First, I need to correct some stuff from other writers who I respect a lot, but who aren't perfect:
1: Ben Watson is a solid in-line blocker, and Jordon Cameron in his third season probably will be too. Cameron is actually stronger, with better reach. Yes, he was a raw prospect coming out of college, but he's had time to develop the skills. A guy I have a lot of respect for said that he would never be a good blocker, and that's just plain nuts.
2: Hate to repeat myself, but you don't take the entirety of a player's second nfl season to label him. Greg Little was stuck on stone hands in the first 4-5 games, then caught everything thrown to him for the rest of the season. He has i m p r o v e d almost predictably.
While Braylon Edwards also looked great for one season and then reverted right back to Edward Scissorhands, Little is a serious man, and has probably put the drops behind him like 9 out of 10 recievers who go through this common pattern.
See the pattern? Some analysts don't bother to anticipate or even recognize the development of players through experience.
Jordon Cameron should be a solid or even superior in-line blocker in 2013, and Greg Little has already been a reliable wide reciever through ten games.
I found another analysis of the Browns by Pete on Sports Chat which was refreshingly intelligent and insightful...mostly.
He correctly did NOT list offensive guard as among the team's five needs. I'd list cornerback as the first and OLB as the second myself, but that's fine. Safety third check.
But number four is wide reciever again. He lists this as a "need", and then for about 80% of the paragraph talks about how Benjamin in the slot was a great pick, Jordon could be awesome in his second season...generalizing about Little in the way I mentioned earlier...
Then comes the "M"-word. "Mentor". Oh for crying out loud. Yes, playing wide reciever is far more complicated than playing quarterback, so young guys simply can't learn it without an old overpriced guy teaching them all the subtle nuances of it. And it can't be an ex-wide reciever who is a coach, or just a coach who has a brain, either. No, you have to have a mentor! And a reciever is a rookie for five years.
Then he lists tight end. I accept this on the surface, since Watson is aging, Cameron has been hurt, and Smith isn't a deep threat anymore. But this is the writer who said that Cameron had zero blocking ability, which is just plain dumb. He also more or less dismissed Smith, who is a very solid all-around tight end that any team would welcome; who would start for many teams.
But overall, the article was very good. I especially liked that in his overview, he correctly described the offensive line as very good, and the defensive line personnel all set to transition to the 3-4 without changes.
Now, some writers are correct in isolating each of the three guards who played last season. Greco was actually pretty good, but the two young guys ranked very low. That position could certainly stand an upgrade (to a more athletic player), but it's not a "need", because both ends and the middle protect the guards on this team.
By the way, one free agent guard is Mitchell Schwartze's older brother...
Self-Corrections:
In this 3-4 scheme, the defensive ends are "five techniques" and line up shaded to the outside of the offensive tackles. I said they lined shaded inside, and there's a world of difference, since the outside leverage makes them more responsible for the edge on runs, and they will attack inside less.
As I understand it so far, they tie up the tackles to prevent them from blocking the OLB edge-rushers, and to force a ball carrier to run wider (the inside backers and safety responsible for the cutback and faster lateral pursuit).
I can't find anything else I was wrong about, except maybe Frostee Rucker sort of. I guess in this scheme, the DE's need to be bigger/stronger in order to push the tackles backwards and pursue laterally without being pushed downfield, and Rucker has less mass and leverage than the other guys.
But I don't think I was really wrong, since the coaches probably just liked the other guys better and wanted to save his signing bonus. Call it a semi-correction.
Oh yeah! Dave Kolonich's recent OBR article about Alex Smith also gave me pause on Alex Smith. While I think Kolonich ignored the development-factor which had much to do with Smith's emergence, I can't argue with Harbaugh's attempts to replace him, or his injuries, and never forget his average arm/Turner's offense.
No first round pick, and no big money. Thanks Dave.
Dave also talks about Matt Moore as a possible challenger to Weeden, and I like that idea, since he would be pretty inexpensive. And no, that ship hasn't sailed. Moore kicked butt for his first season, and was expected to become an elite quarterback.
He did fall on his face, and I'm not clear on the details of that, but we saw a sustained flash of potential. Since then, he has been a backup, and has had plenty of time to practice and learn. He has a stronger arm than Smith, and just might be a huge sleeper in free agency.
Thanks Dave! Also thanks for anticipating the nitpickers who were poised to point out to you that Smith isn't a free agent yet, and pre-emptively calling them d-bags! Amen/hallelujia!
Ok that's 2.5 self corrections. That's pretty good, since I'm usually there half way through any article on the Browns.
No comments:
Post a Comment