Slow News Month

Fred Greetham wrote one of the best pieces I've read in awhile in "Browns Big on Little".  It had everything: Logic, facts, intelligence...he sounded a lot like my humble self.

For all the caterwalling (about 70% of it repeated as a chant, sans original thought or insight) about how terrible the recieving corps is (not was--IS), Little's very real prospects for emerging as an elite reciever are being ignored.

How many wide recievers in a base offense?  TWO.

Do the Browns have slot recievers?  YES.  In fact, they have too many.  Norwood did a fine job last season, as he learned along with Little.  Benjamin is a strong candidate to unseat him, and this Josh kid from Weeden's team is tearing up practices.  Jordan and Norwood have big-play speed, too.

Do the Browns have tight ends who can line up outside?  YES.  THREE of them.

If Little is the default X, the Z is covered, and you have those fast wing tight ends, what is the big issue here?

It hardly even matters if I am wrong about Massequoi not being anywhere near as bad as the rest of the universe thinks he is, when Childress and Shurmer can just sort of use Moore or Cameron or Watson opposite Little, and even have them run the same routes?

Quit with the labels.  Labels simplify things for lazy or simple minds.  Drop the "wide" out of wide reciever and see what you get.  ...okay, reciever jeez.  The slot opposite Little is tailor-made for these three big recievers who are labelled as tight ends.

Here I'm making a leap of faith on Cameron's emergence this season, of course.

What was really missing last season, according the the ex-quarterbacks I listen to, was the one guy who could "take the top off" a defense, and prevent them from stacking the front and flooding the backfield.

Well, maybe it's not missing at all.  Little may well be that scary big dude, and now  Benjamin and Jordon will compete for the scary little dude.

"Slot" is another convenient label.  If Jordan, Benjamin, or even Cooper line up five yards off the tackle, and one of the wing-T's are outside of them, you could call that the slot.

In reality, it aint so, because the defense will put their second-best cornerback on the "slot" guy, and a hybrid linebacker or big safety on the huge "Y".  But it could work extremely well.

That good cornerback on the little inside guy can't use inside leverage and body him toward the sidelines.  There's too much space, and if the waterbug just takes what he's given, he can beat the cornerback and go vertical.  The corner almost has to play "off-man" or zone--backed up a few steps.

So now you have one of your run-stoppers lined up way outside, and a little guy that Richardson can steamroll closer in and backed off.

If Little emerges, as his 60-plus receptions last season indicate he will, then even if you write off MoMass, there are no fewer than FIVE other pass-catchers to exploit any attempt at double-covering him.

But I digress.  Let's see what the peanut gallery had to say about Greetham's article about Greg Little:


You are joking right???? He did not have Pro bowl type numbers. Not even close.


Neither did Green or Jones.


I think you are going to be way more disappointed this year than ever before. I will go on record now saying they will be lucky to win more than 6 games. The defense led by one of the weakest LB corps in football. Will totally collapse if and when the offense actually scores an average of 14 points per game. We were 30th against the run and 6th against the pass because no one had to score many points against us to win. If and when the offense actually looks like a professonal team. Then you will see the smoke and mirrors defense we truely have. Any thing less than 9 - 7 is what's called losing football. Then the excuses will fly again which is Cleveland Browns football since the reestablishment of this franchise. 


Ah!  There's an excellent example of emotional thinking!  He ignores D'Qwell Jackson and the two linebackers who were just drafted.  In asserting that the defense would collapse, he ignores the four new defensive linemen and the much deeper rotation.


Hagg, too: If he can stave off Usama Young for the free safety slot, this guy is an excellent run-stopper.  He's got unusual football intelligence and diagnoses very quickly.  Ignores the fact that Ward missed much of the season.


He completely ignores the fact that last year was the first year in a whole new scheme, and that even without changes, it would automaticly improve in year two.

Ignores Jauron's record and reputation.

But he does go on record, which is very bold of him.

Pretty ignorant, huh?

• 
  

Miscellaneous

First, in previous posts I overlooked Josh Cooper at WR.  Really, some people are comparing him to Wes Welker?

Jordan Norwood and Travis Benjamin are both much faster, and it's too early to speculate with much accuracy.

I remember Brian Brennan.  One particularly bad analyst called him "overrated".

Brennan was small and not very fast.  For these reasons, he was a third reciever,  who rarely started.  He was used in the slot!  He played with Ozzie Newsome, and mostly in a two-back base offense.

They brought him in on obvious passing downs-especially third down, because he was so reliable and made the clutch catch.  Brennan was a sort of specialist, just as slot recievers are today--only in run-oriented offenses that broke his glass only in emergencies.

These factors all eluded the alleged analyst, who said he was inconsistant, and never made a ton of catches.  I think the alleged analyst is overrated.

I also missed something: Greg Little's clock-times were faster than Braylon Edwards', and he can do everything Edwards' did-meaning that he can take the top off a defense...and, I know, drop passes too.  But Little is a real football player making a real effort to improve.

Phil Taylor was rated pretty high in his draft class, but he, too, was called a "reach" by Tom Heckert.  He also drafted Sheard higher than he "should have gone".  Before you start bashing his selection of John Hughes, you need to remember--he's already outsmarted you twice drafting defensive linemen.

Even analysts I respect have said of Hughes "He's nothing special except against the run".  I blink and read it again.  I wonder when it was that defensive tackles had to get sacks.

In a 4-3 defense, the defensive tackle stops the run first and foremost.  He uses leverage and power more than anything else.  Warren Sapp, Micheal Dean Perry--these were mutants and exceptions to the rule.  If a defensive tackle gets 50 tackles and two sacks in a whole season, he's pretty damn good.

I also have to tentatively admit a mistake I made.  Too many insiders, including coaches, are saying that Frostee Rucker is a good passrusher.  Considering his lackluster history with Cincinnati, and his numbers, I sure wasn't expecting that.

But it's good, isn't it?

Billy Winn is a different sort of defensive tackle.  He's faster, and has more range. Nice rotational player, at least.  IF Hughes merely does his job as a run-stuffer, here's the totals for the d-line offseason:

Minus Phil Taylor for awhile, plus Winn, Hughes, Parker, and Rucker, and the defensive line should improve against both the pass and the run.  There is more depth and a deeper rotation.  When Taylor comes back, it could be very special.

...okbye.

Just Checkin' in

Some guy on ESPN predicted that the Browns would go 4-12 again.

OK, well, I'm often accused of being a "homer" because I spend so much time debating against dumb predictions like this--which are always, always negative.  I don't care.  Irrational is irrational.

Why will the Browns not improve any whatsoever this season?

What it can't be:

1: The second year in new offensive and defensive systems, with new coaches.
2: The first full off-season.
3: Many young core players entering their second and third seasons (the majority of the starters.)
4: Trent Richardson.
5: The running back, offensive line, tight end, secondary, or defensive line position groups.
Heading kneejerk negative responses to number five off at the pass: They lost Taylor for most of the season, but solidified defensive end with Rucker and an edge-rusher.  Last season's defensive line was one of the better 4-3 lines in the NFL, Taylor wore down at the end, Sheard enters his second season, and Jauron always knows how to best use his talent.
Facts.  Just facts.
Both first-year inexperienced starting guards are now veterans.  Pinkston, in particular, should make a big jump, as he attended LeCharles Bentley-de Sade's offensive line boot-camp in the offseason.
Upon further examination, Scwartze was the best available insta-right tackle available, and this was the line's biggest weak spot.  This will be a very good offensive line.
Truth.  Deal with it.

What it could be:
1: A rookie quarterback.
2: Bad wide recievers.
3: Tough schedule

Well yeah, okay.  I couldn't make myself read another irrational and/or poorly-researched transcript, but I'm sure that these were mentioned.

One can't help but be concerned about Brandon Weeden the rookie, despite his emotional maturity and physical tools.  He's absolutely going to screw up (duh!).
But isn't it common sense to remember how much better the offense was when Peyton Hillis played, and admit that Richardson will have a similar impact as a reciever, runner, and blocker?

No help from the recievers?  If you insist on ignoring Richardson and the tight ends as recievers, ass ume that Little is another Braylon Edwards perma-bonehead, ignore the good stuff Jordan Norwood did, I suppose you could say that.

But isn't that a whole lot of assuming and ignoring?

Little is another of the second-year players that too many analysts discount.  Despite his fourteen drops, he was the favorite target last season, because he seemed to always be open.

In a recent excellent analysis I read, most of Little's drops were the result of concentration lapses--namely looking upfield before he had secured the ball.  His hands are fine, and this kid stuff is the easiest thing to correct.

Nor is he a "possession" reciever, nor his his size and strength his only asset.  He can go DEEP.

Labels confuse shallow people.  A wing tight end is really just a huge wide reciever, and the Browns have two of them, even excluding Ben Watson.  They're trying to turn Cameron into another Watson, who can block in-line as well, but he's already a wide reciever.

The Browns can mix-and-match all of these players as recievers, including Norwood and now Benjamin--both of whome can make huge plays in a broken field or go deep.

Here again, the ass umptions are universally negative.  That Little won't this time catch the majority of the passes he dropped last season.  That Massequoi's injuries and absence had nothing to do with the decline in his production.  That Benjamin is nothing.  Mitchell doesn't even exist.  Norwood didn't catch everything thrown to him.

That the quarterback won't have more time to throw, the Browns won't be run-oriented in the first place, that Weeden's tight spiral and deep accuracy won't help any...

All of which presupposes that young players don't just naturally grow and improve with experience.

The schedule is a good point, but isn't it each and every year that several of the elite teams decline, just as several of the weak teams get better?

4-12?  Man, if this guy had said 6-10, I might have respected his opinion.  I personally think 7-9 or even 8-8, but I can see where a rookie QB could screw a team up for awhile.  But 4-12?  That's just dumb.

What They're Up To

Terry Pluto wrote another nice article on Richardson and Shurmer's historic reliance on a strong running game.  I just sure hope he's wrong about the over 300 carries part.

Rookie running backs can absolutely hit the ground running and excel in the NFL, but they aren't accustomed to the much longer season, and tend to run out of gas in the last 4-5 games.  Giving Richardson that many carries right off the bat would be a mistake.

Nor is it neccessary.  Hardesty was a top flight running back in college.  The only reason he wasn't a first or high second round pick--on par with Ryan Matthews--in his draft was his injury history.  It's not too early to second-guess that Heckert trade-up/pick, but that's not the point here:

He is healthy for the moment, and can take some carries off Richardson to help keep him fresh.

No need to go over the whole stable, but the survivors of the current competition will yield quality depth for every down, and it should be used to preserve the rookie's stamina and health through the transition to the much longer NFL season.

Jim Brown was the greatest, but was never a coach, manager, or talent scout.  He is bitter, and I believe less than objective, including with himself.  His comments need to be taken in context.  Almost every person who's job it is to evaluate players disagrees with Jim Brown about Richardson being "ordinary".

I'm certain that Jim loves Adrian Peterson, because Peterson is very similar to Brown himself.

Richardson is more like Emmitt Smith...if Smith were more powerful and faster.  JB doesn't seem to regard exceptional recieving skills of any value (especially in a West Coast scheme).  He might also have a gut-level thing against short guys.

In Brown's day, he himself was actually bigger/taller than some of his own blockers and the defensive linemen.  In Brown's day, short running backs might not have done so well.  But today, everybody is a skyscraper, and it's really hard for them to get down low enough to prevent a Richardson from getting under their pads and knocking these much bigger guys on their cans.

Richardson is also a "70 or 80-yard back", meaning that it would take a typical defense that long to catch him from behind.  Peterson can take it to the house from his own goal line.  I'm happy to trade the extra 20 yards for TRich's value as a reciever in this scheme.

Being repetitive once again (sorry), the Browns offense with Peyton Hillis was much much better than without him, including the passing game.  And that had more to do with his pass-catching than with his running.  In Richardson, they got a faster, younger, healthier Hillis.

It was harder to put a rush on the quarterback with Hillis hanging around to stone the extra passrusher (who came out of coverage), or when certain blitzes made Hillis the hot reciever--or simply as McCoy's plan B.

Teams last season moved some of their speediest passrushers over right tackle to exploit that weakness.  After all, it's pretty hard to get by Joe Thomas, so why try?

Now in Schartze, they got an unspectacular guy of whome Gil Brandt said "You watch all his tapes, and after awhile you realize: His guy never made a play!"  A guy who shut everybody out all of Senior Bowl week and then in the game.  You can bash the Hughes pick, but not this one.

So now, right tackle is no weak spot.

Ok, so defenses also targetted both guards with stunts and blitzes.  Pinkston improved with experience, but Lauvauo is taking longer, and remained a target.  This doesn't mean that with that experience under his belt and a full offseason, he won't be a solid starter.

Both sides and the middle of the offensive line looks excellent right now, and that's as in better than most of the teams in the NFL.  Every projected starter except Schwartze--playing outside-has now had one full season together.  Continuity on an offensive line is more important than talent, in the opinion of most coaches.

The young guards will be better through experience, but more importantly, the unit will be better as they anticipate how the other guys will react to split-second situations.

So, with Richardson and this offensive line, why do the Memorex Morons ass ume that the quarterback won't have time to throw?  Because they didn't last season...sans Hillis?  Really, can't we consider new players, experience, and the obviously predictable at all?  Can't we think?


"Grand Canyon sized hole at wide receiver".  Thanks, coach.

Not really.  I'm a little disappointed not to be hearing Mitchell's name coming up much yet, but still have hope for him, and remain aware of his existance and potential.

I'm thrilled that Greg Little has worked so hard in the offseason to come back looking and running more like a true wide reciever than the running back he used to be.  Especially since he got open all last season even as a bigger, slower guy.

So far, he's not dropping 20% of the passes thrown to him either!  I am fairly confident that this guy and Braylon Edwards are miles apart in heart and mind.  Little is dead serious about this one thing, and that only.

Even as a big converted running back, it was rediculous for some amateur scouts to have labelled Little a "possession reciever" with a sub 4.5 40.  Now that he's 10 lbs lighter, this guy could really explode.  The gap between Little and Julio Jones was something like one tenth of a second in the 40.  I'm not sure you can blink that fast!

Little could be a number one.  A real double-team commanding number one.

I hope.

Massequoi is the other starter for now, and rightfully so.  He's not playing hurt this season, and did NOT NOT NOT drop many passes last season no he didn't that was Little dammit!

He played IN 14 games, but didn't start them all and was frequently replaced by extra tight ends and occasionally Josh Cribbs--probably because he wasn't healthy.
When MoMass is healthy, he gets open and he catches well.  He will run good patterns and be where he's supposed to be.

Massequoi is not a number one, but can be a very good number two, especially in this offense.

The WR coach had high hopes for rookie draft pick Travis Benjamin.  Like nearly every reciever in every draft going back to the caves, some scout somewhere said he rounded off routes or looked sloppy sometimes or something.

But he comes from a pro-style offense and was used to elite competition.  He is quick as well as fast, and running good routes is, for him, simply a matter of discipline.  It might be harder for the much taller Carlton Mitchell, but not for this guy.

That coach talked about using him outside as well as in the slot, too, which surprised me since he's such a shrimp, and since, in the West Coast, those guys cross and slant a lot and take serious shots.

Norwood is already here, and until Benjamin came along was the fastest player on the offense.  Norwood was a bright spot, reminding me of Keenan McCardell.

Everybody ass umes that big/tall recievers are the way to go in perpetuity, but it's not neccessarily true, even in a West Coast.  Already, defenses draft defensive backs with the "big nickle" in mind.  That's because of the emergence of wide reciever/TE hybrids like Moore, Cameron, (Winslow and Newsome), and the preponderance of big recievers like Green, Jones, Little, etc.

There were a lot of exceptional cornerbacks who've been drafted low or not at all solely because of their short stature.  Conversely, a corner who's 6' or 6'1" and needs a lot of work is drafted taken much higher than their talent warrants.

Now the Browns have two smurfs who can run circles around the NFL's "ideal" cornerback, who is built to cover big, tall recievers!

Oh, no they won't demote MoMass unless one of the smurfs outperforms him, and we can pretty much put Little in as number one in ink.  But these guys will be very useful in the slot and as rotational/matchup guys.

Between Cameron (who I have confirmed still exists as well), Moore, and even still Ben Watson the Browns are loaded with dangerous pass-catching tight ends, and on the other side of the scale, now have two smurfs.  There are all sorts of ways to mix them in to give defenses a hard time.

Finally, Brandon Weeden is decisive and quick.  It's a very complex scheme, but presumably they'll cut the playbook down at first and then spoon-feed him more plays as it goes along to minimize his mistakes, but he'll make some for sure.  I just don't think that holding onto the ball will be one of them.

I've looked into Brad Smelley some more and think he'll make the team, and maybe bounce Marecic off the roster.

Ah! there's another stupid comment I read: Hillis didn't do as well last season because he didn't have Vickers blocking for him.  The guy was oblivious to the fact that a new offense had been installed!  NO version of the West Coast offense features a "blocking" fullback.

Marecic was thought to be a good West Coast fullback project because he was a good reciever.  But now, here's Smelley, who played mainly tight end and caught over thirty passes.  He's undrafted, but may well be a better West Coast fullback than Marecic...who was a rookie last season, ok?

A good West Coast fullback is more of an H-back who can go in motion, line up in the slot, etc. as well as lead block.  Smelley seems a little faster, and much more accomplished as a reciever.  In-line blocking is much different than lead-blocking or pass-protecting from the backfield, but Smelley's blocking experience vs. much bigger people is meanigful too.

Of course, I'm ready to watch him get cut...what do I know?