1: Mikey might have been sandbagging Clausen. I thought so before, but forgot to mention it. Now they're taking a longer look at him, so I sound almost as dumb as the writers my own family reads instead of me. Dammit.
Anyway, Bradford is potentially awesome, but to move up to get him might be prohibitive. As many different (legitimate, true) experts as I read and hear from (Mayock, Miller, Brandt, Willcotts for example), I can't see what's wrong with the kid.
The hell with this emotional outburst/arrogance stuff--he's kid. You people can't make up your minds what leadership is. Jeez, I thought leaders had to yell at people and stomp around and stuff! Make up your minds!!
It's irrelevant that Quinn came from the same school. Only a stone idiot would say "No more Notre Dame quarterbacks!" Quinn's accuracy was questioned before the draft. Clausen's is not. Bradford and McCoy might be better sharpshooters, but Clausen is right there with them.
And yes, because of his pro-style system and four years experience, he IS just about ready for the NFL. Yeah I know so was Quinn. That's irrelevant too, because Clausen hits what he aims at/is NOT Quinn DO YOU UNDERSTAND HE IS A DIFFERENT PERSON DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
He didn't win all his games. No--his TEAM didn't win all IT's games! I remember all this crap with Elway. Elway "choked" in the big games. Had nothing to do with a fair defense and no running game--naahh! He could beat most of the teams in the league single-freaking-handed, but he gets to the Superbowl and he's facing an elite TEAM. HE couldn't beat THEM single-handed so it's all HIS fault! Idiots!
HE's the only reason average Broncos teams GOT to the Superbowl!
He gets a running game and wins two of them DUHHH!
Maybe just maybe Jimmy Clausen's TEAMS weren't that hot!
Of course, Mike knows best. If HE thinks I'm fulla beans, then I am.
2: Mr. Steuber, with respect: While the Browns would always like to improve their OLB's, they don't really NEED to. They have Matt Roth, and from among no less than FOUR very young contenders, they'll have two. I love Sergio Kindle, but his position is NOT a priority on this planet.
3: Whoever is the Browns QB will be protected. Protection was NOT the problem with the passing game last season. No it was NOT.
While they don't have a very good pass-blocking right tackle (maybe--Capizzi--), they have tight ends who can chip and now two fullbacks who can meet a DE or OLB head-on and stone him. I believe that at some point they'll draft a good RT...NOT in the first round. (Maybe instead of Kindle in the second--but they could get one in the third or even fourth).
4: Thanks to Jim Miller of NFL Radio, I now understand why a West Coast offense also needs a burner (he corrected me--even I make mostakes but at least I admit them). I hope they can find one in this draft...
BUT whoever is the quarterback will have people to throw to. There are now TWO pass-catching tight ends, Massequoi improved rapidly late in the season and became downright reliable, Robiski will be fine in his second (not fifth...second) season, and every running back is an accomplished reciever.
So please quit with this whoever it is will get killed, or won't have anybody to throw to. That's just ignormania.
5: I have great confidence in Jake Delhomme. He rarely fumbles handoffs, and always hands off to the right guy. I think he can also be trusted with the 5-7 yard airborne handoffs he'll sometimes be making.
And it's hard to pressure a quarterback when you're getting run over.
6: I hereby predict that the Browns will draft Bradford, Clausen, McCoy, and/or another quarterback in the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, or sixth round. You can quote me on that.
7: If they just take Berry, I won't complain, even a little. Thomas, the safety Mayock likes better, isn't as versatile. But I'd prefer it if they could trade out of there, get another pick or two, and still get Thomas or Haden instead.
8: Haden's poor combine 40 time never meant much. Mayock and other competant evaluators isolate his matchups with elite recievers. If he covered them, then he covered them, period, and no stopwatch can change that.
9: Rogers is still in play and still has great value. You saw them trade Wimbley. Stay tuned. He could be ammo to move up, get more picks, or nab an elite veteran wide reciever.
...uhh...not a washed up one, okay? Not a "veteran" who has turned onto a possession guy. No. No mentors. You're all so mentor-happy--it's like your new word for the week. Mentor this. Mentor that. How will they ever learn to run correct patterns or catch the ball without a mentor? Somehow they'll manage.
Who's going to mentor james Davis, by the way? Harrison has only been a star for a short time...how will Davis learn how to find daylight? Why, he'll just get the ball and stand there, all confused!!
Mentor-mentor-mentor just shut up, ok? I mean, shut up.
YOU STAND CORRECTED
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
When Dumbasses Attack
On which planet was our quarterbacks' ineffectiveness due to lack of protection by the offensive line? That's one of those dumbass catch-alls, right? That way, you can pretend that your hee-row under center didn't really suck!
They both usually had time. Even the now-famous "right side" did ok with Womack at RT.
I'm not going to argue. Any coach will tell you this.
The line isn't perfect. I heard Holmgren list O-line as one of the needs. Well, we now have young first-rounders at the two critical positions. Steinbach--who's getting up there--is not a mauler. He's a superior athlete better suited to a zone-blocking system.
Womack is the right type, but is aging, and there are better guards/right tackles. Pashos is a bulldozer but not quick, and will turn 30. The line as-is will be pretty good--especially run-blocking. But 2011? And who replaces the venerable ones when they get dinged?
Some of you hear Mr. President mention offensive line and start hallucinating DA or Bray-dee (sigh) under siege. What he meant was that great is better than good, young is better than old, and deep is better than shallow.
He wants the best offensive line in the NFL. OK. But the current line is pretty good.
Mr. Pluto--with sincere respect:
1: A reciever needs to run good patterns and catch the ball. Now, a lineman needs to learn all sorts of dirty tricks--DB's too. A QB has to learn a whole lot. But a reciever or a running back needs a mentor like he needs a hole in the head. The Browns don't need a veteran WR.
2: The only way trading Wimbley makes sense is if the Browns are overloaded with OLB's. Which they ARE.
Holmgren said what he said about not using a high pick on a QB. He might be lying. If he intends to, for example, go after Colt Mccoy, he doesn't want somebody jumping ahead of him in the second round to nab him. He might also like Tony Pike, who could be targetted.
However, assuming he told the truth, what he also said was that in order to take a QB in the second round, he'd have to have another second round pick (so he could still get a DB or WR or something).
Well, he has three third and four fifth-rround picks. He has Rogers. For that matter, he has Jackson...nobody is exempt. In Wimbley, he traded one very damn good all-around linebacker for a low third round pick. In this draft, picks are everything--this draft is historicly deep, and he wants to exploit it to the max.
So he could easily get one or more additional second round picks.
I assume he wants to preserve the thirds if he can, since you can get starting offensive linemen and stuff with those--immediate impact players--whereas the lower picks are projects and risks.
But what about trading number seven down? NONONO we gotta get Berry!!! Well, I sure hope that some other GM's feel that way, since there is another safety who Mike Mayock and others like even better than Berry!
Maybe one of those guys who think that one position-player's being 4% better than another is worth losing a second round pick will cough it up to get Berry instead of almost-Berry!
What about Tebow? Gil Brandt insists that he'll be great in maybe three years. In point of fact, he told about how with a group of personnel guys from various teams, he went to the blackboard to answer questions. After saying what he would do, he told them what they called that play in his college system. Then he told one of the scouts what they called it in his team's system. Then did the same with another scout.
They all were astonished--Tebow is a major-league football brain. He probably won't have a problem reading through progressions or learning to diagnose coverages, etc. He'd have to prove that he can think FAST too, but he's got the rest of it mentally (and psychologicly).
Those who think he'd revert to his too-slow delivery etc. under pressure don't understand how muscle memory works. How do you think boxers are made? They tied Marciano's ankles together with a string. They slap you when you drop your hands (stings more that way). Through repetition, you ingrain good habits. And you don't revert when you get hit. Compared to any boxer, Tebow's road is cake.
I don't know about his accuracy or touch, but I do know that he has thrown some spectacular passes. You can't just go by that, however. He might not do that consistantly.
I don't know. Holmgren does like him, and knows about this stuff better than me. Everybody says he'll need at least two seasons on the bench, but I don't know. I mean, look how in the space of weeks he altered his whole delivery!
Will he be diligent? Does he have the brains? Has he demonstrated accuracy, touch, and strength? All yesses. Would Holmgren draft him?
But I personally suspect he might have his eye on McCoy, whose accuracy is consistant and proven, and whose dad is a coach.
However then there's Kafka, that Michigan State guy, and even the
West VA guy who should be around later. Project guys. Holmgren bats about .400 with those guys--which is better than anybody else (so shut up).
Self-correction:
Jim Miller (ex-Stooler/Buffalo QB) said that a West Coast system does need a burner. It's built into every play that if the free safety is too shallow or poorly positioned, the speed guy goes vertical. This is one reason it's hard to stop--defenses can't afford to squeeze down on all the short routes.
I stand corrected. And so do you.
The guys on the Browns sites must have joined Terry and be reading my blog. I mean, they're now writing about Peyton Hillis being the thunder to Harrison's lightening. But of course they're overboard, giving the guy half the carries and stuff.
Again I have to ask--what does the Ghost have to do?
I look foreward to it. In a pass-happy league, one team can play smash-mouth.
A little illucidationalizing on that: The Ghost is not a mouth-smasher, but he still wears you out chasing him, see? I still like James Davis, by the way, who's a lot harder to take down than his size says he is; who I repeat reminds me a LOT of Earnest Byner.
But now Hillis...man, there's our Jerome Bettis. SHUT UP, YODA! Jeez I'm so sick of you guys trying to be sage and wise and moderating and slowing down everything. I said he's our Bettis and I meant it. He's that big and he's remarkably elusive and shifty for a monster, just like Bettis.
Check the old games on Bettis. Very rarely did he go right over somebody. He got ankle-tackled, jumped from behind, and took most of his hits from the side. You see him coming and you break down (and maybe close your eyes because you figure this is gonna sting a little) and then he goes and cuts to your left or right...
You HAVE to sink your hips and plant, and then when he cuts you simply can't get any power into a diving hit. That niftiness was made Bettis so awesome, and Hillis is just like that.
AND, Hillis is an excellent, excellent reciever!
Oh, I just can't wait. "Uh-oh--it's the Browns next."
"Don't worry! Stop the run, and they're dead!"
"Uh...ok, but...how?"
Ahh-hahahahahahahahaha!
They both usually had time. Even the now-famous "right side" did ok with Womack at RT.
I'm not going to argue. Any coach will tell you this.
The line isn't perfect. I heard Holmgren list O-line as one of the needs. Well, we now have young first-rounders at the two critical positions. Steinbach--who's getting up there--is not a mauler. He's a superior athlete better suited to a zone-blocking system.
Womack is the right type, but is aging, and there are better guards/right tackles. Pashos is a bulldozer but not quick, and will turn 30. The line as-is will be pretty good--especially run-blocking. But 2011? And who replaces the venerable ones when they get dinged?
Some of you hear Mr. President mention offensive line and start hallucinating DA or Bray-dee (sigh) under siege. What he meant was that great is better than good, young is better than old, and deep is better than shallow.
He wants the best offensive line in the NFL. OK. But the current line is pretty good.
Mr. Pluto--with sincere respect:
1: A reciever needs to run good patterns and catch the ball. Now, a lineman needs to learn all sorts of dirty tricks--DB's too. A QB has to learn a whole lot. But a reciever or a running back needs a mentor like he needs a hole in the head. The Browns don't need a veteran WR.
2: The only way trading Wimbley makes sense is if the Browns are overloaded with OLB's. Which they ARE.
Holmgren said what he said about not using a high pick on a QB. He might be lying. If he intends to, for example, go after Colt Mccoy, he doesn't want somebody jumping ahead of him in the second round to nab him. He might also like Tony Pike, who could be targetted.
However, assuming he told the truth, what he also said was that in order to take a QB in the second round, he'd have to have another second round pick (so he could still get a DB or WR or something).
Well, he has three third and four fifth-rround picks. He has Rogers. For that matter, he has Jackson...nobody is exempt. In Wimbley, he traded one very damn good all-around linebacker for a low third round pick. In this draft, picks are everything--this draft is historicly deep, and he wants to exploit it to the max.
So he could easily get one or more additional second round picks.
I assume he wants to preserve the thirds if he can, since you can get starting offensive linemen and stuff with those--immediate impact players--whereas the lower picks are projects and risks.
But what about trading number seven down? NONONO we gotta get Berry!!! Well, I sure hope that some other GM's feel that way, since there is another safety who Mike Mayock and others like even better than Berry!
Maybe one of those guys who think that one position-player's being 4% better than another is worth losing a second round pick will cough it up to get Berry instead of almost-Berry!
What about Tebow? Gil Brandt insists that he'll be great in maybe three years. In point of fact, he told about how with a group of personnel guys from various teams, he went to the blackboard to answer questions. After saying what he would do, he told them what they called that play in his college system. Then he told one of the scouts what they called it in his team's system. Then did the same with another scout.
They all were astonished--Tebow is a major-league football brain. He probably won't have a problem reading through progressions or learning to diagnose coverages, etc. He'd have to prove that he can think FAST too, but he's got the rest of it mentally (and psychologicly).
Those who think he'd revert to his too-slow delivery etc. under pressure don't understand how muscle memory works. How do you think boxers are made? They tied Marciano's ankles together with a string. They slap you when you drop your hands (stings more that way). Through repetition, you ingrain good habits. And you don't revert when you get hit. Compared to any boxer, Tebow's road is cake.
I don't know about his accuracy or touch, but I do know that he has thrown some spectacular passes. You can't just go by that, however. He might not do that consistantly.
I don't know. Holmgren does like him, and knows about this stuff better than me. Everybody says he'll need at least two seasons on the bench, but I don't know. I mean, look how in the space of weeks he altered his whole delivery!
Will he be diligent? Does he have the brains? Has he demonstrated accuracy, touch, and strength? All yesses. Would Holmgren draft him?
But I personally suspect he might have his eye on McCoy, whose accuracy is consistant and proven, and whose dad is a coach.
However then there's Kafka, that Michigan State guy, and even the
West VA guy who should be around later. Project guys. Holmgren bats about .400 with those guys--which is better than anybody else (so shut up).
Self-correction:
Jim Miller (ex-Stooler/Buffalo QB) said that a West Coast system does need a burner. It's built into every play that if the free safety is too shallow or poorly positioned, the speed guy goes vertical. This is one reason it's hard to stop--defenses can't afford to squeeze down on all the short routes.
I stand corrected. And so do you.
The guys on the Browns sites must have joined Terry and be reading my blog. I mean, they're now writing about Peyton Hillis being the thunder to Harrison's lightening. But of course they're overboard, giving the guy half the carries and stuff.
Again I have to ask--what does the Ghost have to do?
I look foreward to it. In a pass-happy league, one team can play smash-mouth.
A little illucidationalizing on that: The Ghost is not a mouth-smasher, but he still wears you out chasing him, see? I still like James Davis, by the way, who's a lot harder to take down than his size says he is; who I repeat reminds me a LOT of Earnest Byner.
But now Hillis...man, there's our Jerome Bettis. SHUT UP, YODA! Jeez I'm so sick of you guys trying to be sage and wise and moderating and slowing down everything. I said he's our Bettis and I meant it. He's that big and he's remarkably elusive and shifty for a monster, just like Bettis.
Check the old games on Bettis. Very rarely did he go right over somebody. He got ankle-tackled, jumped from behind, and took most of his hits from the side. You see him coming and you break down (and maybe close your eyes because you figure this is gonna sting a little) and then he goes and cuts to your left or right...
You HAVE to sink your hips and plant, and then when he cuts you simply can't get any power into a diving hit. That niftiness was made Bettis so awesome, and Hillis is just like that.
AND, Hillis is an excellent, excellent reciever!
Oh, I just can't wait. "Uh-oh--it's the Browns next."
"Don't worry! Stop the run, and they're dead!"
"Uh...ok, but...how?"
Ahh-hahahahahahahahaha!
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Rodney Hillisfield
Peyton Hillis was the top-rated fullback in the 2008 draft.
At his Senior Bowl, as well as in college, he demonstrated surprising agility for a massive mountain of muscles. He was able to make tacklers miss him--indeed fake them out.
Hillis is NOT simply a fullback. He's averaged over 5 YPC both in college and with Denver. He catches passes for tight end-like averages as well...a LOT of passes!
Note to Oblivia: Holmgren just GOT more depth at RUNNING BACK--as well as at fullback. This guy saves a roster spot.
Hillis is a LOT like Jerome Bettis. That's literally true; no hyperbole. He's way quicker and more athletic than a fullback. He will compete for carries in this tailback committee. He's a weapon. More of a mace than an arrow...but a weapon.
So, why did he slide? Partly because NFL people are blockheads. They didn't need a "fullback". "Fullbacks" were not in vogue. They wanted H-backs and tight ends.
But Hillis could actually play H-Back. Nobody paid any attention to his tailback-like elusiveness or unusually high YPC (per catch and per carry both), because he wasn't a home-run hitter. And everybody knows that if a running back can't score from anywhere on the field, he sucks, right?
I mean, who needs a super-reliable pass-catching blocking 5 YPC guy when you can have a 4.41 40 guy? Even the twelth or thirteenth-ranked running back on the board?
Oh, Oblivians-you need to know that this was significant. Imagine if Vickers gets hurt. Won't matter. What about Vickers/Hillis? Wow BANG-CRUNCH! You have no idea! Hillis/Harrison and HILLIS could go to the slot too!!! Cover THAT! Base defense vs. 4-wide with a pass-catching TE? HAHA!
They'll call Hillis a fullback, but don't be fooled. He's a back. Remember when they tried to let Vickers carry the ball? Didn't work that well. But Hillis is different. You'll see. Vickers can't wiggle--Hillis can.
Now, as I alone have been saying for a long time, we got too many good linebackers, and trading even Wimbley--who I really like--for a low third this season is a good way to get rid of some of those surplus good linebackers before they have to start releasing them. Because there are too many ouside and inside linebackers on this roster. Like I've been saying...hello? HELLO?
Some of the guys on NFL Radio wonder where he'll fit in a 4-3. Duh. He'll be an ouside linebacker. These blockheads only know that he was drafted as a DE and converted. Because they ignore the Browns (and other teams that suck), they never saw that Wimbley has developed into as very good total-package linebacker suitable for any defense.
Now, we still have too many ouside and inside linebackers, but at least we got another third round pick.
Do you know what Holmgren really meant when he said that he really liked Bradford and would consider trading up for him? He meant that he really likes Bradford and will consider trading up for him. HONEST!
Some knuckleheads insist that the Browns would never do that because they have "so many other needs". Well, these are the same people that include running back, linebacker, and offensive line among the needs!!!
And the Browns would have to give up their whole draft--really? Six slots, and you start with Rogers? The Rams would have to hesitate right there, even without any more draft picks! Include a third and fifth and now what? Ok 2 fifths?
But who knows? McCoy might do just fine! In fact, none other than Gil Brandt (his story) said that Holmgren at the combine asked him "So who should I take?" Brandt says "Whoever takes Colt McCoy and puts him in a West Coast offense will make everybody forget about Joe Montana".
Wow! Well, Holmgren was half-kidding, of course, and who knows if he agrees? But this is Gil Brandt (who wasn't kidding), and he knows the kid very well; has followed him from highschool.
What's with you dumbasses "don't use another high pick on a quarterback!" Why? Because Couch got his arm wrecked? Because half of them crap out? So don't take any chances and make SURE you have mediocrity nailed down? Shut up.
Then there's this "LINE-LINE-LINE" guy who can't count. We GOT Thomas and Mack, and we need to use the top three picks this season on more offensive linemen. Including #7 overall. Doesn't matter how the unit performed last season. He looks at the roster and doesn't see enough first and second rounders so we need more. Yeah. we need seven or eight of them! We need enough that we have to start cutting them! We need second-rounders retiring without ever playing--shut up!
Speaking of which, who built the Jets? Clue: He started with Ferguson and Mangold. Got bashed for Mangold. I said who built them? Go ahead, say it. SAY IT!
YOU ALL STAND CORRECTED. SHUT UP.
At his Senior Bowl, as well as in college, he demonstrated surprising agility for a massive mountain of muscles. He was able to make tacklers miss him--indeed fake them out.
Hillis is NOT simply a fullback. He's averaged over 5 YPC both in college and with Denver. He catches passes for tight end-like averages as well...a LOT of passes!
Note to Oblivia: Holmgren just GOT more depth at RUNNING BACK--as well as at fullback. This guy saves a roster spot.
Hillis is a LOT like Jerome Bettis. That's literally true; no hyperbole. He's way quicker and more athletic than a fullback. He will compete for carries in this tailback committee. He's a weapon. More of a mace than an arrow...but a weapon.
So, why did he slide? Partly because NFL people are blockheads. They didn't need a "fullback". "Fullbacks" were not in vogue. They wanted H-backs and tight ends.
But Hillis could actually play H-Back. Nobody paid any attention to his tailback-like elusiveness or unusually high YPC (per catch and per carry both), because he wasn't a home-run hitter. And everybody knows that if a running back can't score from anywhere on the field, he sucks, right?
I mean, who needs a super-reliable pass-catching blocking 5 YPC guy when you can have a 4.41 40 guy? Even the twelth or thirteenth-ranked running back on the board?
Oh, Oblivians-you need to know that this was significant. Imagine if Vickers gets hurt. Won't matter. What about Vickers/Hillis? Wow BANG-CRUNCH! You have no idea! Hillis/Harrison and HILLIS could go to the slot too!!! Cover THAT! Base defense vs. 4-wide with a pass-catching TE? HAHA!
They'll call Hillis a fullback, but don't be fooled. He's a back. Remember when they tried to let Vickers carry the ball? Didn't work that well. But Hillis is different. You'll see. Vickers can't wiggle--Hillis can.
Now, as I alone have been saying for a long time, we got too many good linebackers, and trading even Wimbley--who I really like--for a low third this season is a good way to get rid of some of those surplus good linebackers before they have to start releasing them. Because there are too many ouside and inside linebackers on this roster. Like I've been saying...hello? HELLO?
Some of the guys on NFL Radio wonder where he'll fit in a 4-3. Duh. He'll be an ouside linebacker. These blockheads only know that he was drafted as a DE and converted. Because they ignore the Browns (and other teams that suck), they never saw that Wimbley has developed into as very good total-package linebacker suitable for any defense.
Now, we still have too many ouside and inside linebackers, but at least we got another third round pick.
Do you know what Holmgren really meant when he said that he really liked Bradford and would consider trading up for him? He meant that he really likes Bradford and will consider trading up for him. HONEST!
Some knuckleheads insist that the Browns would never do that because they have "so many other needs". Well, these are the same people that include running back, linebacker, and offensive line among the needs!!!
And the Browns would have to give up their whole draft--really? Six slots, and you start with Rogers? The Rams would have to hesitate right there, even without any more draft picks! Include a third and fifth and now what? Ok 2 fifths?
But who knows? McCoy might do just fine! In fact, none other than Gil Brandt (his story) said that Holmgren at the combine asked him "So who should I take?" Brandt says "Whoever takes Colt McCoy and puts him in a West Coast offense will make everybody forget about Joe Montana".
Wow! Well, Holmgren was half-kidding, of course, and who knows if he agrees? But this is Gil Brandt (who wasn't kidding), and he knows the kid very well; has followed him from highschool.
What's with you dumbasses "don't use another high pick on a quarterback!" Why? Because Couch got his arm wrecked? Because half of them crap out? So don't take any chances and make SURE you have mediocrity nailed down? Shut up.
Then there's this "LINE-LINE-LINE" guy who can't count. We GOT Thomas and Mack, and we need to use the top three picks this season on more offensive linemen. Including #7 overall. Doesn't matter how the unit performed last season. He looks at the roster and doesn't see enough first and second rounders so we need more. Yeah. we need seven or eight of them! We need enough that we have to start cutting them! We need second-rounders retiring without ever playing--shut up!
Speaking of which, who built the Jets? Clue: He started with Ferguson and Mangold. Got bashed for Mangold. I said who built them? Go ahead, say it. SAY IT!
YOU ALL STAND CORRECTED. SHUT UP.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Whew! I just had this nightmare that the Browns signed Jake Delhomme for starting money! Me and my overactive imagination. But I'm awake now, and I know that Mike Holmgren would never do something like that.
Yeah, there's a new sherriff in town, and it's pretty stupid to expect a totally different person to do dumb stuff just because the people he replaced did dumb stuff.
Remember Hargrove? Everything was "eggzzbeerriunzz" with him. he signed this pitcher, McDowell, with an ERA over FIVE, for a fortune, and said "but he gives you innings". He got away with it, because his offense sometimes outpaced all the runs McDowell gave up.
Delhomme said he threw all those interceptions because he was trying too hard not to make mistakes. Wow. Well, he's a quarterback, not an english major. I think it translates to he hesitated to pull the trigger. That's really bad in a West Coast.
But it'll be ok. Maybe they can flip first rounders and include Rogers to pry Kolb loose from the Eagles. Then we can just forget about all this Delhomme nonsense.
Rodney Trusnikfield, one of the several young inside/outside linebackers the Browns are loaded to the gills with, signed his tender, so that's good.
Ben Watson!! That's great! "Underachieving"? Hey--that's New England's offense--ever hear of this guy named Welker? Watson blocked a lot. Great pickup!
Pat Ryan of NFL Radio, who never bothers to do any reasearch on lower-rung teams, said that this fills a huge need. We hugely needed a pass-catching tight end, since we have another ghost on the team; this one named Moore. I'm surprised to learn that all those passes he caught were a mirage.
Anyway, that's too bad, since if Rodney Moorefield did exist, then we could sometimes field two tight ends, even in a 2-2 "big" set--with Watson a sweet blocker as well as reciever. Defenses would find that hard to stop. And then we'd have two pass-catching tight ends, so the base offense could safely feature one--you know, build in the deeper patterns.
The signings so far were smart; Watson was REAL smart. So don't worry about Mike Holmgren signing Delhomme as anything more than a backup. Like he'd ever pay a washed up geezer like that like 6 mil or something!
Just a nightmare. Well, I'll flip over to the Plain Dealer page to see what's really going on....
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, there's a new sherriff in town, and it's pretty stupid to expect a totally different person to do dumb stuff just because the people he replaced did dumb stuff.
Remember Hargrove? Everything was "eggzzbeerriunzz" with him. he signed this pitcher, McDowell, with an ERA over FIVE, for a fortune, and said "but he gives you innings". He got away with it, because his offense sometimes outpaced all the runs McDowell gave up.
Delhomme said he threw all those interceptions because he was trying too hard not to make mistakes. Wow. Well, he's a quarterback, not an english major. I think it translates to he hesitated to pull the trigger. That's really bad in a West Coast.
But it'll be ok. Maybe they can flip first rounders and include Rogers to pry Kolb loose from the Eagles. Then we can just forget about all this Delhomme nonsense.
Rodney Trusnikfield, one of the several young inside/outside linebackers the Browns are loaded to the gills with, signed his tender, so that's good.
Ben Watson!! That's great! "Underachieving"? Hey--that's New England's offense--ever hear of this guy named Welker? Watson blocked a lot. Great pickup!
Pat Ryan of NFL Radio, who never bothers to do any reasearch on lower-rung teams, said that this fills a huge need. We hugely needed a pass-catching tight end, since we have another ghost on the team; this one named Moore. I'm surprised to learn that all those passes he caught were a mirage.
Anyway, that's too bad, since if Rodney Moorefield did exist, then we could sometimes field two tight ends, even in a 2-2 "big" set--with Watson a sweet blocker as well as reciever. Defenses would find that hard to stop. And then we'd have two pass-catching tight ends, so the base offense could safely feature one--you know, build in the deeper patterns.
The signings so far were smart; Watson was REAL smart. So don't worry about Mike Holmgren signing Delhomme as anything more than a backup. Like he'd ever pay a washed up geezer like that like 6 mil or something!
Just a nightmare. Well, I'll flip over to the Plain Dealer page to see what's really going on....
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Derrick, Seneca, and Jake
1: DA: Don't apologize any more. Just know that the sub-human scum who (respectful note to Terry Pluto) indeed cheered because you got hurt don't represent all of us. I wasn't embarrassed by Bottlegate; even drunk fans know refs fixing a game when they see it. But I was shamed by those imbeciles.
Without going into detail, I've been there, DA. But most important for you now is to prove me right and them wrong: Kick ass.
2: I promised before that I wouldn't presume to pick on Holmgren about having anything to do with quarterbacks, but I sure wish they weren't bringing Jake Delhomme here.
Well, that's my gut reaction. I mean, he's 35, and really does seem to have lost it.
...but I sure wish I'd have seen those interceptions. I mean, if it was mental...well I just don't know--but Holmgren might fix it. If it was just inaccuracy, then it could well mean that he's just entering his geezerhood, and...
Well what the hell do we know? Mary Kay Cabot was the one who surmised that he was here to compete for the starting job. I personally doubt that.
Well...if he IS signed, which who knows--he should indeed be given that chance. If he's done, let's see it. If he's not; if the change of scenery and Doctor Holmgren can cure him--why wouldn't you use him?
But I rather think he's here to back up and teach.
Seneca: Everybody but the player himself seems to assume HE'S here to be a backup. One writer pointed out that when Seneca was drafted, it might well not have been Holmgren's call. And I actually lean toward that, since Wallace is too short for Mikey.
However, who knows him better than Holmgren? How many old vets do you need? Why after getting Wallace are they now checking out Gramps Delhomme?
All that stuff about he and Cribbs--that's interesting, but when you talk about the two of them on the field at the same time, you're talking about Seneca under center and Cribbs in a role that Harrison or a wide reciever could play. It's not a big thing.
But it IS interesting that now we got two Okie quarterbacks!
Seneca said that this offense wouldn't be exactly like Seattle's. Ya think? I strongly suspect that they could go over 20% Oklahoma, for one thing. How 'bout hurry-up Oklahoma?
They're not done yet, so at this point even I in my humble insightful brilliance am stabbing in the dark (apologies to Mr. Hitchcock).
Troy Smith has three years in the league and a 5th-round tender on him. This is frustrating to watch, as I know that he, too, is too short for Mikey. Wallace's arrival makes it unlikely that that move will be made.
I have to stick to my promise and not question Mikey about quarterbacks. But I sure want to.
Remember Marty? Well, there's one of the best win/loss records in NFL history; even while rebuilding teams sometimes. Truly an excellent coach...who later on even learned not to get ultra-conservative with prevent-the-win defenses too soon...
Anyway, he was a blockhead sometimes. Bill Belichick just let a great wide reciever go for nothing. Too small. Too short. Too slow. Even the best NFL coaches are so often blockheads. They can look right at something and tell you it's not there. They can look right at nothing and tell you what it looks like.
Maybe it's built in. You make up your mind, and stick to it. No matter what.
Of course, Mangini is a lot less like that. It doesn't matter where you were drafted or who drafted you. If you don't practice hard, you don't play. See who started and played most of the last few games. But I digress...
But what is, is. I know that Mikey will draft a quarterback, but I now think it could be any one of a bunch of guys throughout the draft.
The combination of Wallace and interest in Delhomme at this premature point indicate three possibilities:
1: Quinn will stay and probably start. Wallace is the backup/situational contributor, and Jake the old wise vet emergency guy...with a low-round QB on the practice squad.
2: Brett Ratliff. I know it sounds insane, but he fits the profile: several years as a backup, having shown flashes, and owning the physical tools.
Remember Kelly Holcombe? He looked pretty crappy on paper. Steve Young? "Failure". Ratliff is familar with the players and the basic system, and Holmgren said that he feels he could make any kid with the basic ingredients into an excellent quarterback.
Just sayin'...
3: Wallace is actually here to start. He could be the bridge to the next quarterback.
It does make sense in some respects:
1: They could run the Oklahoma at any time during the game, and with Wallace the passing threat is significantly greater.
2: While an NFL offense can't live on roll-outs, more roll-outs could be mixed in with the core 3/5-7-step drop-back offense to help him out.
3: Holmgren might indeed have a pretty rigid attitude about height, but has seen Wallace actually run the normal offense fairly well. While he probably doesn't see Seneca as "the answer", he could be the guy to buy him one season.
4: The running game is well-established. Until the Browns prove they can strike deep, safeties will play up in stacked boxes, unless it's the Saints or the Colts or somebody and they have indeed piled up a big lead on a Browns defense which will be very good.
Side-note: Pat Kirwin, who I respect a lot and have learned a ton from, said (of a dominant running game), that some teams would just play their regular defense and let them pile up ground yardage because they couldn't score fast enough. But he assumes here that the counterpart offense has or will score a lot on the counterpart defense.
This statement makes zero sense in a close game. A dominant running team will beat a defense down and get stronger later. You can't outsmart a beat-down, Pat.
Anyway, to continue: A super-athletic quarterback like Wallace forces any defense to commit one guy to spy on him. They also can't just attack him up the middle; they have to contain him, or he'll burn them with his legs outside. That includes the edge. If a guy gets around a sluggish right tackle, he's opened a lane behind him.
Now, you got 20+% Oklahoma with both him and Cribbs, then maybe 20+ percent rollouts to exploit Wallace's strengths and minimize his weaknesses. Hell, the Browns passing offense could be 50% "gimmicks"!
You run over half the time. You run a lot of play-action passes. But about half of your passes are conventional. Now, the defense has a whole freaking lot of wierd stuff to prepare for.
The key is that running game, and the fact that the rest of the NFL (ie all the other teams the enemy defense prepares and builds itself for) are trying to pass first. The Browns can be different.
Now, about Wallace: Some might compare him to Micheal Vick, and he sorta is. However, per his recievers, Vick seemed unable or unwilling to throw until he'd locked eyes with the reciever; when he was supposed to throw before the reciever had turned. Further, he was inaccurate, and often indecisive.
Wallace ran the West Coast and ran it well. He initially lacked touch on short passes, but has improved in that area. He's not perfect at all, but he's better than what we've had.
For the future, Seneca isn't who Holmgren wants, but if you have a good defense and a strong running game, a super-athletic quarterback and a gimmicky, unpredictable passing offfense could win a lot of games.
But another thing about Seneca? He's got a gun. If the Browns can get somebody deep, he can deliver it, with accuracy.
Innovation: If I were a head coach, I would see what everybody else was doing, and do the opposite. This is why the 3-4 defense was so dominant early after it's introduction.
Now, teams routinely run 3 and even 4-wide offenses and tend to pass first. Hard to argue with the stats on playoff and Superbowl teams (thanks Starting Blocks)--that's how almost all of them got there.
But Bill Cowher said run-first would come back in the cycle, and he was correct. Let all the other defenses carry those extra defensive backs and focus on pass-rushers and coverage linebackers. Let them practice for five weeks to stop passing teams and then have to play a physical smash-mouth team.
I don't know about Quinn, Ratliff, or even some guy they haven't got yet, but right now I sort of think Wallace has a real shot here, despite being a short guy. (I do wish it could be Troy Smith, but alas).
Because all those aformentioned teams are also built to stop a 6'4" pocket passer who can't outsprint most safeties. With Wallace under center, playing the Browns would be a trip to the Twilight Zone.
Not to mention painful.
Without going into detail, I've been there, DA. But most important for you now is to prove me right and them wrong: Kick ass.
2: I promised before that I wouldn't presume to pick on Holmgren about having anything to do with quarterbacks, but I sure wish they weren't bringing Jake Delhomme here.
Well, that's my gut reaction. I mean, he's 35, and really does seem to have lost it.
...but I sure wish I'd have seen those interceptions. I mean, if it was mental...well I just don't know--but Holmgren might fix it. If it was just inaccuracy, then it could well mean that he's just entering his geezerhood, and...
Well what the hell do we know? Mary Kay Cabot was the one who surmised that he was here to compete for the starting job. I personally doubt that.
Well...if he IS signed, which who knows--he should indeed be given that chance. If he's done, let's see it. If he's not; if the change of scenery and Doctor Holmgren can cure him--why wouldn't you use him?
But I rather think he's here to back up and teach.
Seneca: Everybody but the player himself seems to assume HE'S here to be a backup. One writer pointed out that when Seneca was drafted, it might well not have been Holmgren's call. And I actually lean toward that, since Wallace is too short for Mikey.
However, who knows him better than Holmgren? How many old vets do you need? Why after getting Wallace are they now checking out Gramps Delhomme?
All that stuff about he and Cribbs--that's interesting, but when you talk about the two of them on the field at the same time, you're talking about Seneca under center and Cribbs in a role that Harrison or a wide reciever could play. It's not a big thing.
But it IS interesting that now we got two Okie quarterbacks!
Seneca said that this offense wouldn't be exactly like Seattle's. Ya think? I strongly suspect that they could go over 20% Oklahoma, for one thing. How 'bout hurry-up Oklahoma?
They're not done yet, so at this point even I in my humble insightful brilliance am stabbing in the dark (apologies to Mr. Hitchcock).
Troy Smith has three years in the league and a 5th-round tender on him. This is frustrating to watch, as I know that he, too, is too short for Mikey. Wallace's arrival makes it unlikely that that move will be made.
I have to stick to my promise and not question Mikey about quarterbacks. But I sure want to.
Remember Marty? Well, there's one of the best win/loss records in NFL history; even while rebuilding teams sometimes. Truly an excellent coach...who later on even learned not to get ultra-conservative with prevent-the-win defenses too soon...
Anyway, he was a blockhead sometimes. Bill Belichick just let a great wide reciever go for nothing. Too small. Too short. Too slow. Even the best NFL coaches are so often blockheads. They can look right at something and tell you it's not there. They can look right at nothing and tell you what it looks like.
Maybe it's built in. You make up your mind, and stick to it. No matter what.
Of course, Mangini is a lot less like that. It doesn't matter where you were drafted or who drafted you. If you don't practice hard, you don't play. See who started and played most of the last few games. But I digress...
But what is, is. I know that Mikey will draft a quarterback, but I now think it could be any one of a bunch of guys throughout the draft.
The combination of Wallace and interest in Delhomme at this premature point indicate three possibilities:
1: Quinn will stay and probably start. Wallace is the backup/situational contributor, and Jake the old wise vet emergency guy...with a low-round QB on the practice squad.
2: Brett Ratliff. I know it sounds insane, but he fits the profile: several years as a backup, having shown flashes, and owning the physical tools.
Remember Kelly Holcombe? He looked pretty crappy on paper. Steve Young? "Failure". Ratliff is familar with the players and the basic system, and Holmgren said that he feels he could make any kid with the basic ingredients into an excellent quarterback.
Just sayin'...
3: Wallace is actually here to start. He could be the bridge to the next quarterback.
It does make sense in some respects:
1: They could run the Oklahoma at any time during the game, and with Wallace the passing threat is significantly greater.
2: While an NFL offense can't live on roll-outs, more roll-outs could be mixed in with the core 3/5-7-step drop-back offense to help him out.
3: Holmgren might indeed have a pretty rigid attitude about height, but has seen Wallace actually run the normal offense fairly well. While he probably doesn't see Seneca as "the answer", he could be the guy to buy him one season.
4: The running game is well-established. Until the Browns prove they can strike deep, safeties will play up in stacked boxes, unless it's the Saints or the Colts or somebody and they have indeed piled up a big lead on a Browns defense which will be very good.
Side-note: Pat Kirwin, who I respect a lot and have learned a ton from, said (of a dominant running game), that some teams would just play their regular defense and let them pile up ground yardage because they couldn't score fast enough. But he assumes here that the counterpart offense has or will score a lot on the counterpart defense.
This statement makes zero sense in a close game. A dominant running team will beat a defense down and get stronger later. You can't outsmart a beat-down, Pat.
Anyway, to continue: A super-athletic quarterback like Wallace forces any defense to commit one guy to spy on him. They also can't just attack him up the middle; they have to contain him, or he'll burn them with his legs outside. That includes the edge. If a guy gets around a sluggish right tackle, he's opened a lane behind him.
Now, you got 20+% Oklahoma with both him and Cribbs, then maybe 20+ percent rollouts to exploit Wallace's strengths and minimize his weaknesses. Hell, the Browns passing offense could be 50% "gimmicks"!
You run over half the time. You run a lot of play-action passes. But about half of your passes are conventional. Now, the defense has a whole freaking lot of wierd stuff to prepare for.
The key is that running game, and the fact that the rest of the NFL (ie all the other teams the enemy defense prepares and builds itself for) are trying to pass first. The Browns can be different.
Now, about Wallace: Some might compare him to Micheal Vick, and he sorta is. However, per his recievers, Vick seemed unable or unwilling to throw until he'd locked eyes with the reciever; when he was supposed to throw before the reciever had turned. Further, he was inaccurate, and often indecisive.
Wallace ran the West Coast and ran it well. He initially lacked touch on short passes, but has improved in that area. He's not perfect at all, but he's better than what we've had.
For the future, Seneca isn't who Holmgren wants, but if you have a good defense and a strong running game, a super-athletic quarterback and a gimmicky, unpredictable passing offfense could win a lot of games.
But another thing about Seneca? He's got a gun. If the Browns can get somebody deep, he can deliver it, with accuracy.
Innovation: If I were a head coach, I would see what everybody else was doing, and do the opposite. This is why the 3-4 defense was so dominant early after it's introduction.
Now, teams routinely run 3 and even 4-wide offenses and tend to pass first. Hard to argue with the stats on playoff and Superbowl teams (thanks Starting Blocks)--that's how almost all of them got there.
But Bill Cowher said run-first would come back in the cycle, and he was correct. Let all the other defenses carry those extra defensive backs and focus on pass-rushers and coverage linebackers. Let them practice for five weeks to stop passing teams and then have to play a physical smash-mouth team.
I don't know about Quinn, Ratliff, or even some guy they haven't got yet, but right now I sort of think Wallace has a real shot here, despite being a short guy. (I do wish it could be Troy Smith, but alas).
Because all those aformentioned teams are also built to stop a 6'4" pocket passer who can't outsprint most safeties. With Wallace under center, playing the Browns would be a trip to the Twilight Zone.
Not to mention painful.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Pachos Corrections
1: There is NO URGENCY to replace Womack at either guard or tackle. Womack is a solid guard and did surprisingly well at right tackle--although he wasn't called upon to do much passblocking, so we can't be sure about that.
Womack is aging, and of course a pro-bowler would be better, but at the present time there is no scramble to bench him.
2: Pachos is a dominating run-blocker who may have improved his pass-blocking recently, but was injured before anybody could really confirm it. While earlier in his carreer he forced a trade rather than move inside, at this point he WILL BE competing at both guard and right tackle with Womack and Rodney Capizzifield.
Despite his unusual height for a guard, he is a powerlifting champion and could actually find it his best position. Historicly he had slow feet and weak lateral movement skills, which made the right tackle vulnerable to speed-rushers--and with Ravens and Steelers in this division, we're talking linebackers.
So it could even end up that Womack remains at right tackle, unless unseated by the Cappizifield, who is due to either prove to be a starter, or else a terminal backup.
Capizzi HAS the feet, strength, and reach to be a good-to-great right tackle do you hear me?
4: Fujita was an OUTSIDE linebacker who can play any of the four linebacker positions here. It may indeed be that he lands inside here. However, as a strongside 4-3 backer, he hasn't been USED on blitzes, so we don't know how well he'll do at it. He has all the other requisite skills to be a top-flight 3-4 OLB.
I don't know where he'll end up, but since so many other guys did well inside...since we have so MANY inside linebackers...it could be outside.
5: Jackson is not slow. His combine 40 time was mediocre, and you are an idiot if you cling to that rather than his performance in games. The Browns inside linebackers in general have about average speed for 3-4 inside linebackers, who are not expected to be as fast as safeties. The weak inside linebackers tend to be faster, and the strong inside guys need to deal with offensive line blocks in space, and you have to think with your brain about that.
6: Fujita can't pile up stats like he did at SAM and concievably be slow. To call him slow is profoundly ignorant. And he is thirty, not 33. He has something left.
Wherever Pachos ends up, the running game just got even more dominating. Wherever Fujita winds up, the defense just got smarter and deeper.
7: I repeat: The Browns were never going to waste #7 overall on a guard or right tackle. The only reason any offensive lineman goes atop the first round is his ability to play left tackle.
Left tackles make gobs of money for that reason. The rest of the offensive line positions are drafted lower for that reason.
8: While the safety Berry is awesome and would be a huge upgrade at a position of need, if you prefer him to Bradford, you are out of your mind. You think that shoulder will be an issue? Stay tuned. You think a quiet, intelligent guy can't lead? You know nothing about leadership. You think Polumalu is more important than Big Ben?
Quarterback is the ONLY critical need this team has.
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
Womack is aging, and of course a pro-bowler would be better, but at the present time there is no scramble to bench him.
2: Pachos is a dominating run-blocker who may have improved his pass-blocking recently, but was injured before anybody could really confirm it. While earlier in his carreer he forced a trade rather than move inside, at this point he WILL BE competing at both guard and right tackle with Womack and Rodney Capizzifield.
Despite his unusual height for a guard, he is a powerlifting champion and could actually find it his best position. Historicly he had slow feet and weak lateral movement skills, which made the right tackle vulnerable to speed-rushers--and with Ravens and Steelers in this division, we're talking linebackers.
So it could even end up that Womack remains at right tackle, unless unseated by the Cappizifield, who is due to either prove to be a starter, or else a terminal backup.
Capizzi HAS the feet, strength, and reach to be a good-to-great right tackle do you hear me?
4: Fujita was an OUTSIDE linebacker who can play any of the four linebacker positions here. It may indeed be that he lands inside here. However, as a strongside 4-3 backer, he hasn't been USED on blitzes, so we don't know how well he'll do at it. He has all the other requisite skills to be a top-flight 3-4 OLB.
I don't know where he'll end up, but since so many other guys did well inside...since we have so MANY inside linebackers...it could be outside.
5: Jackson is not slow. His combine 40 time was mediocre, and you are an idiot if you cling to that rather than his performance in games. The Browns inside linebackers in general have about average speed for 3-4 inside linebackers, who are not expected to be as fast as safeties. The weak inside linebackers tend to be faster, and the strong inside guys need to deal with offensive line blocks in space, and you have to think with your brain about that.
6: Fujita can't pile up stats like he did at SAM and concievably be slow. To call him slow is profoundly ignorant. And he is thirty, not 33. He has something left.
Wherever Pachos ends up, the running game just got even more dominating. Wherever Fujita winds up, the defense just got smarter and deeper.
7: I repeat: The Browns were never going to waste #7 overall on a guard or right tackle. The only reason any offensive lineman goes atop the first round is his ability to play left tackle.
Left tackles make gobs of money for that reason. The rest of the offensive line positions are drafted lower for that reason.
8: While the safety Berry is awesome and would be a huge upgrade at a position of need, if you prefer him to Bradford, you are out of your mind. You think that shoulder will be an issue? Stay tuned. You think a quiet, intelligent guy can't lead? You know nothing about leadership. You think Polumalu is more important than Big Ben?
Quarterback is the ONLY critical need this team has.
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Dismissing Bradford is Stupid
The Browns have the seventh overall pick, two thirds, four fifths, Rogers, Jackson, Quinn, and...I don't know if I can...H-h...the Ghost (God that hurt)...
And listen: Bradford is all that, absolutely. He's THE prototype West Coast QB, with rare accuracy. There may well be an opportunity here to trade up, especially since Bradford is injured, and only merely has a pretty strong arm, and not the cannon which so many think is anywhere near as important as accuracy.
A C C U R A C Y.
If you're the Rams, sure you need a quarterback, but then you need everything else too. In the real world, any quarterback you get doesn't have much protection or many weapons. You can't tell the FANS that, of course!
Realisticly, you know you have to build stuff up, and can't do it in one offseason. You need more STUFF way more than you need a quarterback who will be destroyed.
How can you make the most improvment quickest; get the most stuff fastest?
You answer the phone and say yes. Yes to #7 overall, Rogers, Quinn, and Jackson. At least Quinn can run around. And there's even one reciever in the draft who could catch his passes, given a little time to get to the general area where it might come down. (Fans are too dumb to know that the ball is twelve yards off the mark. They think if it's caught it's a good pass).
Rogers AND Jackson--you kidding me? Jeez you might discover something like an actual defense!!! Tell the fans "Well we got three players including a pro-bowl nose tackle and a first round draft pick QB". Hard to argue with that!
Now are you really going to tell me they wouldn't go for it? Why not? OK then let's toss in a fifth rounder too, how 'bout that? OK ok would you rather have Shaun Rogers or a high second round pick? If you have to think about that, go back to sleep.
Ditto Jackson, who LED THE NFL IN TACKLES two seasons ago.
I WANT BRADFORD!!! THIS guy can be as good as any QB in the NFL! Clausen and the rest--who knows? They all got warts. Bradford NEVER had a bad game, and his accuracy is natural and built-in. It can't go away. And he's definitely absolutely smart enough to use it in a West Coast offense!
As for when he'd start, ideally he doesn't right away. They need to get him some more help. He already has tight ends who can catch (especially Moore), an offense that can grind it out on the ground, Masseqoui, and (I'm confident) Robiskie.
All the defense needs to do is take up where it left off, and, with the ground game, he's kept out of carrying the team. This is exactly how the Stoolers brought Roethsenburger in. They protected him.
The Browns can do that. The Rams can't, and they know it.
There are other possibilities, of course. I'd actually rather see rogers stick around and move around on the defensive line, wreaking havoc from various angles. Much as I like D'Qwell, he's a commodity--the right quarterback is everything.
Hell, a lot of experts think the Rams really want one of the two super-DT's anyway. If that's true, then why don't you just compare them to Rogers? He's a game-changer who is better than both, and the hell with combine numbers. He's under contract, ready to go, and can't bust. AND, compared to what you'd pay for #1, he's even CHEAP! You could bribe some good free agents!
Think with your brain, for cryin' out loud!
Don't ass ume the Browns can't get Bradford. Remember, when you ass ume, you make an ass of yourself. (Feel free to use that if you want).
BRAD-FORD! BRAD-FORD! BRAD-FORD!!!
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
And listen: Bradford is all that, absolutely. He's THE prototype West Coast QB, with rare accuracy. There may well be an opportunity here to trade up, especially since Bradford is injured, and only merely has a pretty strong arm, and not the cannon which so many think is anywhere near as important as accuracy.
A C C U R A C Y.
If you're the Rams, sure you need a quarterback, but then you need everything else too. In the real world, any quarterback you get doesn't have much protection or many weapons. You can't tell the FANS that, of course!
Realisticly, you know you have to build stuff up, and can't do it in one offseason. You need more STUFF way more than you need a quarterback who will be destroyed.
How can you make the most improvment quickest; get the most stuff fastest?
You answer the phone and say yes. Yes to #7 overall, Rogers, Quinn, and Jackson. At least Quinn can run around. And there's even one reciever in the draft who could catch his passes, given a little time to get to the general area where it might come down. (Fans are too dumb to know that the ball is twelve yards off the mark. They think if it's caught it's a good pass).
Rogers AND Jackson--you kidding me? Jeez you might discover something like an actual defense!!! Tell the fans "Well we got three players including a pro-bowl nose tackle and a first round draft pick QB". Hard to argue with that!
Now are you really going to tell me they wouldn't go for it? Why not? OK then let's toss in a fifth rounder too, how 'bout that? OK ok would you rather have Shaun Rogers or a high second round pick? If you have to think about that, go back to sleep.
Ditto Jackson, who LED THE NFL IN TACKLES two seasons ago.
I WANT BRADFORD!!! THIS guy can be as good as any QB in the NFL! Clausen and the rest--who knows? They all got warts. Bradford NEVER had a bad game, and his accuracy is natural and built-in. It can't go away. And he's definitely absolutely smart enough to use it in a West Coast offense!
As for when he'd start, ideally he doesn't right away. They need to get him some more help. He already has tight ends who can catch (especially Moore), an offense that can grind it out on the ground, Masseqoui, and (I'm confident) Robiskie.
All the defense needs to do is take up where it left off, and, with the ground game, he's kept out of carrying the team. This is exactly how the Stoolers brought Roethsenburger in. They protected him.
The Browns can do that. The Rams can't, and they know it.
There are other possibilities, of course. I'd actually rather see rogers stick around and move around on the defensive line, wreaking havoc from various angles. Much as I like D'Qwell, he's a commodity--the right quarterback is everything.
Hell, a lot of experts think the Rams really want one of the two super-DT's anyway. If that's true, then why don't you just compare them to Rogers? He's a game-changer who is better than both, and the hell with combine numbers. He's under contract, ready to go, and can't bust. AND, compared to what you'd pay for #1, he's even CHEAP! You could bribe some good free agents!
Think with your brain, for cryin' out loud!
Don't ass ume the Browns can't get Bradford. Remember, when you ass ume, you make an ass of yourself. (Feel free to use that if you want).
BRAD-FORD! BRAD-FORD! BRAD-FORD!!!
YOU STAND CORRECTED.
FA Post Corrections
"Holmgren is an idiot": It sure didn't take long for some of you! This burst forth in response to the Browns getting hosed by the Lions for corey Williams. And to be sure, Williams AND A SEVENTH for a fifth was a hose job.
Well, they "should have just kept him!"
OK, this aint rocket science:
1: Williams wanted out--specificly to go back to a 4-3. Everybody in the NFL knew it, because he was starting to really crank up the bitching. If you ARE an idiot, you force this guy to stay.
2: His performance would never match his salary. The guaranteed money was astronomical. This is an uncapped year, but if you think that means Lerner should buy a championship, YOU are an idiot!
There WILL BE another cap, and all the contracts Lerner, Dan Sneider, etc. carry over into it will be ruled by it. Only an IDIOT would want to be found 20 mil over the cap!
3: By trading, rather than releasing him, they got out from under the guaranteed money, and now have that for other signings.
3a: The Lions, in turn, are stuck with it. They knew they were doing the Browns a favor, and took advantage of it.
The person who called Homgren an idiot over this is an idiot, and stands corrected.
Now, at least, the Browns have turned their seventh into a fourth fifth...
Pat Kirwin noticed that Tavares Jackson (sp?) was tendered a third round deal, and that the Browns have two third round picks. This is a small-college kid who was thrown into a west coast system, probably too soon.
He did start out quite well, but went downhill fast once the defensive coordinators got some film of him. This is pretty common. He was replaced before he could get a handle on that.
I lack information on him, but I do know that he is extremely athletic, strong-armed, and pretty accurate. The two things Holmgren will no doubt be able to determine for himself are, does he have the heart, and is he smart enough to run this complex system?
Just sayin: it's a possibility: A third for Jackson, who is still fairly young, and has some real experience in this very system.
Matt Flynn of the Packers won a National Championship, and has had two years in a west coast system. How bout that?
Fujita would be a sweet signing, since he's just thirty, and was with the Saints from the basement to the Superbowl, calling the defensive signals IN the Superbowl. The Browns would really like to have this guy in the locker room telling stories and stuff.
Now, he's a 4-3 SAM. Local reporters ASS UME that he'd play inside here. But he's 6'3", 250, can cover TE's, defeat blocks, and based on his tackle stats (at that position especially), he can really MOVE, so don't make any such assumption.
Because he wasn't USED on blitzes doesn't mean he can't play OLB here. I'm not saying that he would be, just that he could be. The reporters no doubt had in mind the hallucinated need for an inside linebacker, and a whole bunch pf premature obituaties. RIP's on Benard, Maiava, Trusnik, et al.
D'Qwell was tendered with a second-rounder, but the Browns have the right to match any offer. Calm the hell down. And anyway, a second rounder might just be a deal. Things change. Fujita, for example, might be able to do well at the weak inside position.
Maiava, who is about the same size as London Fletcher, in fact started there and did well, perhaps in the eyes of the coaches making D'Qwell expendable. I know that the notion of Mangini scoring on another low-round pick is horrifying to some, but I'm afraid that this could be the case.
Trading Williams does NOT preclude a Rogers trade. Once again, some reporters are ASS UMING again. The guys they dis are: Coleman, who should be fine for another season and is an EXCELLENT (if unsung) 3-4 DE (especially vs. the run). CJ Mosely, who (word to Oblivia) has emerged as a pretty good 3/4 DE himself. Mosely is best as a pass-rushing penetrator, and needed to work on defeating blocks as a 2-gapper. He has now succeeded in doing that.
I know that it's more convenient to assume stagnation and not think, but I'm unable to shut my brain down, so there it is. I am very sorry that both of the aforementioned are ex-Jets.
Brian Schaefering: A college nose tackle with surprising speed. Two seasons ago released from the Browns practice squad, picked up by the Jets, signed here by Mangini just in time to emerge as a solid and improving 3-4 DE. (You really need to work on this: Young players have a strong tendancy to improve, and while you were busy carefully ignoring him, Schaefering was making some real good plays!)
Robaire Smith: Getting long in the tooth; will probably be used less to preserve him--but still very solid, and able to stop-gap at NT.
There are other guys that I don't know about, but RUBIN even YOU know about, so there's that.
Really it would be best to have two real nose tackles, since they take such abuse and should be relieved and rested. In a perfect world, Rogers stays (and plays more DE, where he should have been all along). But his retention is NOT critical, as the Browns have a solid group of defensive ends and at least one solid nose tackle.
If Rogers is of more use to move up in the draft or trade for a real quarterback or WR or something, that will happen.
I like the interest in the ex-OSU guard named ROB. You can't miss with a name like that. He started in Seattle and has turned into a pretty good player.
Reporters ASS UMING that this would leave Womack at RT may be correct, since he did a pretty good job there--but once again they already have Capizzi's gravestone all engraved and ass ume he won't be any better than he was as a rookie.
They ASS UME that this would mean that the Browns no longer would use a high draft pick on an offensive lineman, but they are wrong.
In the first place, they were NEVER going to use a high first for a left tackle they would pay more than Thomas and have play right tackle, which would be idiotic.
In the second place, if a real stud slid into the second or third round and was the best player available, they'd pull that trigger. They have Thomas and Mack, and the other guys vary from adequate to pretty good. If you can upgrade that, you do it.
Gil Brandt must really focus on the draft, and not pay much attention to losing teams. He said of Harrison "He's not real big and not real fast", and "he's a good second or third back". Even as he ackowleged the third highest rushing game in NFL history, he pointed out that the Browns offensive line had Joe Thomas and is otherwise average.
This stuff drives me nuts, and I hear it on NFL radio every day. OK so he runs for 280-odd yards despite an "average" offensive line but he's a "good" second or third back. It's just impossible to rationally torture logic into these shapes! My god!
MACK is average? FIVE 100-plus yard games and he's a second or third? How can an offensive line be "average" when the other running backs did pretty well too?
I get it: Mike Holmgren told a story of how once he was going to draft a 5'8" running back. Ron Wolfe came back with a printout, showing that Barry Sanders and one other guy were the only 5'8" running backs that did anything. So he didn't draft the guy.
Well, I don't see the problem! Harrison is five-NINE!
Anyway, I wonder how many of those little short guys just never got a CHANCE!? JEEEEEZ could it be that Jerome isn't the only 6 YPC pass-catching running back to get no chance until everybody else got hurt? How many short 6YPC running backs collected splinters til they retired because coaches ignored everything they did?
Could it be that despite what he did last season, none of it mattered? Is even Mike Holmgren standing there with a printout pretending it didn't happen? This shit is just madness!
I can't defer to NFL pros on this, man! He DID it! He's DONE it in every offensive scheme and with every offensive line he's had, every time he was on the field! Why do you GIVE a shit how short he is are you INSANE!?
Of course, Holmgren told that story in reference to why the height of quarterbacks matters, and why Brees is a rare exception. In that context, I can see it, since you can't hit what you can't see, and helmet-high trajectories are bad.
I hold out hope that he isn't some Martonian blockhead about Harrison's height trumping his PROVEN ABILITY.
Ron Jaworskie knows more about quarterbacks than you or I. HE SAID that Derrick Anderson could be a very good quarterback with a little support.
This is the difference between an objective pro who studies game films and a barstool GM in Cleveland. HE sees what he sees. YOU see what you expect to see. Jaws got no dog in this fight.
Don't count DA out.
You stand corrected.
Well, they "should have just kept him!"
OK, this aint rocket science:
1: Williams wanted out--specificly to go back to a 4-3. Everybody in the NFL knew it, because he was starting to really crank up the bitching. If you ARE an idiot, you force this guy to stay.
2: His performance would never match his salary. The guaranteed money was astronomical. This is an uncapped year, but if you think that means Lerner should buy a championship, YOU are an idiot!
There WILL BE another cap, and all the contracts Lerner, Dan Sneider, etc. carry over into it will be ruled by it. Only an IDIOT would want to be found 20 mil over the cap!
3: By trading, rather than releasing him, they got out from under the guaranteed money, and now have that for other signings.
3a: The Lions, in turn, are stuck with it. They knew they were doing the Browns a favor, and took advantage of it.
The person who called Homgren an idiot over this is an idiot, and stands corrected.
Now, at least, the Browns have turned their seventh into a fourth fifth...
Pat Kirwin noticed that Tavares Jackson (sp?) was tendered a third round deal, and that the Browns have two third round picks. This is a small-college kid who was thrown into a west coast system, probably too soon.
He did start out quite well, but went downhill fast once the defensive coordinators got some film of him. This is pretty common. He was replaced before he could get a handle on that.
I lack information on him, but I do know that he is extremely athletic, strong-armed, and pretty accurate. The two things Holmgren will no doubt be able to determine for himself are, does he have the heart, and is he smart enough to run this complex system?
Just sayin: it's a possibility: A third for Jackson, who is still fairly young, and has some real experience in this very system.
Matt Flynn of the Packers won a National Championship, and has had two years in a west coast system. How bout that?
Fujita would be a sweet signing, since he's just thirty, and was with the Saints from the basement to the Superbowl, calling the defensive signals IN the Superbowl. The Browns would really like to have this guy in the locker room telling stories and stuff.
Now, he's a 4-3 SAM. Local reporters ASS UME that he'd play inside here. But he's 6'3", 250, can cover TE's, defeat blocks, and based on his tackle stats (at that position especially), he can really MOVE, so don't make any such assumption.
Because he wasn't USED on blitzes doesn't mean he can't play OLB here. I'm not saying that he would be, just that he could be. The reporters no doubt had in mind the hallucinated need for an inside linebacker, and a whole bunch pf premature obituaties. RIP's on Benard, Maiava, Trusnik, et al.
D'Qwell was tendered with a second-rounder, but the Browns have the right to match any offer. Calm the hell down. And anyway, a second rounder might just be a deal. Things change. Fujita, for example, might be able to do well at the weak inside position.
Maiava, who is about the same size as London Fletcher, in fact started there and did well, perhaps in the eyes of the coaches making D'Qwell expendable. I know that the notion of Mangini scoring on another low-round pick is horrifying to some, but I'm afraid that this could be the case.
Trading Williams does NOT preclude a Rogers trade. Once again, some reporters are ASS UMING again. The guys they dis are: Coleman, who should be fine for another season and is an EXCELLENT (if unsung) 3-4 DE (especially vs. the run). CJ Mosely, who (word to Oblivia) has emerged as a pretty good 3/4 DE himself. Mosely is best as a pass-rushing penetrator, and needed to work on defeating blocks as a 2-gapper. He has now succeeded in doing that.
I know that it's more convenient to assume stagnation and not think, but I'm unable to shut my brain down, so there it is. I am very sorry that both of the aforementioned are ex-Jets.
Brian Schaefering: A college nose tackle with surprising speed. Two seasons ago released from the Browns practice squad, picked up by the Jets, signed here by Mangini just in time to emerge as a solid and improving 3-4 DE. (You really need to work on this: Young players have a strong tendancy to improve, and while you were busy carefully ignoring him, Schaefering was making some real good plays!)
Robaire Smith: Getting long in the tooth; will probably be used less to preserve him--but still very solid, and able to stop-gap at NT.
There are other guys that I don't know about, but RUBIN even YOU know about, so there's that.
Really it would be best to have two real nose tackles, since they take such abuse and should be relieved and rested. In a perfect world, Rogers stays (and plays more DE, where he should have been all along). But his retention is NOT critical, as the Browns have a solid group of defensive ends and at least one solid nose tackle.
If Rogers is of more use to move up in the draft or trade for a real quarterback or WR or something, that will happen.
I like the interest in the ex-OSU guard named ROB. You can't miss with a name like that. He started in Seattle and has turned into a pretty good player.
Reporters ASS UMING that this would leave Womack at RT may be correct, since he did a pretty good job there--but once again they already have Capizzi's gravestone all engraved and ass ume he won't be any better than he was as a rookie.
They ASS UME that this would mean that the Browns no longer would use a high draft pick on an offensive lineman, but they are wrong.
In the first place, they were NEVER going to use a high first for a left tackle they would pay more than Thomas and have play right tackle, which would be idiotic.
In the second place, if a real stud slid into the second or third round and was the best player available, they'd pull that trigger. They have Thomas and Mack, and the other guys vary from adequate to pretty good. If you can upgrade that, you do it.
Gil Brandt must really focus on the draft, and not pay much attention to losing teams. He said of Harrison "He's not real big and not real fast", and "he's a good second or third back". Even as he ackowleged the third highest rushing game in NFL history, he pointed out that the Browns offensive line had Joe Thomas and is otherwise average.
This stuff drives me nuts, and I hear it on NFL radio every day. OK so he runs for 280-odd yards despite an "average" offensive line but he's a "good" second or third back. It's just impossible to rationally torture logic into these shapes! My god!
MACK is average? FIVE 100-plus yard games and he's a second or third? How can an offensive line be "average" when the other running backs did pretty well too?
I get it: Mike Holmgren told a story of how once he was going to draft a 5'8" running back. Ron Wolfe came back with a printout, showing that Barry Sanders and one other guy were the only 5'8" running backs that did anything. So he didn't draft the guy.
Well, I don't see the problem! Harrison is five-NINE!
Anyway, I wonder how many of those little short guys just never got a CHANCE!? JEEEEEZ could it be that Jerome isn't the only 6 YPC pass-catching running back to get no chance until everybody else got hurt? How many short 6YPC running backs collected splinters til they retired because coaches ignored everything they did?
Could it be that despite what he did last season, none of it mattered? Is even Mike Holmgren standing there with a printout pretending it didn't happen? This shit is just madness!
I can't defer to NFL pros on this, man! He DID it! He's DONE it in every offensive scheme and with every offensive line he's had, every time he was on the field! Why do you GIVE a shit how short he is are you INSANE!?
Of course, Holmgren told that story in reference to why the height of quarterbacks matters, and why Brees is a rare exception. In that context, I can see it, since you can't hit what you can't see, and helmet-high trajectories are bad.
I hold out hope that he isn't some Martonian blockhead about Harrison's height trumping his PROVEN ABILITY.
Ron Jaworskie knows more about quarterbacks than you or I. HE SAID that Derrick Anderson could be a very good quarterback with a little support.
This is the difference between an objective pro who studies game films and a barstool GM in Cleveland. HE sees what he sees. YOU see what you expect to see. Jaws got no dog in this fight.
Don't count DA out.
You stand corrected.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Let the Heckert-bashing Begin!
Last season, everybody was all over Mangini for bringing in a bunch on Jets and some depth-players instead of blowing his entire budget for years to come on one or two geezer name-players.
Everybody just ass umed (and you should never ass ume, because when you ass ume, you make an ass of yourself)--that these guys were all intended to start, rather than Parcells "hold-the-fort" guys at bargain-basement prices.
Well, I just read that the Browns haven't pursued Chester Taylor. DUH. Nor did they try to pay Julius Peppers 12.5 million bucks. You guys just want to grab everybody you ever heard of, don't you?
Behind the scenes they might well have tried for Cromartie, despite his ole-tackling skills, but Rob's bro had all the leverage.
Bidding on DE Banning from the Ratbirds...very intersting there! I like that, especially since you never heard of him! He's pretty damn good!
Thomas Jones? I bet they ARE chasing HIM, but you know--the Browns, due to their record and QB situation, might not have a chance unless overpaying can trump his desire to get to the Superbowl. Some of you will blame Heckert for that. Like he wan't trying hard enough or something.
Look--the Browns HAVE a small, fast, pass-catching, game-breaking running back. They don't want to burn him out, so they want people to platoon and to play with him in a two-back, and that's a big guy.
Plus, it's NOT a priority! There is nothing wrong with James Davis! Davis is a lot like Earnest Byner. If they don't sign anybody better, or even draft anybody better, they just need to upgrade the depth behind those two.
That's simply because they probably intend to have a two-back base, which conventionally means three active running backs and (sometimes) two fullbacks on game day. The third back isn't there to collect splinters, either--all of them are used during the game,and they should be different from eachother.
When Mikey said "D E P T H at running back" he meant that for the season he'd really need at least five who could play. Three obstensibly active, and a couple more on-deck for injuries.
Much is made about Mangini's reluctance to declare Harrison "the man". Well, evidently he had a problem with Harrison's work ethic, and wants to make sure Harrison understands tha the will not be allowed to skate. I personally think he's kinda nuts expecting Harrison to block guys that outweigh him by 60 lbs. and have about 12" in real reach on him, but he's the Coach.
Further, the intent seems to be to platoon heavily anyway in order to mess up defenses and preserve the backs, so even though Harrison probably gets the most touches, it's not accurate to call him "the man".
Quit making a big deal out of trivia. Leave that to the pros. I was trained to make mountains out of mole-hills! If the mole-hills don't fit, you must...uh...just quit.
I'm pretty disappointed if all they get out of Williams is a low round pick, but when Detroit knows you don't want that salary on your books, they've got all the leverage. I just hope it's a 4th-rounder or multiples.
Okbye.
Everybody just ass umed (and you should never ass ume, because when you ass ume, you make an ass of yourself)--that these guys were all intended to start, rather than Parcells "hold-the-fort" guys at bargain-basement prices.
Well, I just read that the Browns haven't pursued Chester Taylor. DUH. Nor did they try to pay Julius Peppers 12.5 million bucks. You guys just want to grab everybody you ever heard of, don't you?
Behind the scenes they might well have tried for Cromartie, despite his ole-tackling skills, but Rob's bro had all the leverage.
Bidding on DE Banning from the Ratbirds...very intersting there! I like that, especially since you never heard of him! He's pretty damn good!
Thomas Jones? I bet they ARE chasing HIM, but you know--the Browns, due to their record and QB situation, might not have a chance unless overpaying can trump his desire to get to the Superbowl. Some of you will blame Heckert for that. Like he wan't trying hard enough or something.
Look--the Browns HAVE a small, fast, pass-catching, game-breaking running back. They don't want to burn him out, so they want people to platoon and to play with him in a two-back, and that's a big guy.
Plus, it's NOT a priority! There is nothing wrong with James Davis! Davis is a lot like Earnest Byner. If they don't sign anybody better, or even draft anybody better, they just need to upgrade the depth behind those two.
That's simply because they probably intend to have a two-back base, which conventionally means three active running backs and (sometimes) two fullbacks on game day. The third back isn't there to collect splinters, either--all of them are used during the game,and they should be different from eachother.
When Mikey said "D E P T H at running back" he meant that for the season he'd really need at least five who could play. Three obstensibly active, and a couple more on-deck for injuries.
Much is made about Mangini's reluctance to declare Harrison "the man". Well, evidently he had a problem with Harrison's work ethic, and wants to make sure Harrison understands tha the will not be allowed to skate. I personally think he's kinda nuts expecting Harrison to block guys that outweigh him by 60 lbs. and have about 12" in real reach on him, but he's the Coach.
Further, the intent seems to be to platoon heavily anyway in order to mess up defenses and preserve the backs, so even though Harrison probably gets the most touches, it's not accurate to call him "the man".
Quit making a big deal out of trivia. Leave that to the pros. I was trained to make mountains out of mole-hills! If the mole-hills don't fit, you must...uh...just quit.
I'm pretty disappointed if all they get out of Williams is a low round pick, but when Detroit knows you don't want that salary on your books, they've got all the leverage. I just hope it's a 4th-rounder or multiples.
Okbye.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)