The rumor that Josh Cribbs could be available for a trade might be true. Being ruled by my brain and not being inclined to hero worship, as GM I would have most of the team available for a trade. I love the guy, and furthermore don't think he's too old or too expensive. People keep talking about his big salary, but as I recall his contract was laden with incentives, most of which he didn't meet last season.
But there are other things I read about this that ass ume a lot of don't compute.
For one thing, I sort of doubt that his comments about retaining Mangini were an issue. At least two or three other players made similar comments.
Next, who said the flash offense (or whatever) was dead? Why?
Next, what was said of him as a wide reciever is true. He might have become as good as he will be, he doesn't run patterns as well as the other guys, etc. Ok.
But refer to my last blog. He's not a good fit as a West Coast wide reciever, bit he IS a great fit as a West Coast running back. I'll BET you right now that if he isn't traded, he will be worked in there (where he probably should have been all along.)
The "labor" (hahahahaha) situation could preclude any trades, but if it doesn't, I wonder how much interest there would be in him. While he does have the incentives, his base salary still isn't insignificant. While I feel that his decline last season was a bump caused by injury and fatigue, other teams would be wary.
They probably wouldn't get a very good offer for him.
Now, some would question him as a running back due to the fact that he doesn't have a fast start. He's not as quick to the hole as he should be.
But this will be a West Coast-like offense. This offense uses more recievers and sending them wide (ps Moore would be one of these, often). This pulls defenders away from the middle, and also forces a couple of them to play farther back than they want to. This makes it difficult to stack the line.
An explosive first step is the least important attribute for a West Coast running back. If the target hole closes too quickly, the West Coast back improvises. With so much of the defense backed up and pulled toward the sidelines, it's impossible for them to cover every gap.
Cribbs has the vision, recieving skills, and broken-field niftiniess to be damn near a prototype running back in the West Coast. It's made for him.
Rogers is another story. I was frustrated by him last season. I know he was injured early, and might not have fully recovered. But he also got real real FAT, and at his age I think he might be in trouble with the new staff.
It's no mystery when one of these monsters gets leg problems. Their joints were never intended to support that much weight. it's worse for Rogers, because the best way to block him is to cut his legs.
With his salary, and at his age, I don't think the Browns could get anything for him. He could be released.
If he is, some of you will need to get over it.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Superbowl
I'm not like most Browns fans in that I sometimes suspend my hatred of the Stoolers. I figure if I can't root for the Browns I'd like to see the AFC North win. Stoolers or Ratbird victories make the Browns look a little less crappy, and also place the highest challenge right here.
Many fans hearing this will call me a...what--a heretic, or something. See previous post.
Anyway, I do give the edge to the Packers by a hair. I only have a few reasons for this.
For one, Pouncey won't play, which is good news for BJ Raji. Next, the Stoolers tackles are just okay, and one is ancient. Clay Matthews loves that.
Couple this with Big Ben. When Big Ben plays the Browns, he is often in the grasp for three seconds between the tackles, on his way down to the ground (at a 45 degree angle), and sort of dribbles the ball to the nearest available bare spot. It's always called an incomplete pass, and never intentional grounding or in-the-grasp (sack).
That won't work in the Superbowl. Here the refs will have to call a legitimate game. So Big Ben will lose perhaps his biggest advantage.
I don't blame Ben for taking advantage of this obvious bias. I would too. But I fully expect him to try it in this game, and wonder why all of a sudden they're treating him like the rest of the quarterbacks in the NFL. Hopefully, he'll get flustered by it.
And then, unlike the Browns "tacklers", the Packers won't dribble off him. Matthews and co. won't let him fool around like that. He'll have to intentionally ground the ball before he's hit.
And, too, I like the West Coast and Rodgers (PS the quarterback has a "d" in his name. Out defensive lineman doesn't. Two different names. Get literate, please). Hampton and Kiesel are old geezers, and Rodgers gets rid of it quickly. It will be harder for Harrison and company to get at him, and it might be foolish to take them out of coverage to try it.
Oh--and "I play the way I was taught to play" Harrison: Mister why is everybody always picking on me loves to hit other guys in the helmet and try to break their necks or put them in comas. He is obviously a vicous, sadistic, and perhaps sociopathic player who simply can't resist inflicting the greatest possible lasting or permanent damage on his fellow football players.
Should be good for some penalties. And by the way, mike Tomlin is an apologist and an enabler who deserves to lose for that reason alone.
Taught to play that way? Navy Seals and terrorists aren't football players, and anyway Harrison never was one, so that's a lie.
Polumalu can only blow up so many plays per game, and might be hindered by his hammy. If he's leaping tall offensive lines at a single bound, he's not in coverage, and Rodgers can move (and scramble).
AND aside from Troy and one corner, the rest of the secondary isn't the greatest--especially in nickels and dimes--which the Pack will no doubt seek to keep them in all day long.
I will be watching this game to see how a properly executed West Coast offense works against this defense.
Thoughts on that:
1: The Browns don't have the Packers recievers, but I repeat that both MoMass and Robiskie are better suited to the West Coast than to conventional offenses. Robiskie is not explosive and will never gain much separation, but with an accurate quarterback has a height/size advantage on cornerbacks.
MoMass is more explosive and does get more separation, plus runs like a back with the ball.
The West Coast uses many shallow slants and crosses tailor made for these two players to make the most of their gifts.
2: As much as I love Cribbs the returner, I'd like to see him replaced by some of the quite capable other guys in some of those special teams roles so that he could remain healthy and fresh as a reciever, running back, and gimmick quarterback.
He has made big strides as a reciever. Last season, Hillis and Watson were prolific as hell, so he didn't get that many targets.
And yeah I said "running back". In the West Coast, this might be his best position, since he'd be catching it in space more than running it anyway. In the absence of a drafted or FA waterbug change-up for Hillis, that's one fo the ways I'd use Cribbs.
As a WR, his patterns still aren't as precise as they need to be, and he has trouble with jams. From the backfield, he's jam-proof and can even juke before he crosses the line to shake coverage. They have to cover him softer.
3: Both Moore and Watson will be excellent in the West Coast, and definitely, for sure, they will BOTH be on the field more often here.
Picture Moore and Watson with Robiske and MoMass, then either Hillis or Cribbs in the backfield. If all four of the down guys go out for a pass, you've almost got to keep at least five back in coverage, inc. one safety over the top. Both tight ends are unmatchable with an unsual size/speed combination, and will be open early and usually not far from the quarterback, and between the hashes.
MoMass can beat single coverage all day long. As a rookie, he was beating doubles consistantly in the last half of 2009, and with two bad quarterbacks. He's not a burner, but is pretty fast and dangerous. If the Browns can't land a real burner in the offseason, in this scenario MoMass can be a real threat.
I love Hillis in the West Coast. It's tailor-made for a guy with his skill-set. He'd last much longer in it, too, because he could avoid a lot of the punishment he took being a human battering-ram. He'd get the ball outside and in space more often, with a chance to see what's coming at him, rather than in a tight space with the whole defense focussed on his hole.
Ditto Cribbs, who I repeat I would phase partly out of special teams and make more a running back than in-line reciever. As a reciever he can make tough catches now, but as a West Coast running back, he can catch the ball in space, and do what he does every time he catches a punt or kickoff!
Think about that. On punts and kickoffs, the leg puts the ball in a certain place, and the entire coverage unit is collapsing towards him. As a running back, he'd often get the ball with defenders pulled all over the place and trying to reverse directions. As a returner, he only got the ball a few times per-game. Just imagine if he got it two or three times as often, and usually much closer to the enemy goal line.
Tell me where I'm wrong. Go ahead, tell me. We need playmakers? Well, we got one, anyway, if they'd just use him right!
No, the offense isn't by any means complete, but I regard a young right tackle as more important than a fast wide-out, and a running back (you know like the TWO they just got rid of dammit?) to offset/spell Hillis could be forestalled.
For that matter, just like most teams, almost every position could be upgraded. I never said anything was perfect. Thomas is as good as it gets, and I really like Watson, and Mack, and Hillis...and even Moore, who should finally get a real opportunity to make me look smart. And Cribbs, of course. And I have much confidence in a healthy, experienced McCoy in a Colt-freindly system with great coaching. But EVERY other position could be upgraded. I'd rather have Bradford than McCoy, for that matter (but don't tell Colt I said so, and in this system Colt might even out-do him).
Is that understood?
In conclusion, USE CRIBBS AT RUNNING BACK 33% of the time, use Moore WITH Watson, and this should be a highly-competitive offense.
I HAVE SPOKEN.
Many fans hearing this will call me a...what--a heretic, or something. See previous post.
Anyway, I do give the edge to the Packers by a hair. I only have a few reasons for this.
For one, Pouncey won't play, which is good news for BJ Raji. Next, the Stoolers tackles are just okay, and one is ancient. Clay Matthews loves that.
Couple this with Big Ben. When Big Ben plays the Browns, he is often in the grasp for three seconds between the tackles, on his way down to the ground (at a 45 degree angle), and sort of dribbles the ball to the nearest available bare spot. It's always called an incomplete pass, and never intentional grounding or in-the-grasp (sack).
That won't work in the Superbowl. Here the refs will have to call a legitimate game. So Big Ben will lose perhaps his biggest advantage.
I don't blame Ben for taking advantage of this obvious bias. I would too. But I fully expect him to try it in this game, and wonder why all of a sudden they're treating him like the rest of the quarterbacks in the NFL. Hopefully, he'll get flustered by it.
And then, unlike the Browns "tacklers", the Packers won't dribble off him. Matthews and co. won't let him fool around like that. He'll have to intentionally ground the ball before he's hit.
And, too, I like the West Coast and Rodgers (PS the quarterback has a "d" in his name. Out defensive lineman doesn't. Two different names. Get literate, please). Hampton and Kiesel are old geezers, and Rodgers gets rid of it quickly. It will be harder for Harrison and company to get at him, and it might be foolish to take them out of coverage to try it.
Oh--and "I play the way I was taught to play" Harrison: Mister why is everybody always picking on me loves to hit other guys in the helmet and try to break their necks or put them in comas. He is obviously a vicous, sadistic, and perhaps sociopathic player who simply can't resist inflicting the greatest possible lasting or permanent damage on his fellow football players.
Should be good for some penalties. And by the way, mike Tomlin is an apologist and an enabler who deserves to lose for that reason alone.
Taught to play that way? Navy Seals and terrorists aren't football players, and anyway Harrison never was one, so that's a lie.
Polumalu can only blow up so many plays per game, and might be hindered by his hammy. If he's leaping tall offensive lines at a single bound, he's not in coverage, and Rodgers can move (and scramble).
AND aside from Troy and one corner, the rest of the secondary isn't the greatest--especially in nickels and dimes--which the Pack will no doubt seek to keep them in all day long.
I will be watching this game to see how a properly executed West Coast offense works against this defense.
Thoughts on that:
1: The Browns don't have the Packers recievers, but I repeat that both MoMass and Robiskie are better suited to the West Coast than to conventional offenses. Robiskie is not explosive and will never gain much separation, but with an accurate quarterback has a height/size advantage on cornerbacks.
MoMass is more explosive and does get more separation, plus runs like a back with the ball.
The West Coast uses many shallow slants and crosses tailor made for these two players to make the most of their gifts.
2: As much as I love Cribbs the returner, I'd like to see him replaced by some of the quite capable other guys in some of those special teams roles so that he could remain healthy and fresh as a reciever, running back, and gimmick quarterback.
He has made big strides as a reciever. Last season, Hillis and Watson were prolific as hell, so he didn't get that many targets.
And yeah I said "running back". In the West Coast, this might be his best position, since he'd be catching it in space more than running it anyway. In the absence of a drafted or FA waterbug change-up for Hillis, that's one fo the ways I'd use Cribbs.
As a WR, his patterns still aren't as precise as they need to be, and he has trouble with jams. From the backfield, he's jam-proof and can even juke before he crosses the line to shake coverage. They have to cover him softer.
3: Both Moore and Watson will be excellent in the West Coast, and definitely, for sure, they will BOTH be on the field more often here.
Picture Moore and Watson with Robiske and MoMass, then either Hillis or Cribbs in the backfield. If all four of the down guys go out for a pass, you've almost got to keep at least five back in coverage, inc. one safety over the top. Both tight ends are unmatchable with an unsual size/speed combination, and will be open early and usually not far from the quarterback, and between the hashes.
MoMass can beat single coverage all day long. As a rookie, he was beating doubles consistantly in the last half of 2009, and with two bad quarterbacks. He's not a burner, but is pretty fast and dangerous. If the Browns can't land a real burner in the offseason, in this scenario MoMass can be a real threat.
I love Hillis in the West Coast. It's tailor-made for a guy with his skill-set. He'd last much longer in it, too, because he could avoid a lot of the punishment he took being a human battering-ram. He'd get the ball outside and in space more often, with a chance to see what's coming at him, rather than in a tight space with the whole defense focussed on his hole.
Ditto Cribbs, who I repeat I would phase partly out of special teams and make more a running back than in-line reciever. As a reciever he can make tough catches now, but as a West Coast running back, he can catch the ball in space, and do what he does every time he catches a punt or kickoff!
Think about that. On punts and kickoffs, the leg puts the ball in a certain place, and the entire coverage unit is collapsing towards him. As a running back, he'd often get the ball with defenders pulled all over the place and trying to reverse directions. As a returner, he only got the ball a few times per-game. Just imagine if he got it two or three times as often, and usually much closer to the enemy goal line.
Tell me where I'm wrong. Go ahead, tell me. We need playmakers? Well, we got one, anyway, if they'd just use him right!
No, the offense isn't by any means complete, but I regard a young right tackle as more important than a fast wide-out, and a running back (you know like the TWO they just got rid of dammit?) to offset/spell Hillis could be forestalled.
For that matter, just like most teams, almost every position could be upgraded. I never said anything was perfect. Thomas is as good as it gets, and I really like Watson, and Mack, and Hillis...and even Moore, who should finally get a real opportunity to make me look smart. And Cribbs, of course. And I have much confidence in a healthy, experienced McCoy in a Colt-freindly system with great coaching. But EVERY other position could be upgraded. I'd rather have Bradford than McCoy, for that matter (but don't tell Colt I said so, and in this system Colt might even out-do him).
Is that understood?
In conclusion, USE CRIBBS AT RUNNING BACK 33% of the time, use Moore WITH Watson, and this should be a highly-competitive offense.
I HAVE SPOKEN.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Memorex Morons
Here's a great example of some idjut with excrement-colored glasses scrupulously cherry-picking facts to back up what he already made up his mind about:
Whipple, big deal! Rottenburgers had a cannon arm, touch, couldn't be tackled, had quick feet...ergo Whipple had nothing to do with his success.
Rottenburgers was a ROOKIE. The only ROOKIE quarterback in history to be that good was Dan Marino. (Well, Kyle Orton did pretty well too). Ben went to Pittsburgh clueless about the NFL and OBVIOUSLY needed a teacher.
It's not that this clown can't tell the difference between three year veterans and rookies. It's just that that's inconvenient when your objective is to find some way to bash the credentials of a new hire, and bash the people who hired him--thus bashing the organization you've spent your life campaigning against.
Have you ever tried to watch a game sitting near one of these fools? They find ways to blame the quarterback and reciever both for every interception. And also the coach for calling the play. They make everyone around them miserable. EVERYTHING sucks. There goes all the oxygen and sunshine. Oh god here he comes again.
And this clown is hammering away on the internet, bashing every single move they make.
Let me try to think like this guy. Shouldn't be too hard--I sort of did when I was five or six. When I looked out the window on Xmas Eve and saw Santa's sleigh flying across the moon.
First I need a premise. Hmm...oh I know! Colt mcCoy sucks!
OK but he out-did Wallace, Delhomme, and everybody from last season as a rookie. But fortunately for me, he fell on his face in the last few games. So I need to pretend all the other games don't matter, and focus on the last three. Cooincidentally, it was December, so I get to say that the reason he sucks is that he can't play in bad weather.
But he had a lot of bad weather wins in college. Nevermind that. I'll just hope nobody mentions it. I get away with stuff all the time when people are even dumber than me.
See how it works? It's the scientific method: First, decide what you believe. Next, filter everything you hear and see so that only the stuff that "proves" your point gets through!
Of course, my version is much more sophisticated, since I'm doing it deliberately, and being analytical. Guys who think like this have their analytical minds shut down. That's why when you show them they're wrong, they just dig in and get more insistant (and usually emotional).
Really, Joe Twelve Pack no longer represents them, since he instead changes the subject every time I nail him. That way, he can pretend he wasn't just slammed. These guys tend to just raise their voices and personally insult you.
In re McCoy: Actually Sancez hit his wall, and so did Big Ben. The Stoolers won their playoff games in his rookie season despite Ben, who was putrid in the playoffs.
Grossi might be right about Colt's arm. I don't insult the guy, who sees more film than me and just tells us what he sees. I don't want to hear that stuff, but it might be accurate.
Thing is, Colt's shoulder injury wasn't completely healed, and I have seen him zip some long sideliners etc., so I know that he has the arm, at least sometimes. Further, ex-QB Jim Miller insists that arm strength can be increased. Miller said that he himself had to work on it coming out of college, and he wound up regarded as a very strong arm.
I'd also point out to Tony that Joe Montana did indeed exist. Kosar's arm was shot when he twice reached the AFC Championship. Who was Seattle's QB when they reached the Superbowl?
Anyway, for objective people, the overall picture is much more positive than negative. You just have to ignore the goobers with the crap-colored glasses.
Whipple, big deal! Rottenburgers had a cannon arm, touch, couldn't be tackled, had quick feet...ergo Whipple had nothing to do with his success.
Rottenburgers was a ROOKIE. The only ROOKIE quarterback in history to be that good was Dan Marino. (Well, Kyle Orton did pretty well too). Ben went to Pittsburgh clueless about the NFL and OBVIOUSLY needed a teacher.
It's not that this clown can't tell the difference between three year veterans and rookies. It's just that that's inconvenient when your objective is to find some way to bash the credentials of a new hire, and bash the people who hired him--thus bashing the organization you've spent your life campaigning against.
Have you ever tried to watch a game sitting near one of these fools? They find ways to blame the quarterback and reciever both for every interception. And also the coach for calling the play. They make everyone around them miserable. EVERYTHING sucks. There goes all the oxygen and sunshine. Oh god here he comes again.
And this clown is hammering away on the internet, bashing every single move they make.
Let me try to think like this guy. Shouldn't be too hard--I sort of did when I was five or six. When I looked out the window on Xmas Eve and saw Santa's sleigh flying across the moon.
First I need a premise. Hmm...oh I know! Colt mcCoy sucks!
OK but he out-did Wallace, Delhomme, and everybody from last season as a rookie. But fortunately for me, he fell on his face in the last few games. So I need to pretend all the other games don't matter, and focus on the last three. Cooincidentally, it was December, so I get to say that the reason he sucks is that he can't play in bad weather.
But he had a lot of bad weather wins in college. Nevermind that. I'll just hope nobody mentions it. I get away with stuff all the time when people are even dumber than me.
See how it works? It's the scientific method: First, decide what you believe. Next, filter everything you hear and see so that only the stuff that "proves" your point gets through!
Of course, my version is much more sophisticated, since I'm doing it deliberately, and being analytical. Guys who think like this have their analytical minds shut down. That's why when you show them they're wrong, they just dig in and get more insistant (and usually emotional).
Really, Joe Twelve Pack no longer represents them, since he instead changes the subject every time I nail him. That way, he can pretend he wasn't just slammed. These guys tend to just raise their voices and personally insult you.
In re McCoy: Actually Sancez hit his wall, and so did Big Ben. The Stoolers won their playoff games in his rookie season despite Ben, who was putrid in the playoffs.
Grossi might be right about Colt's arm. I don't insult the guy, who sees more film than me and just tells us what he sees. I don't want to hear that stuff, but it might be accurate.
Thing is, Colt's shoulder injury wasn't completely healed, and I have seen him zip some long sideliners etc., so I know that he has the arm, at least sometimes. Further, ex-QB Jim Miller insists that arm strength can be increased. Miller said that he himself had to work on it coming out of college, and he wound up regarded as a very strong arm.
I'd also point out to Tony that Joe Montana did indeed exist. Kosar's arm was shot when he twice reached the AFC Championship. Who was Seattle's QB when they reached the Superbowl?
Anyway, for objective people, the overall picture is much more positive than negative. You just have to ignore the goobers with the crap-colored glasses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)