The elephant in the room here is that in both the Lions and the KC game, the referees mugged the Browns. After the two early bullcrap interference calls on Haden and Skrine, the referees last week were itching to see them actually press cover somebody so they could flag it.
Now, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, as our defenders have a "rap sheet".
And they haven't done a damn thing wrong, and I'm sick of it.
Marty Schottenheimer, in one of his many attempts to sound deep and profound, once said that the referees can't change the outcome of a game. Yes, there's a mystical sort of fate kinda thing sorta which, you know, if you work harder, you know, you just overcome all the bad calls and win, kinda like.
Marty knows better.
The Lions outplayed the Browns and probably deserved to win. The Packers beat them fair and square. But the Browns beat the Chiefs. They just couldn't beat the referees too.
I told you Jason Campbell was a decent quarterback, and his performance shouldn't suprise anyone who knows what he did with the Raiders. He was actually a little better here, because he has better talent around him. In fact it's possible that he has never in his carreer played with this much talent around him.
Peter Smith mentioned that the Ravens will now have some game tape in Campbell. Well, Peter dismissed Campbell as even a competant quarterback early on, and might feel a tad embarrassed.
The Chiefs had abundant tape on Campbell from his Raiders days, and some of the defenders had played against him. Granted, this is a different scheme, but tendancies are built into a player.
I don't know what Campbell's specific tendancies are, but these are examples:
1: A quarterback might not be able to hit the broad side of a barn if forced to run left.
2: A quarterback's ball might tend to sail/overshoot if he's moving to his right.
3: A Brandon Weeden might tend to lock onto recievers, hesitate, wait to confirm a break before throwing--blowing timing to hell.
The Ravens aren't as good as KC, the Lions, the Packers, or the Browns. I'm grateful for not hearing this mystical, worshipful crap about them that I hear about the Steelers on NFL Radio. I'm not the only one who knows that these Browns and Jason Campbell should beat them.
And you know, these guys all know lots more about football than I do. So does Peter Smith, and even some of the guys on Bleacher Report. But they're often influenced by emotion.
The Ravens won the Superbowl and have Harbaugh and Newsome. These are powerful facts. And just when you thought Newsome's cupboard was cleaned out and his team was gutted, there he goes grabbing Dummerville, a left tackle, and several other bargain free agents!
That's a fact. But it's also a fact that they have no consistant deep threat. Ed Reed was old, but still an elite player. Lewis's replacement is an upgrade over the shadow of himself he was, but it's not the same team anymore.
If, talent-wise, the Ravens were a nine last season, they're a 7.5 this season. If the Cleveland Browns were a 6 last season, they're a 7.5 this season.
This was obvious to me. That's why I said Cameron should explode this season, Gordon would be even better, Skrine had a shot to be much better, Gipson was massively underrated, Campbell was a good quarterback, etc.
It's not rocket science. Young players tend to get better. Old players tend to get worse.
Right now, this is the Bengals' Division. But listen to me: The Steelers are the worst team in the AFC North, and it's because they lack talent. It's not because Tomlin suddenly sucks, or Mercury aligns with Mars, or they're just not inspired enough.
The Ravens are still competitive, but the Browns are overtaking them, and are nipping at Cinci's heels.
I personally don't mind them losing this season, because this looks like a bumper crop for quarterbacks in the draft. Objectively, it's better to lose one more year and get a stud quarterback than to do well, not make the playoffs, and miss that chance.
But also obectively, I'm afraid the Browns with Jason Campbell will sweep the Steelers, beat the Ravens, and could even upset the Bengals again...and go 8-8 or 9-7...and NOT make the playoffs anyway.
...and draft maybe 18th and 26th overall, and get screwed out of a quarterback again.
I repeat that I love Hoyer even more than most other people. I feel quite confident that he'll continue to kick ass after defenses get film on him and start messing with him. I see him getting better, and not worse. I think Hoyer could be a Pro-Bowl, franchise guy, absolutely.
...but I'm not positively sure, and what if I'm wrong, or he gets maimed again?
The cycle continues. That's what.
But what the hell--go Browns beat dem Ratbirds!
Oh yeah...the referees...
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Weeden Had his Shot
I kept faith with Weeden until now. Unlike others, I know the difference between a dropped pass and a bad throw, and where to place the blame for a loss.
Still, here comes Hoyer and lights it up--there you go. Well, not really. Weeden didn't have that dee-lux deep threat, Josh Gordon, to loosen things up, as well as to make actual big plays for him.
So I said let's see what he does with Gordon.
He failed. Not all of it was his fault, but now I've seen enough to pretty much give up on Weeden.
I believe part of it is his age. When you're 22-23, it's easier for you to learn and adapt. At 29-30, you're much more hard-wired. Weeden was wired for focus and tunnel vision as a pitcher. It didn't hurt him much as a college QB, but now he's 29, and it seems too late for him.
It's still classless and embarrassing to hear the guy get bood before he's thrown his first pass. Boobirds in general irk me, because every player is trying; nobody is screwing up on purpose. It's sadistic to take a guy who's already humiliated and hurting, and kick him when he's down.
Except Braylon Edwards, or somebody like that--ok he's not trying so boo him.
Anyway, now it's Jason Campbell. Much is made of the fact that they skipped over him and put Hoyer in when Weeden got hurt. Then, of the fact that Weeden returned when Hoyer went down.
Well yeah, they thought Hoyer was a better fit for this offense, because he's more accurate on deep passes. And then, they knew about Campbell, but needed to give Hoyer his chance so that they could find out what he had to offer.
It was a calculated risk. If Hoyer had stunk up the joint, it would have been Campbell time.
But as usual, the conclusion-leapers overshot. It meant they really hate Campbell and he sucks and stuff. Not at all.
Cherry-pickers want to focus solely on his brief, putrid performance with the Bears the season before he was signed here, and ignore what he was doing with the Raiders before he was injured.
He was winning games with a crappy team. I'm not sure what happened in Chicago, and you can't just ignore it. But with Campbell or anyone else, you need to look at his overall history--except perhaps his rookie season.
Jim Zorn was his coach in Washington. Armani Tumor points out that Zorn's offense was all about short, quick passes, and didn't allow Campbell to use his big arm.
In fact, Armani picked the Browns to upset KC today! When I regained consciousness, I recalled that he cited this fact, and stated his personal opinion that this former first round pick was always a good QB, and got blamed for bad teams.
Boy, that sounds familiar.
I'm not kidding myself. Campbell is no long-term answer, even if he does well. Contrary to current mythology, he's shown that he's above average and a competant starter, which is positive. Not negative.
Hoyer, I believe, is better. He's also younger, with more upside. And regardless of how much Norv and Chud like Hoyer, they'll still draft a quarterback to compete with/learn from him next season.
But for now, Campbell is a decent QB who will give the Browns a chance to win every game. He is NOT a bad quarterback.
As for the draft crop, I've heard a lot of irrational theories about this or that guy "falling" to them. That won't happen unless they draft at least in the top 5.
Bridgewater is probably off the table to begin with, and several other teams will try to trade ahead of the Browns for the others. Because teams in need of a quarterback tend to draft in the top third, the teams ahead of them might well need a QB, and those a few slots behind them will have the ammo to make moves.
Before the rookie salary cap, this happened. With the cap, it will happen in every draft, as teams will take more chances on players who won't cost them 25% of their salary cap.
HOWEVER, the idea of trading Josh Gordon is still rediculous. Gordon and Cameron are THE two guys who could help Hoyer or a rookie quarterback succeed. You take Gordon out of it, and they're all over Cameron and playing downhill to hammer to the quarterback and stuff the run.
Gordons don't grow on trees! Why can't some people not GET this? You just watch what happens to the Bengals if Green gets hurt! Check out the Steelers without Wallace (and Wallace can't carry Gordon's jock)!
As for the KC game, Armani's prediction and my higher opinion of Campbell have given me some hope. While I was also bothered by the defense looking bad the last two weeks, the matchups here are interesting.
Alex Smith is relying almost exclusively on short passes. I don't know if he's gone deep even once this whole season. With the emergence of Skrine, the Browns have the secondary to mix zone with man and jump those routes.
This includes both Roberts and Jackson.
The Chiefs unsung heros are the defenders. They've been very stingy, and this is where the Browns could have a bigger problem.
I'm afraid this feels like a loss to me...but maybe I don't mind that much, since I'd really like to get a stud quarterback (not that Hoyer can't be that, ok?)
One point on that: Level of competition doesn't mean as much for a quarterback, ok? This is common sense. His recievers, protectors, and ball carriers are all presumably at the same level as the opponent, and he still has to be smart and accurate, period.
YOU STAND CORRECTED
Oh! I forgot the referees! They'll probably make sure...
Still, here comes Hoyer and lights it up--there you go. Well, not really. Weeden didn't have that dee-lux deep threat, Josh Gordon, to loosen things up, as well as to make actual big plays for him.
So I said let's see what he does with Gordon.
He failed. Not all of it was his fault, but now I've seen enough to pretty much give up on Weeden.
I believe part of it is his age. When you're 22-23, it's easier for you to learn and adapt. At 29-30, you're much more hard-wired. Weeden was wired for focus and tunnel vision as a pitcher. It didn't hurt him much as a college QB, but now he's 29, and it seems too late for him.
It's still classless and embarrassing to hear the guy get bood before he's thrown his first pass. Boobirds in general irk me, because every player is trying; nobody is screwing up on purpose. It's sadistic to take a guy who's already humiliated and hurting, and kick him when he's down.
Except Braylon Edwards, or somebody like that--ok he's not trying so boo him.
Anyway, now it's Jason Campbell. Much is made of the fact that they skipped over him and put Hoyer in when Weeden got hurt. Then, of the fact that Weeden returned when Hoyer went down.
Well yeah, they thought Hoyer was a better fit for this offense, because he's more accurate on deep passes. And then, they knew about Campbell, but needed to give Hoyer his chance so that they could find out what he had to offer.
It was a calculated risk. If Hoyer had stunk up the joint, it would have been Campbell time.
But as usual, the conclusion-leapers overshot. It meant they really hate Campbell and he sucks and stuff. Not at all.
Cherry-pickers want to focus solely on his brief, putrid performance with the Bears the season before he was signed here, and ignore what he was doing with the Raiders before he was injured.
He was winning games with a crappy team. I'm not sure what happened in Chicago, and you can't just ignore it. But with Campbell or anyone else, you need to look at his overall history--except perhaps his rookie season.
Jim Zorn was his coach in Washington. Armani Tumor points out that Zorn's offense was all about short, quick passes, and didn't allow Campbell to use his big arm.
In fact, Armani picked the Browns to upset KC today! When I regained consciousness, I recalled that he cited this fact, and stated his personal opinion that this former first round pick was always a good QB, and got blamed for bad teams.
Boy, that sounds familiar.
I'm not kidding myself. Campbell is no long-term answer, even if he does well. Contrary to current mythology, he's shown that he's above average and a competant starter, which is positive. Not negative.
Hoyer, I believe, is better. He's also younger, with more upside. And regardless of how much Norv and Chud like Hoyer, they'll still draft a quarterback to compete with/learn from him next season.
But for now, Campbell is a decent QB who will give the Browns a chance to win every game. He is NOT a bad quarterback.
As for the draft crop, I've heard a lot of irrational theories about this or that guy "falling" to them. That won't happen unless they draft at least in the top 5.
Bridgewater is probably off the table to begin with, and several other teams will try to trade ahead of the Browns for the others. Because teams in need of a quarterback tend to draft in the top third, the teams ahead of them might well need a QB, and those a few slots behind them will have the ammo to make moves.
Before the rookie salary cap, this happened. With the cap, it will happen in every draft, as teams will take more chances on players who won't cost them 25% of their salary cap.
HOWEVER, the idea of trading Josh Gordon is still rediculous. Gordon and Cameron are THE two guys who could help Hoyer or a rookie quarterback succeed. You take Gordon out of it, and they're all over Cameron and playing downhill to hammer to the quarterback and stuff the run.
Gordons don't grow on trees! Why can't some people not GET this? You just watch what happens to the Bengals if Green gets hurt! Check out the Steelers without Wallace (and Wallace can't carry Gordon's jock)!
As for the KC game, Armani's prediction and my higher opinion of Campbell have given me some hope. While I was also bothered by the defense looking bad the last two weeks, the matchups here are interesting.
Alex Smith is relying almost exclusively on short passes. I don't know if he's gone deep even once this whole season. With the emergence of Skrine, the Browns have the secondary to mix zone with man and jump those routes.
This includes both Roberts and Jackson.
The Chiefs unsung heros are the defenders. They've been very stingy, and this is where the Browns could have a bigger problem.
I'm afraid this feels like a loss to me...but maybe I don't mind that much, since I'd really like to get a stud quarterback (not that Hoyer can't be that, ok?)
One point on that: Level of competition doesn't mean as much for a quarterback, ok? This is common sense. His recievers, protectors, and ball carriers are all presumably at the same level as the opponent, and he still has to be smart and accurate, period.
YOU STAND CORRECTED
Oh! I forgot the referees! They'll probably make sure...
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Bottlegate II (Minus Bottles)
First, my stipulations:
1: Weeden sucked.
2: The defense sucked in the second half. One idiot waited eleven halves to declare this defense a failure, but going forward, those of us with two gliel cells to rub together aren't concerned about that side of the ball.
The referees had a strong and obvious anti-Brown bias. The first two interference calls were not "iffy"--they were bullcrap. A cornerback is allowed to keep a hand on the reciever in order to track him. If he doesn't shove him five yards past the line of scrimmage, he's clean. I repeat: Bullcrap.
In fact, later in the game Calvin Johnson caught a TD pass after obviously pushing Haden away while the ball was in the air.
The first time Psycho Suh had a chance to hit Weeden, he hit him in the facemask with the top of his helmet. The referees and TV announcers made sure to pretend it didn't happen, but after the victory was safely in the books for the Lions, the league fined Suh for this and another cheap shot.
Greg Little's feet were in-bounds. Sure, Fox should have had more camera angles, but the shot from across the field was sufficient to confirm it. Terry Pluto, what are you looking at? The inside foot was already down and dragging. The only issue was the outside foot, which got down clearly in-bounds a few nanoseconds later.
After letting Suh go helmet-to-helmet and late all he wanted, they flagged OUR guy for a clean hit on Stafford!
The referees mugged the Browns, period.
But I give Stafford and the Lions their props. They outplayed the Browns and might have won anyway. Maybe.
Peter Smith, Jason Campbell does not suck. If Weeden doesn't get it together and achieve at least mediocrity, Campbell is a better option.
Pat McManamon ticked me off a little with his dismissive "is what he is" description of Chris Obgannaya. All the guy does is rack up yards every chance he gets. I don't get how people can look right at something and see something else.
The Browns have a puncher's chance against the Packers, who are mainly a West Coast offense temporarily short on intermediate recievers. Joe Haden will of course be on Jordy Nelson, which makes a difference.
As everybody else knows and has written, Eddie Lacy is kicking butt, and the Packers will try to hammer the Browns on the ground. But with Haden on Nelson, the defense can play shallow and try to smother and attack.
Sheard is back, and the OLB rotation is four deep again. This makes for a good matchup for the Browns, since Rodgers is perhaps more dangerous running out of the pocket than he is inside it.
The Ravens don't have a Haden, and the Browns front seven rotation is better here on planet Reality. Lacy is dangerous, and Rodgers' normally is quick and decisive. But Lacy can't do much damage if he is met in the backfield, and Rodgers can't count on anybody getting open quickly.
The Pack's passrush is also hurting, and believe it or not Weeden might have a good game.
That's all optimistic, because it feels like the Browns with Weeden are outgunned and will lose. Especially if the referees are on their side again.
By the way, how's that Trent Who trade looking? Huh?
1: Weeden sucked.
2: The defense sucked in the second half. One idiot waited eleven halves to declare this defense a failure, but going forward, those of us with two gliel cells to rub together aren't concerned about that side of the ball.
The referees had a strong and obvious anti-Brown bias. The first two interference calls were not "iffy"--they were bullcrap. A cornerback is allowed to keep a hand on the reciever in order to track him. If he doesn't shove him five yards past the line of scrimmage, he's clean. I repeat: Bullcrap.
In fact, later in the game Calvin Johnson caught a TD pass after obviously pushing Haden away while the ball was in the air.
The first time Psycho Suh had a chance to hit Weeden, he hit him in the facemask with the top of his helmet. The referees and TV announcers made sure to pretend it didn't happen, but after the victory was safely in the books for the Lions, the league fined Suh for this and another cheap shot.
Greg Little's feet were in-bounds. Sure, Fox should have had more camera angles, but the shot from across the field was sufficient to confirm it. Terry Pluto, what are you looking at? The inside foot was already down and dragging. The only issue was the outside foot, which got down clearly in-bounds a few nanoseconds later.
After letting Suh go helmet-to-helmet and late all he wanted, they flagged OUR guy for a clean hit on Stafford!
The referees mugged the Browns, period.
But I give Stafford and the Lions their props. They outplayed the Browns and might have won anyway. Maybe.
Peter Smith, Jason Campbell does not suck. If Weeden doesn't get it together and achieve at least mediocrity, Campbell is a better option.
Pat McManamon ticked me off a little with his dismissive "is what he is" description of Chris Obgannaya. All the guy does is rack up yards every chance he gets. I don't get how people can look right at something and see something else.
The Browns have a puncher's chance against the Packers, who are mainly a West Coast offense temporarily short on intermediate recievers. Joe Haden will of course be on Jordy Nelson, which makes a difference.
As everybody else knows and has written, Eddie Lacy is kicking butt, and the Packers will try to hammer the Browns on the ground. But with Haden on Nelson, the defense can play shallow and try to smother and attack.
Sheard is back, and the OLB rotation is four deep again. This makes for a good matchup for the Browns, since Rodgers is perhaps more dangerous running out of the pocket than he is inside it.
The Ravens don't have a Haden, and the Browns front seven rotation is better here on planet Reality. Lacy is dangerous, and Rodgers' normally is quick and decisive. But Lacy can't do much damage if he is met in the backfield, and Rodgers can't count on anybody getting open quickly.
The Pack's passrush is also hurting, and believe it or not Weeden might have a good game.
That's all optimistic, because it feels like the Browns with Weeden are outgunned and will lose. Especially if the referees are on their side again.
By the way, how's that Trent Who trade looking? Huh?
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Browns vs. Lions Stuff
1: The Browns take phone calls from other GMs. They listen to every offer. They are not going to trade Josh Gordon unless they get somebody else's whole draft. Since they won't, they won't. Just stop it.
2: I've heard that my Calvin Johnson voodoo doll is paying off and he won't play. I'm not sure. However, I would be just about as happy to see him try to beat Joe Haden with a bumb leg.
3: Suh and Fairley rightfully get a lot of hype, and Ansah not enough. Those guys are scary, and they'll be lining up all over the place.
But I'm glad Luavao is back all the way and has had a nice tune-up. Luavao isn't that great, but is better than Cousins.
Despite the hype, Detroit's defense is about average overall, and the Browns with Luavao could have a chance to actually run the ball some.
They'll try to. But what even some of the GMs on NFL Radio don't seem to get is that second and third and longs happen when a running back gets stuffed too.
Two weeks ago the Browns couldn't run the ball, and resorted to using dumpoff passes. These are what Lindy Infante called "long handoffs".
Bullcrap aside, Weeden can do this about as well as Hoyer did. Bullcrap aside, Weeden has good touch.
Ideally, the run will work fine, but if it doesn't, look for dumpoffs and try to comprehend that these are more like 75-80% plays than normal passes, and are designed to get the ball to a back in space and moving foreward. Dumpoffs are very hard to defend.
Most defenses will have one linebacker mirror the back, but remain in coverage. The rest of the defense will attack the pocket or cover. They have to trust the single linebacker to get a hat on the back before he can do much damage, and then on their ability to converge.
Turner's offense, now with Josh Gordon, keeps more defenders further upfield. It's quite possible that the Lions defensive line can clog everything up inside, and force things laterally too, when the Browns try to run, but a dumpoff puts the back instantly out of their range with one guy to beat and a two-way go.
This should also draw a penalty from the homicidal psychopath, who starts trying to maim or kill everybody if he can't hurt somebody early. Inflicting pain or death on other people is his drug of choice, and he is an addict. If Suh didn't have a stat sheet, he'd have a rap sheet, and 20 years-to-life to contemplate it.
But I digress.
If Calvin J can't play, Stafford will be in the same place as Weeden in the first two games, Flacco, and Big Ben. Horton will kitchen-sink him and blow up runs on the way in. Now that Skrine has improved, the secondary can cover pretty tight and Gipson can stay shallow.
Stafford is an excellent quarterback, but sans Johnson he'll have smaller windows and less time.
The Lions are favored largely on the strength of their super-tough defensive line, but the stats say that's the best part of that defense, and the Browns can beat them.
And should.
4: I was glad to hear Weeden say exactly the right things about getting rid of the ball and "trusting" his guys.
I know, we've heard this stuff before, but this time I think he'll follow through, because Cameron, Little, and Bess will join Gordon this time and not let him get away with window-shopping. I bet the linemen get in on it too. We'll call this the "Hoyer Effect".
In all the pregame analyses I've seen, I have yet to find out who is going to cover these guys. And I don't think it matters.
This is cool too, because I'll be in Toledo to watch it. Toledo has become Detroit/Cleveland no man's land, and I look foreward to trading barbs with Detroit fans in the bar.
2: I've heard that my Calvin Johnson voodoo doll is paying off and he won't play. I'm not sure. However, I would be just about as happy to see him try to beat Joe Haden with a bumb leg.
3: Suh and Fairley rightfully get a lot of hype, and Ansah not enough. Those guys are scary, and they'll be lining up all over the place.
But I'm glad Luavao is back all the way and has had a nice tune-up. Luavao isn't that great, but is better than Cousins.
Despite the hype, Detroit's defense is about average overall, and the Browns with Luavao could have a chance to actually run the ball some.
They'll try to. But what even some of the GMs on NFL Radio don't seem to get is that second and third and longs happen when a running back gets stuffed too.
Two weeks ago the Browns couldn't run the ball, and resorted to using dumpoff passes. These are what Lindy Infante called "long handoffs".
Bullcrap aside, Weeden can do this about as well as Hoyer did. Bullcrap aside, Weeden has good touch.
Ideally, the run will work fine, but if it doesn't, look for dumpoffs and try to comprehend that these are more like 75-80% plays than normal passes, and are designed to get the ball to a back in space and moving foreward. Dumpoffs are very hard to defend.
Most defenses will have one linebacker mirror the back, but remain in coverage. The rest of the defense will attack the pocket or cover. They have to trust the single linebacker to get a hat on the back before he can do much damage, and then on their ability to converge.
Turner's offense, now with Josh Gordon, keeps more defenders further upfield. It's quite possible that the Lions defensive line can clog everything up inside, and force things laterally too, when the Browns try to run, but a dumpoff puts the back instantly out of their range with one guy to beat and a two-way go.
This should also draw a penalty from the homicidal psychopath, who starts trying to maim or kill everybody if he can't hurt somebody early. Inflicting pain or death on other people is his drug of choice, and he is an addict. If Suh didn't have a stat sheet, he'd have a rap sheet, and 20 years-to-life to contemplate it.
But I digress.
If Calvin J can't play, Stafford will be in the same place as Weeden in the first two games, Flacco, and Big Ben. Horton will kitchen-sink him and blow up runs on the way in. Now that Skrine has improved, the secondary can cover pretty tight and Gipson can stay shallow.
Stafford is an excellent quarterback, but sans Johnson he'll have smaller windows and less time.
The Lions are favored largely on the strength of their super-tough defensive line, but the stats say that's the best part of that defense, and the Browns can beat them.
And should.
4: I was glad to hear Weeden say exactly the right things about getting rid of the ball and "trusting" his guys.
I know, we've heard this stuff before, but this time I think he'll follow through, because Cameron, Little, and Bess will join Gordon this time and not let him get away with window-shopping. I bet the linemen get in on it too. We'll call this the "Hoyer Effect".
In all the pregame analyses I've seen, I have yet to find out who is going to cover these guys. And I don't think it matters.
This is cool too, because I'll be in Toledo to watch it. Toledo has become Detroit/Cleveland no man's land, and I look foreward to trading barbs with Detroit fans in the bar.
Monday, October 7, 2013
You People
I'm old enough to remember people like you driving Art Modell out of town. And that's what happened. The Indians get a brand new stadium and Art gets the finger. The plumbing is shot and leaking, the grass is green paint, muni was built on a landfill and methane percolated up when it rained.
I couldn't listen to sports talk anymore because people like you were calling in, calling Art Modell the worst person in history for firing Marty and hiring Bill. You know--Bill Belichick?
"I hope he dies, but his son might be worse." "He micromanages" (that was bullcrap. Art was hands off and left football stuff to football people--but that was said and repeated until it was accepted as fact). Worst owner in history. Had little to do with the TV contract (see you were making stuff up as you went along. You can't leave your victims with anything at all.)
Now it's Weeden. Worst quarterback in history. (By the way, I'm confiscating "deer in the headlights". Shut up with that you drones.)
No no no it had nothing to do with the absence of Gordon, no running game, or drops! No that's just more excuses!
Look at what Hoyer did. Well sure, ok. I love Hoyer. Better than Weeden. Smart, decisive, icewater in his veins--carreer backup my foot he could be a franchise guy. And no, I doubt that Weeden can be. Yes, he's better than Weeden. Yes, they should KEEP him after the season and trade Weeden.
But that's not good enough for you Oxbow cretins. No, it wasn't Weeden's four consecutive scoring drives--it was Benjamin and Ward. No we can't give him any credit at all--none whatsoever. He must be the worst ever, period.
I see what you see! Okay so he stands there looking around til he eats the ball. He's locked on (I heard he looked off in the last game though--no that can't be I got my hands over my eyes he didn't look anybody off ever because he sucks period--)
But he got better after Gordon told him to nononooo I can't hear you da-da-dada--
His QB rating is now nonononononooooooo
You freaking lynch-mob. You mindless bunch of drones.
Brandon Weeden has done enough to win every single game, warts and all. He takes unneccessary sacks, overlooks open recievers and delivers beautiful big plays and points. Hoyer is better. Hoyer has more upside. Hoyer is the man. But Weeden is okay.
Yes he is. You're beyond reason here, come back. He did enough to win without Josh Gordon--he delivered the throws to win both of the first two games. He can't catch his own passes though--deal with it.
Now he's got Josh Gordon, so the Turner offense can hit on all cylinders. The Browns can win with him.
Grow up. Back Weeden up. If he kicks some butt this season, they might get a second rounder for him.
Another thing: Those stats on players who do or don't come back or stick around after acl surgery? He's a QUARTERBACK. Not a running back, wide reciever, cornerback, etc. He'll be back!
Meanwhile, the Browns can win games with Weeden. They're talented and well-coached. They have a dominating defense.
I remember you: Once I was on the ground and two hillbillies were trying to kick me to death. That's YOU., giggles!
Ignoramusses. Go hang YOURSELF this time.
I couldn't listen to sports talk anymore because people like you were calling in, calling Art Modell the worst person in history for firing Marty and hiring Bill. You know--Bill Belichick?
"I hope he dies, but his son might be worse." "He micromanages" (that was bullcrap. Art was hands off and left football stuff to football people--but that was said and repeated until it was accepted as fact). Worst owner in history. Had little to do with the TV contract (see you were making stuff up as you went along. You can't leave your victims with anything at all.)
Now it's Weeden. Worst quarterback in history. (By the way, I'm confiscating "deer in the headlights". Shut up with that you drones.)
No no no it had nothing to do with the absence of Gordon, no running game, or drops! No that's just more excuses!
Look at what Hoyer did. Well sure, ok. I love Hoyer. Better than Weeden. Smart, decisive, icewater in his veins--carreer backup my foot he could be a franchise guy. And no, I doubt that Weeden can be. Yes, he's better than Weeden. Yes, they should KEEP him after the season and trade Weeden.
But that's not good enough for you Oxbow cretins. No, it wasn't Weeden's four consecutive scoring drives--it was Benjamin and Ward. No we can't give him any credit at all--none whatsoever. He must be the worst ever, period.
I see what you see! Okay so he stands there looking around til he eats the ball. He's locked on (I heard he looked off in the last game though--no that can't be I got my hands over my eyes he didn't look anybody off ever because he sucks period--)
But he got better after Gordon told him to nononooo I can't hear you da-da-dada--
His QB rating is now nonononononooooooo
You freaking lynch-mob. You mindless bunch of drones.
Brandon Weeden has done enough to win every single game, warts and all. He takes unneccessary sacks, overlooks open recievers and delivers beautiful big plays and points. Hoyer is better. Hoyer has more upside. Hoyer is the man. But Weeden is okay.
Yes he is. You're beyond reason here, come back. He did enough to win without Josh Gordon--he delivered the throws to win both of the first two games. He can't catch his own passes though--deal with it.
Now he's got Josh Gordon, so the Turner offense can hit on all cylinders. The Browns can win with him.
Grow up. Back Weeden up. If he kicks some butt this season, they might get a second rounder for him.
Another thing: Those stats on players who do or don't come back or stick around after acl surgery? He's a QUARTERBACK. Not a running back, wide reciever, cornerback, etc. He'll be back!
Meanwhile, the Browns can win games with Weeden. They're talented and well-coached. They have a dominating defense.
I remember you: Once I was on the ground and two hillbillies were trying to kick me to death. That's YOU., giggles!
Ignoramusses. Go hang YOURSELF this time.
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Rodney ClevelandBrownsfield
I used to think that My Browns were dissed a lot simply because they've sucked so bad for so long. How could I blame any outsiders for having a glass half-empty view of them?
A quarterback guru like Greg Cosell pointing out a littany of Weeden's faults--somehow I manage to nod and shake my head at the same time.
But now it's getting rediculous. Greg was being interviewed by Ross Tucker on NFL Radio. This was prior to Hoyer's maddening but predictable injury, in the wake of Hoyer's second straight victory.
Cosell asserts that Norv Turner cut down the defense for Hoyer so that Hoyer could be a game manager.
After a hesitation, the diplomatic Tucker said "One thing I was impressed with about Hoyer--he seems to spot single man coverage on Cameron or Gordon every time, and hits them for big plays."
Here's the translation for those of you who can't read subtext: "Greg I can't believe you just said that. 53 passes in one game, going deep all the time, including on first down, taking over the game on the comeback touchdown drive in Minnesota. If anything, Turner expanded the playbook for Hoyer. Here's your chance to get the egg off your face, because about two thirds of my fans are laughing at you right now."
ZING! Right over Greg Cosell's oversized head! Instead of backing off his utterly mindless "game manager" comment, Greg singles out one of the touchdowns passes to Gordon, and eagerly points out how Gordon had to slow down a little for it.
The problem here is ego. Five years ago, Greg scouted Hoyer in college and decided he sucked. He doesn't want to go back and re-evaluate.
He's got Hoyer in his box with the label on it, and that's where he stays. The label says "carreer backup at best".
Besides, he's a Cleveland Brown!
Pat Kirwan is a little more objective on Hoyer, but before the thursday night game pointed out that after that, defensive coordinators would have three games worth of film on him, and then we would find out how Hoyer would do against defenses which had prepared specifically for him.
That's true, of course. But the reason Pat brought this up was that he fully expected Hoyer to fall on his face, because Pat, too, has him in a labelled box and doesn't want to let him out.
Rookie quarterbacks hit that game four wall and either adapt or sputter; but that's rookies. Hoyer has been in the NFL for four years, including three under Tom Brady. He's not only watched his friend from the sidelines, but in the film room. And he doesn't see Brady: He sees himself.
When the defenses start trying to screw him up, he will adapt. Pat undrestimates him. But then, Hoyer is a Cleveland Brown.
Kirwan gives all the credit in the world to Josh Gordon. He's big and strong and long. He never says "fast", and Gordon has as much long speed as any player in the NFL. He might beat AJ Green in the 100. Why does Kirwan not see this?
Because Gordon is a Cleveland Brown.
But unlike Cosell, Pat isn't full of himself, and tries to be objective. He's probably not even aware that his opinions are corrupted by prejudice. But come on--why does he sniff, and say "I smell something brown"?
I just die laughing evey time I hear that. You know, brown? Smell hahahaha I can't stand it! Pat should do stand-up comedy or something! Put him on Raw Dawg--then he can say all the dirty words too!
See, Pat thinks that's funny the 300th time around...which is disturbing.
In re Gordon, I've read local articles saying that he could eventually someday become a scary deep threat. Are you trying to seem wise, or something? He already is a premier deep threat up there with Green and Jones. He would have been as a rookie, if Shurmer had allowed it. Just how many more long bombs does he have to haul in before you call him what he is?
Pat and the other guys have a lot of love for the new and improved Heckert draft pick Buster Skrine, though. He's becoming Minnifield to Haden's Hanford. (By the way, I told you he had that potential).
They also noticed what many of you locals didn't: Weeden was a lot better in the second half, and for the third time did enough to win. The difference is that the recievers didn't drop passes this time. Another difference was that he had Josh Gordon.
It was interesting to hear that it was Gordon himself who came back to the huddle after another one of those maddening ball-patting hesitant sacks and told Weeden to stop thinking so much and just throw the damn ball.
It's nice to know that now that these guys have played with a real quarterback, they can help coach up the one they're stuck with.
Dumb people tend to be extreme in everything. Hoyer is great. Weeden is the worst quarterback in history. The truth is that while I think Hoyer is better and could be great, and that Weeden won't be great, he doesn't suck, either.
The Browns probably will draft a quarterback they think can be a franchise guy no matter what, and most likely will seek to trade Weeden and retain Hoyer, but listen:
The quarterback is indeed the most critical component of a team, but isn't as important during the regular season as he is in the playoffs. Even there, there are exceptions: Big Ben's first Superbowl, for example. He wasn't ready for primetime. He screwed up a lot. He was carried there by defense and Jerome Bettis.
Mathematicly, the QB is about 30%. He handles the ball on every snap and is half the offense, 25% of the team, with 5% thrown in for changing plays at the line and leadership.
We saw Hoyer use his arm to take over late in the Vikings game and put the stake in their heart. Then we saw him (with some help from McGahee this time) put the Bengals away for good. That's franchise stuff: When all else fails, a quarterback who can do it by himself.
But a franchise quarterback without at least a couple of recievers, a mediocre offensive line, and a running back still won't win. A Josh Gordon can make an average quarterback look great.
This season, Big Ben and Flacco don't have that lid-lifter. Dalton and Weeden have Green and Gordon. The franchise guys are losing. Get it?
So come back down here: Weeden is good enough to win with, at least until Gordon gets hurt or something. This is a very talented team, starting to get healthy again so the offensive line won't be so bad. Skrine's emergence changes the whole secondary, and I told you we had a free safety in Gipson.
The Steelers suck. The Ravens are beatable (Weeden would have beaten them last time if not for the drops). The Bengals are the badasses and will want revenge now, but (to my own surprise) I give the Browns an even chance to beat them again.
Too bad about how low they'll draft, but if Weeden kicks some butts they might get something for him.
And finally, Tim Tebow? Some people will believe anything.
A quarterback guru like Greg Cosell pointing out a littany of Weeden's faults--somehow I manage to nod and shake my head at the same time.
But now it's getting rediculous. Greg was being interviewed by Ross Tucker on NFL Radio. This was prior to Hoyer's maddening but predictable injury, in the wake of Hoyer's second straight victory.
Cosell asserts that Norv Turner cut down the defense for Hoyer so that Hoyer could be a game manager.
After a hesitation, the diplomatic Tucker said "One thing I was impressed with about Hoyer--he seems to spot single man coverage on Cameron or Gordon every time, and hits them for big plays."
Here's the translation for those of you who can't read subtext: "Greg I can't believe you just said that. 53 passes in one game, going deep all the time, including on first down, taking over the game on the comeback touchdown drive in Minnesota. If anything, Turner expanded the playbook for Hoyer. Here's your chance to get the egg off your face, because about two thirds of my fans are laughing at you right now."
ZING! Right over Greg Cosell's oversized head! Instead of backing off his utterly mindless "game manager" comment, Greg singles out one of the touchdowns passes to Gordon, and eagerly points out how Gordon had to slow down a little for it.
The problem here is ego. Five years ago, Greg scouted Hoyer in college and decided he sucked. He doesn't want to go back and re-evaluate.
He's got Hoyer in his box with the label on it, and that's where he stays. The label says "carreer backup at best".
Besides, he's a Cleveland Brown!
Pat Kirwan is a little more objective on Hoyer, but before the thursday night game pointed out that after that, defensive coordinators would have three games worth of film on him, and then we would find out how Hoyer would do against defenses which had prepared specifically for him.
That's true, of course. But the reason Pat brought this up was that he fully expected Hoyer to fall on his face, because Pat, too, has him in a labelled box and doesn't want to let him out.
Rookie quarterbacks hit that game four wall and either adapt or sputter; but that's rookies. Hoyer has been in the NFL for four years, including three under Tom Brady. He's not only watched his friend from the sidelines, but in the film room. And he doesn't see Brady: He sees himself.
When the defenses start trying to screw him up, he will adapt. Pat undrestimates him. But then, Hoyer is a Cleveland Brown.
Kirwan gives all the credit in the world to Josh Gordon. He's big and strong and long. He never says "fast", and Gordon has as much long speed as any player in the NFL. He might beat AJ Green in the 100. Why does Kirwan not see this?
Because Gordon is a Cleveland Brown.
But unlike Cosell, Pat isn't full of himself, and tries to be objective. He's probably not even aware that his opinions are corrupted by prejudice. But come on--why does he sniff, and say "I smell something brown"?
I just die laughing evey time I hear that. You know, brown? Smell hahahaha I can't stand it! Pat should do stand-up comedy or something! Put him on Raw Dawg--then he can say all the dirty words too!
See, Pat thinks that's funny the 300th time around...which is disturbing.
In re Gordon, I've read local articles saying that he could eventually someday become a scary deep threat. Are you trying to seem wise, or something? He already is a premier deep threat up there with Green and Jones. He would have been as a rookie, if Shurmer had allowed it. Just how many more long bombs does he have to haul in before you call him what he is?
Pat and the other guys have a lot of love for the new and improved Heckert draft pick Buster Skrine, though. He's becoming Minnifield to Haden's Hanford. (By the way, I told you he had that potential).
They also noticed what many of you locals didn't: Weeden was a lot better in the second half, and for the third time did enough to win. The difference is that the recievers didn't drop passes this time. Another difference was that he had Josh Gordon.
It was interesting to hear that it was Gordon himself who came back to the huddle after another one of those maddening ball-patting hesitant sacks and told Weeden to stop thinking so much and just throw the damn ball.
It's nice to know that now that these guys have played with a real quarterback, they can help coach up the one they're stuck with.
Dumb people tend to be extreme in everything. Hoyer is great. Weeden is the worst quarterback in history. The truth is that while I think Hoyer is better and could be great, and that Weeden won't be great, he doesn't suck, either.
The Browns probably will draft a quarterback they think can be a franchise guy no matter what, and most likely will seek to trade Weeden and retain Hoyer, but listen:
The quarterback is indeed the most critical component of a team, but isn't as important during the regular season as he is in the playoffs. Even there, there are exceptions: Big Ben's first Superbowl, for example. He wasn't ready for primetime. He screwed up a lot. He was carried there by defense and Jerome Bettis.
Mathematicly, the QB is about 30%. He handles the ball on every snap and is half the offense, 25% of the team, with 5% thrown in for changing plays at the line and leadership.
We saw Hoyer use his arm to take over late in the Vikings game and put the stake in their heart. Then we saw him (with some help from McGahee this time) put the Bengals away for good. That's franchise stuff: When all else fails, a quarterback who can do it by himself.
But a franchise quarterback without at least a couple of recievers, a mediocre offensive line, and a running back still won't win. A Josh Gordon can make an average quarterback look great.
This season, Big Ben and Flacco don't have that lid-lifter. Dalton and Weeden have Green and Gordon. The franchise guys are losing. Get it?
So come back down here: Weeden is good enough to win with, at least until Gordon gets hurt or something. This is a very talented team, starting to get healthy again so the offensive line won't be so bad. Skrine's emergence changes the whole secondary, and I told you we had a free safety in Gipson.
The Steelers suck. The Ravens are beatable (Weeden would have beaten them last time if not for the drops). The Bengals are the badasses and will want revenge now, but (to my own surprise) I give the Browns an even chance to beat them again.
Too bad about how low they'll draft, but if Weeden kicks some butts they might get something for him.
And finally, Tim Tebow? Some people will believe anything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)