, and they make him unreliable, and for his own sake he ought to quit.
Have you ever heard Ken Norton or Joe Frazier try to talk? 'Nuff said--Brodney I love ya, but quit right now.
Correcting linebacker dumbness demands a whole separate blog, so I'll save that.
"We need a quarterback": Oops! That's NOT dumb--nevermind.
"I'm concerned about the right side of the offensive line": Womack filled in surprisingly well at right tackle (this from a guy who said Womack can't play right tackle).
All the same, I stipulate to Womack being less than ideal there, and that an upgrade would be in order. A guy named Capizzi who the Browns got from Pittsburgh is 6'9", used to be 315. He's athletic, and scouts felt he could play left tackle.
Entering his fourth season, he's at the stage where many offensive linemen emerge. The Stoolers, who are located in PA, dug him up as a left tackle for NCAA powerhouse Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
Yeah, he was released. But he's athletic and 6'9" (he has the ability period).
Might not work out-might be a depth guy. But you folks pretend he and his potential don't exist. It's inconvenient to think that hard, aint it?
So yes, drafting a right tackle is a good idea. "I say we use #7 on a right tackle".
WOW! Let's draft a left tackle to play right tackle and pay him more than Joe Thomas! Brilliant!
In this draft, a right tackle can be found into the third round. An exceptional right tackle has the feet to play on the left side as well, but more commonly they're tall right guards.
And right tackle is not the right side. The Browns do NOT need a right guard. Hadnot's passblocking has improved, and changes in the blocking scheme favor him. Womack is a good right guard in any system. Typicly, a lot of fans throw out the baby with the bathwater, and mindlessly repeat crap they hear.
You can't fake it.
"We need a playmaking tight end". In other words, all those catches Devon Moore made were flukes. He just came into an unfamilar scheme and kept fluking. He was a wide reciever in college and is at least as fast as Jurevicious but that doesn't matter either.
After about eight games and 25 or so catches and a bunch of touchdowns, I trust it will dawn on some of you that we already have a playmaking tight end.
"We need a number one and number two reciever". OK here we go again: You've already got Robiskie in a grave and are shoveling dirt in his face because he didn't do anything as a rookie.
I know that, being a coach's son, smart and polished, we expected more up front. It didn't happen, therefore it never will? Jeez.
I'm pretty sure that at least part of Robiski'e problem is that he's not a fast-twitch athlete; he's not explosive. He's a glider, so it's hard for him to separate from cornerbacks who are often faster and always quicker than he is.
He's not alone. If he were a little guy, he'd be DOA, but Robiskie is 6'3", has good top-end speed and excellent hands. He can return from the offseason a little bigger and stronger and simply be a Jurevicious type. Jurevicious, of late Ohco Cinco, and other big recievers rarely get much separation, but they make the catch anyway because they can wall off, out-reach, and out-leap the defender.
Some clown after the season called Massequoi a number three or four reciever. Excuse me, but he was the X-reciever for the Browns, beat double coverage, and did what he did later in his rookie season. Don't tell me about drops--I didn't see any in the last six games, and those are all that count.
For vertical systems, you ideally want a Braylon Edwards (I mean if Edwards could catch)--type deep flyer to keep a safety back and open up the shorter stuff, but it looks a whole lot like the new Browns will be predominantly West Coast.
That's not a vertical system, and Massequoi is ideal for it. A lot of the yardage in a West Coast system is YAC, and that's Massequoi's game. Jerry Rice wan't even AS fast as Massequoi, and over 90% of his receptions travelled less than 15 yards in the air. (I'm not positive of/can't prove that, but the knowlegable reader won't try to pick a fight over it).
I would like to see better depth, and frankly Robiskie shoved to the third spot; A speedy/dangerous guy would be great...but the Browns don't NEED both a number one and number two reciever. If they can find an X-reciever who can knock Massequoi to Y, I'm all for it.
Hey how bout Randy Moss, that Fitzgerald guy, and Steve Largeant? Great! But coaches and GM's have to live on THIS planet.
"We need a big running back to complement Harrison": Hey Jerome! You're awesome, man! There. I just comlimented Harrison. Let's move on now.
But seriously, the Browns have one of the two best fullbacks in the NFL, James Davis will be back, and Chris Jennings weighs in at 218--a whopping five or six pounds heavier than Harrison!!!
I really like this one 245-pounder in the draft that they don't know if he's a running back or a fullback...sounds like Mike Alstott--that would be great, but the premise of NEED is false.
What do Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes, Kiki Barber, Joe Morris, Barry Sanders and 30 or so other superstar running backs have in common? They were all shrimps who outlasted the big guys. They were smaller targets and instinctively avoided big hits.
You want a change of pace? James Davis is just a grinder; much stronger than his weight indicates, and he breaks tackles. Reminds me a lot of Earnest Byner. I mean, like a Byner CLONE! And Byner blocked for Kevin Mack!
Short yardage? Did you see what the Browns did the last five games? "Okay we're going to run. Harrison will get the ball and Vickers will lead-block for him, so all you guys just key on Vickers and try to stop us. Ready?"
That went for short yardage (no pun intended) too. A small waterbug can pick up tough yards too. He just does it a different way. THINK!!!
But like I said, that monster running back would be sweet...actually there are two of these in this draft, and niether will go in the first round.....
Thank God nobody is dumb enough to think we need defensive linemen. And I stipulate to needing a safety and a cornerback. ONE safety and ONE cornerback. Adams is excellent depth and a nickel back, McDonald may not be a starter but can fill in, and Furrey is okay too.
They could USE another safety who's better than Elam, but don't NEED one.
Poole? He says he's coming back, but I hate those concussions. I mean, you're re-injuring old damage, and compounding the damage each time. Poole is very talented (and you don't know what you're talking about if you think he isn't), but the concussions won't go away, and they make him unreliable, and for his own sake he ought to quit.
Have you ever heard Ken Norton or Joe Frazier try to talk? 'Nuff said--Brodney I love ya, but quit right now.
Correcting linebacker dumbness demands a whole separate blog, so I'll save that.
"We need a quarterback": Oops! That's NOT dumb--nevermind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)