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.