In my last post, I guessed that the Browns might not be able to get a top-ranked quarterback. If you recall the RG3 trade, the Rams already had a quarterback. If they hadn't, they might have resisted all offers for their pick and drafted the guy themselves.
This season, those teams drafting ahead of the Browns--possibly even including the Rams, who may be disappointed by Sam Bradford--want a quarterback.
Walter Football now rates Blake Bortles number two behind Bridgewater and ahead of Carr and Manziel.
CBS Sports rates him fourth, behind the aforementioned.
The way it's shaping up, there seems to be Bridgewater, who will only enhance his stock at the combine assuming he enters the draft, and those three other guys.
Theoretically, the Browns might have a shot at one of those four.
As I've said, in my amateur opinion Manziel is too scary and not a good fit for a Turner offense, and I can't believe that they would use that high pick on him.
We can hope that one of those other teams prefer him over Bortles or Carr, giving them a shot at grabbing one of those two (if they like him enough). If the Browns draft, say (optimisticly-go Squealers) sixth, they'd have a shot--but still might have to trade up, believe it or not.
A lot of fans are too lazy to think it through, and would call this a dumb trade. In reality, should one of these top quarterbacks be available one or two slots ahead of the Browns, calls are being made, and other teams are trying to jump ahead of them to grab that guy.
But listening to WKNR recently, a new guy came to my attention. I'm not sure who the hosts were quoting, but it might have been the head coach of Bowling Green University.
Jimmy Garoppolo, ranked ninth by CBS and eleventh by Walter Football, is the quarterback for Eastern Illinois.
Due to his level of competition, hand size, height (6'2" or 6'3" we'll see at the combine), and good-but-not-great arm, he may well be taken lower than he should be.
I've read conflicting analyses of this guy, but always go with the real football people. They say his arm is fine. His stats tend to support this, as he's gone deep a lot. In the two games he stepped up in class against San Diego State and Northern Illinois, he completed 68.4% of his passes for 711 yards, NINE touchdowns, and two picks.
He is described as a "rythm" quarterback with perhaps the quickest release of any quarterback in this or the last draft. He's already used to throwing timing patterns, ie to a spot, which is very important for Norv Turner.
I repeat yet again that level of competition is much less important for a quarterback than for other players, since his team mates are only as good as their opposite numbers.
Garopollo doesn't lock on or play favorites. Three different recievers have had 100-yard games with him. He distributes the ball, meaning he scans the field and throws or checks down quickly.
Some quarterbacks (see Brandon Wedone) can't even be trained to do this, and it's uncommon for a college quarterback to have this ability already developed and proven.
Some of the very same people who question his arm say he certainly can make all the throws...which is confusing, but anyway Jim Miller insists that arm strength can be improved. He cites himself and Tom Brady as examples.
Brian Hoyer doesn't have a great arm, but as we saw, he can run Turner's offense just fine.
Since Garoppolo is also pretty nifty with his feet (even caught a touchdown pass himself), I doubt that the middle rounds are realistic. A few have even suggested that when it's all said and done, this guy could go in the first round.
I doubt that as well, but if Banner pulls the trigger on him with the lower first round pick, leave me out of the necktie party.
This is all speculation, of course--but since there's a good chance the Browns will get screwed out of one of the top three quarterbacks here, I'm positive that Garoppolo will be considered as a Hoyer understudy.
Indeed, what is Hoyer? He's a guy that reads and throws quicky and on-time. With a good-but-not-great arm. He's a little smaller than Garoppolo, but they're similar.
Norv knows best, of course, but I really like this guy and think he will too. Probably. Maybe. Possibly.
Wednesday, December 25, 2013
Monday, December 23, 2013
Go Browns! Closing in on Franchise QB! Nice Job!
Yeah that really sucked. Campbell is making me look dumb. He was inaccurate again. Don't know if he overlooked open recievers again yet...
Is anybody else starting to begin to notice those running plays that got blown up in the backfield? Is it dawning on you that Adrian Peterson couldn't have escaped that, and that this is a blocking issue?
Now look at this: Everybody is dropping passes!
Still, one writer from ESPN was pretty ignorant about the Browns problems. He describes a team just full of holes, then talks about how the drops and penalties really hurt them. He mentions two dropped touchdown passes, Gipson's bonehead move that probably gave the Jets a field goal, and other errors having nothing to do with talent.
I suppose this means that Josh Gordon, who dropped at least one of the passes, now officially sucks. That Gipson sucks. That Hoyer, when he comes back, will suck, along with any quarterback they draft. I guess this means that Thomas and Mack suck.
Bullcrap. This team needs to upgrade at guard (which could mean drafting a right tackle and moving people-or the emergence of one of three guys already on the roster, ripening in the nursery).
Inside linebackers, fullbacks, possession recievers, and guards aren't often drafted in the top twenty of a draft, and many pro bowlers at these positions emerge from the third round or below.
Another bad analyst warned that anybody who thinks the Browns can fix all their problems in one offseason is mistaken. The Browns have an extra first, third, and fourth round pick and 25 mil in cap space. See previous paragraph, goober.
Try to grasp this: There are twenty two starters. Not fifty. The Browns don't really need to replace: Thomas, Mack, Schwartze (probably a good GUARD ok?), Cameron, Gordon, Hoyer, Baker, anybody on the defensive line, Jackson, any of three outside linebackers, Skrine, Haden, Gipson, or Ward. Can't you count?
I've left out a certain running back who broke his leg and will return next season, three practice squad offensive linemen with great potential, two of whom can play right tackle, one center, and all three guard.
In this game I saw some nifty stuff from Josh Cooper, and have some hope for the slot reciever position next season.
The Browns are in a 6-way tie for the second worst record with four wins, and the Texans lead the race for the top overall pick with 3.
Experience has taught me that now that it means nothing, the Browns could upset Pittsburgh due to their superior overall talent, but I remain hopeful that they will lose.
Due to their unfortunate success within the division, this would still have them drafting sixth overall at best, and more likely seventh.
Funny comments: One poster said he didn't believe in drafting quarterbacks that high. Laughing yet?
Another poster said skip the quarterback, draft an offensive lineman.
Another poster said he expected Bortles to be drafted third overall by the Raiders. From his other comments, I know this guy is pretty smart, but I doubt that. This guys seems to assume that both Carr and Bridgewater will be gone, and that the Raiders agree with him (and me) that Bortles will be the best of the rest.
On the Bridgewater staying in college issue, I doubt it. And sure hope not.
However, it's now looking more and more like Bortles won't fall to the Browns, and if they really want him they'll have to trade up. Even the trade-up is questionable, because those teams want quarterbacks too.
In the event that they either don't see a real franchise guy, or do but can't get him, what should they do?
Being the anti-Grossi, my default answer as always is to trade down if they can. They could move down 3-5 slots and still get an exceptional right tackle; ie one with the physical tools to play left tackle. That move should land them a second round pick.
Think about that: Cyrus Kouandjio or Taylor Lewan now opposite Joe Thomas, Mitchell Schwartze playing guard, and now a low first, high second, and middle second round pick coming right behind them!
That's a wide reciever, center (if neccessary), and (pick one) stud inside backer or corner or whatever--even before you get to the high and low third and high fourth rounder where the fullbacks, running backs, guards, and inside linbackers linger overlong.
I'm sure that among those picks a project quarterback would be drafted for Turner and company to mold from the ground up, and meanwhile they'd trust in Hoyer and (I hope) retain Campbell for depth and guidance.
That's making the best of a tough situation. This would give Hoyer better protection, a stronger run game, another reliable and probably dangerous target, and a stronger defense. Even if Hoyer doesn't in the long run emerge as a truly elite quarterback (and I believe he will), he'll probably LOOK like one.
Anybody who thinks the Browns CAN'T turn this thing around in one offseason just isn't paying attention.
Never thought I'd say this: Go Stoolers.
Is anybody else starting to begin to notice those running plays that got blown up in the backfield? Is it dawning on you that Adrian Peterson couldn't have escaped that, and that this is a blocking issue?
Now look at this: Everybody is dropping passes!
Still, one writer from ESPN was pretty ignorant about the Browns problems. He describes a team just full of holes, then talks about how the drops and penalties really hurt them. He mentions two dropped touchdown passes, Gipson's bonehead move that probably gave the Jets a field goal, and other errors having nothing to do with talent.
I suppose this means that Josh Gordon, who dropped at least one of the passes, now officially sucks. That Gipson sucks. That Hoyer, when he comes back, will suck, along with any quarterback they draft. I guess this means that Thomas and Mack suck.
Bullcrap. This team needs to upgrade at guard (which could mean drafting a right tackle and moving people-or the emergence of one of three guys already on the roster, ripening in the nursery).
Inside linebackers, fullbacks, possession recievers, and guards aren't often drafted in the top twenty of a draft, and many pro bowlers at these positions emerge from the third round or below.
Another bad analyst warned that anybody who thinks the Browns can fix all their problems in one offseason is mistaken. The Browns have an extra first, third, and fourth round pick and 25 mil in cap space. See previous paragraph, goober.
Try to grasp this: There are twenty two starters. Not fifty. The Browns don't really need to replace: Thomas, Mack, Schwartze (probably a good GUARD ok?), Cameron, Gordon, Hoyer, Baker, anybody on the defensive line, Jackson, any of three outside linebackers, Skrine, Haden, Gipson, or Ward. Can't you count?
I've left out a certain running back who broke his leg and will return next season, three practice squad offensive linemen with great potential, two of whom can play right tackle, one center, and all three guard.
In this game I saw some nifty stuff from Josh Cooper, and have some hope for the slot reciever position next season.
The Browns are in a 6-way tie for the second worst record with four wins, and the Texans lead the race for the top overall pick with 3.
Experience has taught me that now that it means nothing, the Browns could upset Pittsburgh due to their superior overall talent, but I remain hopeful that they will lose.
Due to their unfortunate success within the division, this would still have them drafting sixth overall at best, and more likely seventh.
Funny comments: One poster said he didn't believe in drafting quarterbacks that high. Laughing yet?
Another poster said skip the quarterback, draft an offensive lineman.
Another poster said he expected Bortles to be drafted third overall by the Raiders. From his other comments, I know this guy is pretty smart, but I doubt that. This guys seems to assume that both Carr and Bridgewater will be gone, and that the Raiders agree with him (and me) that Bortles will be the best of the rest.
On the Bridgewater staying in college issue, I doubt it. And sure hope not.
However, it's now looking more and more like Bortles won't fall to the Browns, and if they really want him they'll have to trade up. Even the trade-up is questionable, because those teams want quarterbacks too.
In the event that they either don't see a real franchise guy, or do but can't get him, what should they do?
Being the anti-Grossi, my default answer as always is to trade down if they can. They could move down 3-5 slots and still get an exceptional right tackle; ie one with the physical tools to play left tackle. That move should land them a second round pick.
Think about that: Cyrus Kouandjio or Taylor Lewan now opposite Joe Thomas, Mitchell Schwartze playing guard, and now a low first, high second, and middle second round pick coming right behind them!
That's a wide reciever, center (if neccessary), and (pick one) stud inside backer or corner or whatever--even before you get to the high and low third and high fourth rounder where the fullbacks, running backs, guards, and inside linbackers linger overlong.
I'm sure that among those picks a project quarterback would be drafted for Turner and company to mold from the ground up, and meanwhile they'd trust in Hoyer and (I hope) retain Campbell for depth and guidance.
That's making the best of a tough situation. This would give Hoyer better protection, a stronger run game, another reliable and probably dangerous target, and a stronger defense. Even if Hoyer doesn't in the long run emerge as a truly elite quarterback (and I believe he will), he'll probably LOOK like one.
Anybody who thinks the Browns CAN'T turn this thing around in one offseason just isn't paying attention.
Never thought I'd say this: Go Stoolers.
Thursday, December 12, 2013
Finally Saw Bortles
I saw Blake Bortles' highlights. Naturally, these are the best plays he made, so it's one-sided. But these videos are useful for showing you how guys move, lead, throw, etc.
The guy who compared him to Big Ben--I just don't know what he was looking at. That's Andrew Luck. No I'm not saying he's that good (yet), but he's athletic and fast, which Ben is not.
I also watched the last three minutes of his game with Bridgewater and Louisville. Bortles was down by four points, and he covered around eighty yards, mostly by air, finishing with a touchdown pass in the corner of the end zone off a roll-out.
What I learned: That looked like a pro-style offense to me, for one thing. I was also very impressed by some of his tight throws way downfield. I mean guys were absolutely well-covered, but he put that ball in this tiny little bucket where only his (by the way impressive) recievers could catch it.
Those were NFL throws. The pros can't cover better than that without interfering. They were also gutsy throws.
He's not a yeller or a foot-stomper. He looked calm at all times. No doubt because of his coolness, some will question his leadership. Some people think leadership means you yell and scream a lot. Ignore them. Quarterbacks who don't get rattled are instant leaders.
These videos didn't show him running much, and I gather that he has a professional-type attitude about only running when he has to, or when it counts. The one run I saw was a TD scramble from the 6 yard line.
I'm not the expert on mechanics that Norv Turner is, but I also saw him throw while moving with precision. He has remarkable body control and balance.
I really like this guy!
One thing I didn't see (or I might have missed it) was his throwing with anticipation. I don't believe that offense uses timing that much, and it's not his fault.
I do know that when Norv and company work him out with real recievers, one of the first things they'll do is have him throw timing routes. They'll say "he's going to break inside eleven yards downfield--a slant not a cross--and when he turns to look, that ball needs to be almost there".
Seriously, this is very hard for some guys. I'll bet Bortles will be fine, because of the guts it took to make some of those throws I saw him make. He's just not the scared type.
No doubt, there is some work to do on him--which wasn't evident in the videos I watched, but he sure looked like an NFL quarterback to me, and I'm not at all surprised that some of the smarter mock drafters have the Browns taking him (with Carr gone).
In re that, I just gave up trying to watch the Carr highlights. They did show that he's emotional and fiery, so shallow analysts will recognize leadership--but they mostly showed that and not many actual plays.
We have yet to see the Bowl games, Senior Bowl, combine etc., but I kind of doubt that Bortles is going to slide any. I do think that Derek Carr will pass Bridgewater as the better NFL prospect, and maybe be drafted ahead of him.
In fact, I think a lot of people are already selling this draft class short in acting like the very idea of comparing Carr to Luck and Bridgewater to RG3 is rediculous.
Not at all! It's a good comparison. It's just that preconcieved notion/prejudice thing. I mean, there just couldn't be two drafts like that only a year apart!
Bortles to the Browns...a year behind Carr at most, developmentally. I like it.
The guy who compared him to Big Ben--I just don't know what he was looking at. That's Andrew Luck. No I'm not saying he's that good (yet), but he's athletic and fast, which Ben is not.
I also watched the last three minutes of his game with Bridgewater and Louisville. Bortles was down by four points, and he covered around eighty yards, mostly by air, finishing with a touchdown pass in the corner of the end zone off a roll-out.
What I learned: That looked like a pro-style offense to me, for one thing. I was also very impressed by some of his tight throws way downfield. I mean guys were absolutely well-covered, but he put that ball in this tiny little bucket where only his (by the way impressive) recievers could catch it.
Those were NFL throws. The pros can't cover better than that without interfering. They were also gutsy throws.
He's not a yeller or a foot-stomper. He looked calm at all times. No doubt because of his coolness, some will question his leadership. Some people think leadership means you yell and scream a lot. Ignore them. Quarterbacks who don't get rattled are instant leaders.
These videos didn't show him running much, and I gather that he has a professional-type attitude about only running when he has to, or when it counts. The one run I saw was a TD scramble from the 6 yard line.
I'm not the expert on mechanics that Norv Turner is, but I also saw him throw while moving with precision. He has remarkable body control and balance.
I really like this guy!
One thing I didn't see (or I might have missed it) was his throwing with anticipation. I don't believe that offense uses timing that much, and it's not his fault.
I do know that when Norv and company work him out with real recievers, one of the first things they'll do is have him throw timing routes. They'll say "he's going to break inside eleven yards downfield--a slant not a cross--and when he turns to look, that ball needs to be almost there".
Seriously, this is very hard for some guys. I'll bet Bortles will be fine, because of the guts it took to make some of those throws I saw him make. He's just not the scared type.
No doubt, there is some work to do on him--which wasn't evident in the videos I watched, but he sure looked like an NFL quarterback to me, and I'm not at all surprised that some of the smarter mock drafters have the Browns taking him (with Carr gone).
In re that, I just gave up trying to watch the Carr highlights. They did show that he's emotional and fiery, so shallow analysts will recognize leadership--but they mostly showed that and not many actual plays.
We have yet to see the Bowl games, Senior Bowl, combine etc., but I kind of doubt that Bortles is going to slide any. I do think that Derek Carr will pass Bridgewater as the better NFL prospect, and maybe be drafted ahead of him.
In fact, I think a lot of people are already selling this draft class short in acting like the very idea of comparing Carr to Luck and Bridgewater to RG3 is rediculous.
Not at all! It's a good comparison. It's just that preconcieved notion/prejudice thing. I mean, there just couldn't be two drafts like that only a year apart!
Bortles to the Browns...a year behind Carr at most, developmentally. I like it.
Mocking the Mock Drafts
Before I mock the mock drafts, I need to mock the Jay Cutler-to-Cleveland stuff. Cutler is a very good aging quarterback who will cost a lot of money.
In Wiley's no-spin zone, he's not significantly better than either Hoyer or Campbell. Despite Campbell's stellar performances when healthy, the younger Hoyer will have first crack at starting next season, and I do hope that Campbell will be retained as insurance.
And give Hoyer a chance. He could be better than Cutler.
One writer cites three reasons why the Browns must draft Johnny Manziel. He makes a respectable argument, but there are too many questions about this kid.
He may have grown out of his off-the-field antics, and it's ignorant to always blame the quarterback for losing every time he faces elite competition, but the questions are valid.
He may have the speed and elusiveness to run through NFL defenses, but will he hold up?
And because Wilson succeeded, does it necessarily follow that 5'10" quarterbacks are okay now? We forget the ODDS against them.
The Coryall/Turner system operates out of an old-fashioned pocket, which is why bigger, taller quarterbacks with shotgun arms are preferred. Shorter quarterbacks have to move around to see recievers and get throwing lanes.
Manziel may indeed kick butt in the NFL, but I doubt that Norv Turner and company agree with this writer about this guy in this offense.
Many feel that should the Browns end up at seven, Carr may not be there for them, but I find the notion that they would never trade up for him kind of funny.
But this Blake Bortles guy has come out of nowhere. No mistake: Carr is more polished, experienced, proven and safer, but this guy has a lot to recommend him.
Seven would be considered a reach, but not if he's Turner's guy. They'd ignore the angry mobs and take him there--and lock Lombardi in the basement if necessary.
One reason they might draft Bortles is because with two veterans ahead of him, Turner (and Campbell) can work with him. For Norv, a less experienced guy is actually better, since he's not as set in his ways, and can be polished up in the pro game, by pro coaches and trainers.
What can't be taught, and what separates a franchise quarterback from a Romo, is performance under pressure. Bortles comes from behind.
This Bleacher Report mock draft had the Browns drafting Jake Matthews, son of Bruce.
What's with these guys wanting to draft left tackles to play right tackle? I mean, it would be just awesome to have those bookends with Schwartze inside, and Matthews could also back up big Joe and eventually replace him...
Nah since the new rookie salary scale I can't really knock that too hard, except that he's foregoing the most important position on the team, which is quarterback.
Look, among NFL quarterbacks, almost every elite one was a first round draft pick. For every Tom Brady, there are at least twenty busts, and that includes the second-rounders.
Contrary to what some are now saying (Tony Grossi), this is a really good quarterback class, and if you hold out for can't-misses you will never, ever find one. If you think you can just wait til 2015 and see what's there instead, great--because with Hoyer and Campbell healthy, they'll win most of their games and draft low.
No, they've got to look hard at these quarterbacks, and get their eventual franchise guy now, so they can begin developing him in an ideal environment.
Possibly, Matthews is there at seven and they can find somebody willing to trade up for him. They could still get Bortles (if they want him.) Possibly Carr makes it to them, and most likely they'd just draft him.
And as I began, if they want Carr--they could make a move to nab him.
Like some obnoxious posters, I let my imagination run away with me about trades and the like, but what if it just stays as-is and they can't trade down: Say they take Bortles, and damn the torpedoes (Some compare him to big Ben or even Andrew Luck.)
They might draft a tackle at 23 (or wherever)! Wouldn't be as good as Matthews, but still a really good player which (with the Schwartze move to guard) would upgrade two fifths of the offensive line.
I believe that upgrade would be the most immediately helpful thing for this team, since it enhances both pass and run.
Those who deem a wide reciever more important don't seem to grasp the fact that Jordan Cameron is already the counterweight to Josh Gordon, and although Little's production has declined, he doesn't suck.
But...well okay if you insist they can get a wide reciever in the second round. There are three of them with "1-2" round grades who are over 6'2" and would fit in well here.
But there are others who could be had lower, like the huge 6'5", 235 lb. Kelvin Benjamin. Benjamin's production (50 receptions, 20 YPC) is hurt by the fact that the Seminoles offense is loaded at reciever, and the ball goes all over the place.
He could have a conversion to tight end in his future, but is projected by analysts as a wide reciever. Despite his gaudy yards-per catch number, he's not very fast or explosive (for a wide reciever), but (now I'm officially guessing) does get separation and is hard to bring down--getting nice yards-after-catch.
This is a number two reciever who could exploit single coverage opposite Gordon, and a huge red zone threat. Nothing spectacular, but a great fit who could be there in the third round or lower.
Ah well-it's all just speculation right now, as the Browns prepare for da Bearss.
Sadly, I think the Browns are going to stomp them into the mud and hurt their draft status.
Oh well.
In Wiley's no-spin zone, he's not significantly better than either Hoyer or Campbell. Despite Campbell's stellar performances when healthy, the younger Hoyer will have first crack at starting next season, and I do hope that Campbell will be retained as insurance.
And give Hoyer a chance. He could be better than Cutler.
One writer cites three reasons why the Browns must draft Johnny Manziel. He makes a respectable argument, but there are too many questions about this kid.
He may have grown out of his off-the-field antics, and it's ignorant to always blame the quarterback for losing every time he faces elite competition, but the questions are valid.
He may have the speed and elusiveness to run through NFL defenses, but will he hold up?
And because Wilson succeeded, does it necessarily follow that 5'10" quarterbacks are okay now? We forget the ODDS against them.
The Coryall/Turner system operates out of an old-fashioned pocket, which is why bigger, taller quarterbacks with shotgun arms are preferred. Shorter quarterbacks have to move around to see recievers and get throwing lanes.
Manziel may indeed kick butt in the NFL, but I doubt that Norv Turner and company agree with this writer about this guy in this offense.
Many feel that should the Browns end up at seven, Carr may not be there for them, but I find the notion that they would never trade up for him kind of funny.
But this Blake Bortles guy has come out of nowhere. No mistake: Carr is more polished, experienced, proven and safer, but this guy has a lot to recommend him.
Seven would be considered a reach, but not if he's Turner's guy. They'd ignore the angry mobs and take him there--and lock Lombardi in the basement if necessary.
One reason they might draft Bortles is because with two veterans ahead of him, Turner (and Campbell) can work with him. For Norv, a less experienced guy is actually better, since he's not as set in his ways, and can be polished up in the pro game, by pro coaches and trainers.
What can't be taught, and what separates a franchise quarterback from a Romo, is performance under pressure. Bortles comes from behind.
This Bleacher Report mock draft had the Browns drafting Jake Matthews, son of Bruce.
What's with these guys wanting to draft left tackles to play right tackle? I mean, it would be just awesome to have those bookends with Schwartze inside, and Matthews could also back up big Joe and eventually replace him...
Nah since the new rookie salary scale I can't really knock that too hard, except that he's foregoing the most important position on the team, which is quarterback.
Look, among NFL quarterbacks, almost every elite one was a first round draft pick. For every Tom Brady, there are at least twenty busts, and that includes the second-rounders.
Contrary to what some are now saying (Tony Grossi), this is a really good quarterback class, and if you hold out for can't-misses you will never, ever find one. If you think you can just wait til 2015 and see what's there instead, great--because with Hoyer and Campbell healthy, they'll win most of their games and draft low.
No, they've got to look hard at these quarterbacks, and get their eventual franchise guy now, so they can begin developing him in an ideal environment.
Possibly, Matthews is there at seven and they can find somebody willing to trade up for him. They could still get Bortles (if they want him.) Possibly Carr makes it to them, and most likely they'd just draft him.
And as I began, if they want Carr--they could make a move to nab him.
Like some obnoxious posters, I let my imagination run away with me about trades and the like, but what if it just stays as-is and they can't trade down: Say they take Bortles, and damn the torpedoes (Some compare him to big Ben or even Andrew Luck.)
They might draft a tackle at 23 (or wherever)! Wouldn't be as good as Matthews, but still a really good player which (with the Schwartze move to guard) would upgrade two fifths of the offensive line.
I believe that upgrade would be the most immediately helpful thing for this team, since it enhances both pass and run.
Those who deem a wide reciever more important don't seem to grasp the fact that Jordan Cameron is already the counterweight to Josh Gordon, and although Little's production has declined, he doesn't suck.
But...well okay if you insist they can get a wide reciever in the second round. There are three of them with "1-2" round grades who are over 6'2" and would fit in well here.
But there are others who could be had lower, like the huge 6'5", 235 lb. Kelvin Benjamin. Benjamin's production (50 receptions, 20 YPC) is hurt by the fact that the Seminoles offense is loaded at reciever, and the ball goes all over the place.
He could have a conversion to tight end in his future, but is projected by analysts as a wide reciever. Despite his gaudy yards-per catch number, he's not very fast or explosive (for a wide reciever), but (now I'm officially guessing) does get separation and is hard to bring down--getting nice yards-after-catch.
This is a number two reciever who could exploit single coverage opposite Gordon, and a huge red zone threat. Nothing spectacular, but a great fit who could be there in the third round or lower.
Ah well-it's all just speculation right now, as the Browns prepare for da Bearss.
Sadly, I think the Browns are going to stomp them into the mud and hurt their draft status.
Oh well.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Referees, not Patriots, Beat Browns
I knew it would be like this after the game.
Look, Chud and the players have to take the blame for this loss. They must continue striving for perfection, and can't allow themselves to accept an imperfect performance as good enough.
They must also focus on controlling what they can control, since dwelling on THREE horrible bullcrap calls is counterproductive.
But when columnists and fans parrot all that stuff, it's pretty disgusting.
Look: You get paid daily for making widgets. You get paid per widget. So ok, you go to work early and have a record run of widgets. It would have been even more, but you didn't catch a miscalibration in time and had to scrap a run of bad widgets, which came out of your pay.
But you work 12 hours and then come home with your bag of money. While you're taking a shower, a guy in a striped shirt breaks in and steals it.
Following the logic of all these people, the bad run of widgets cost you your money. Bullcrap.
When a quarterback is outside the tackle box, he can throw it anywhere he wants. Intentional grounding is not even possible. A shoulder-to-shoulder hit is legal anywhere on the field. And interference is--well just interference--not touching, or going for the ball!
Had the game been properly officiated, the Browns probably would have won, and they earned it.
Mysticism--preconcieved notions: well Josh Gordon is "obviously no Calvin Johnson". No, because he gets more yards per-catch, has more yards overall in two fewer games, and did it with three different quarterbacks, one of which is a bust.
He's the best reciever in the NFL, period. Get used to it.
The offensive line did a great job, but the biggest reason Campbell was as good as he was in his first two games was because his ribs weren't killing him when he threw. A healthy Campbell always plays above average.
I'm confiscating "desperately". I just read this Bleacher Report analysis of the Browns' needs.
In fairness, it was pretty logical, although it inflated what really is a "could use an upgrade" to a "need" for a wide reciever opposite Gordon, and there was that word: "desperate". The Browns also "desperately" need a couple more things, apparently.
You need to save these adjectives for when they really apply. "Desperate" means something, and maybe you should look it up in your Funk&Wagnal so you know that.
Aside from this annoying tendancy of the writer to overstate everything, the article didn't really suck. Guard could use an upgrade, and the two he named looked pretty good. Some of his proposed free agents look to be very expensive, but none were over the hill.
One commenter did take him to task: Golden Tate is overrated, and Eric Decker aint all that without Manning throwing to him. The commenter has an anger management issue, but these were interesting points. Decker in particular--he'll cost an arm and a leg, and how much of his big numbers are Peyton Manning, and how much him?
Ben Tate is only 25, and (despite what the commenter said) could be available. There will be a bidding war for him, though. I'd love to have him here as the running back.
Ask Tony: Tony Grossi says that the only big name running back to make a big impact with a new team is Micheal Turner. He favors finding a running back to compete with Owens in the middle rounds, and using free agency to get a battering-ram fullback instead.
That does seem to make more sense.
A little later, a guy asked Tony about the offensive line pass-protecting. Tony said:
Hey Jerry: Is the Browns’ O-line an impenetrable wall of protection? No. Is it the worst I’ve seen? Not at all. I recognize there have been breakdowns from all sides at various times. But more often than not I find myself screaming, “Get rid of the ball!” The quarterback has to make a decision within three seconds. After that, bad things usually occur.
What HE said!
The Browns desperate need to fill this cavernously humungus gaping hole is urgent.
Look, Chud and the players have to take the blame for this loss. They must continue striving for perfection, and can't allow themselves to accept an imperfect performance as good enough.
They must also focus on controlling what they can control, since dwelling on THREE horrible bullcrap calls is counterproductive.
But when columnists and fans parrot all that stuff, it's pretty disgusting.
Look: You get paid daily for making widgets. You get paid per widget. So ok, you go to work early and have a record run of widgets. It would have been even more, but you didn't catch a miscalibration in time and had to scrap a run of bad widgets, which came out of your pay.
But you work 12 hours and then come home with your bag of money. While you're taking a shower, a guy in a striped shirt breaks in and steals it.
Following the logic of all these people, the bad run of widgets cost you your money. Bullcrap.
When a quarterback is outside the tackle box, he can throw it anywhere he wants. Intentional grounding is not even possible. A shoulder-to-shoulder hit is legal anywhere on the field. And interference is--well just interference--not touching, or going for the ball!
Had the game been properly officiated, the Browns probably would have won, and they earned it.
Mysticism--preconcieved notions: well Josh Gordon is "obviously no Calvin Johnson". No, because he gets more yards per-catch, has more yards overall in two fewer games, and did it with three different quarterbacks, one of which is a bust.
He's the best reciever in the NFL, period. Get used to it.
The offensive line did a great job, but the biggest reason Campbell was as good as he was in his first two games was because his ribs weren't killing him when he threw. A healthy Campbell always plays above average.
I'm confiscating "desperately". I just read this Bleacher Report analysis of the Browns' needs.
In fairness, it was pretty logical, although it inflated what really is a "could use an upgrade" to a "need" for a wide reciever opposite Gordon, and there was that word: "desperate". The Browns also "desperately" need a couple more things, apparently.
You need to save these adjectives for when they really apply. "Desperate" means something, and maybe you should look it up in your Funk&Wagnal so you know that.
Aside from this annoying tendancy of the writer to overstate everything, the article didn't really suck. Guard could use an upgrade, and the two he named looked pretty good. Some of his proposed free agents look to be very expensive, but none were over the hill.
One commenter did take him to task: Golden Tate is overrated, and Eric Decker aint all that without Manning throwing to him. The commenter has an anger management issue, but these were interesting points. Decker in particular--he'll cost an arm and a leg, and how much of his big numbers are Peyton Manning, and how much him?
Ben Tate is only 25, and (despite what the commenter said) could be available. There will be a bidding war for him, though. I'd love to have him here as the running back.
Ask Tony: Tony Grossi says that the only big name running back to make a big impact with a new team is Micheal Turner. He favors finding a running back to compete with Owens in the middle rounds, and using free agency to get a battering-ram fullback instead.
That does seem to make more sense.
A little later, a guy asked Tony about the offensive line pass-protecting. Tony said:
Hey Jerry: Is the Browns’ O-line an impenetrable wall of protection? No. Is it the worst I’ve seen? Not at all. I recognize there have been breakdowns from all sides at various times. But more often than not I find myself screaming, “Get rid of the ball!” The quarterback has to make a decision within three seconds. After that, bad things usually occur.
What HE said!
The Browns desperate need to fill this cavernously humungus gaping hole is urgent.
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Browns vs. Pats
Yesterday I had this as a loss in ink, but now I hear there might be a snowstorm. That would give the Browns a slight chance.
The Pats can run the ball, but the Browns have been pretty good against the run. Gronk could thrive in snow, and that would certainly be a problem, but it would also help Cameron.
The Browns could gear up for the run in snow and this time maybe get some chunk-plays out of this stable. Gordon's smooth, long striding running style might give him an edge (educated guess--I'm not sure).
Brady has a good arm, but not great (here outside the hype-zone) and could be a little off in weather. Niether team's speed rushers will have an easy time because they'll slip if they try to cut too hard...but it shouldn't bother Phil Taylor at all, and Rubin might be the same.
Here you like the shorter inside Browns' linebackers.
Here's another thing about Gronk: Robertson can run with him. Too bad Gronk has so much reach on him and can push him around. At least he can try to drag him down and might get lucky with a low throw or something.
Yeah I still think the Pats will win, but a snowstorm probably helps the Browns' a little.
The Pats can run the ball, but the Browns have been pretty good against the run. Gronk could thrive in snow, and that would certainly be a problem, but it would also help Cameron.
The Browns could gear up for the run in snow and this time maybe get some chunk-plays out of this stable. Gordon's smooth, long striding running style might give him an edge (educated guess--I'm not sure).
Brady has a good arm, but not great (here outside the hype-zone) and could be a little off in weather. Niether team's speed rushers will have an easy time because they'll slip if they try to cut too hard...but it shouldn't bother Phil Taylor at all, and Rubin might be the same.
Here you like the shorter inside Browns' linebackers.
Here's another thing about Gronk: Robertson can run with him. Too bad Gronk has so much reach on him and can push him around. At least he can try to drag him down and might get lucky with a low throw or something.
Yeah I still think the Pats will win, but a snowstorm probably helps the Browns' a little.
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Stuff
I really liked Backwoods' (Dawg Pound Daily)'s analysis if the current front office, although it sounded eerily familiar...
He likened them to a construction crew. Do you want a house built overnight (with cheap materials and hastily), or one that's well planned? Solid foundation. Insulated. 50-year roof.
I still like my temper-tantrum "now now now!" analogy in re the impatient fans he's addressing.
I keep hearing it. Same old Browns. The owner is in his second season, the Joe Banner and the coaches in their first! "Same old"? Slap yourself, okay?
Sure, we've been through this over and over, and been disappointed every time so far. But NONE of these guys was here! And no, there's NOT a bunch of loser or stupid in the water! These guys are great at what they do, and will keep being great.
Oh yeah, Lombardi. Well how much damage has he done so far, aside from getting that bumb Hoyer in here?
By the way, Joe Banner is technically in charge of personnel. He takes input from Lombardi and the coaches, so Mikey is just one of five voices (don't forget the highly regarded Farmer).
More on Lombardi: Okay calling the Weeden pick "panic" was idiotic, but he was right about Weeden, and right about Hoyer. He came here being blamed for the Oakland Raiders drafts, as if he actually made ANY of those picks.
Whether or not he's really a great judge of talent, he has something in common with Gil Brandt: an encyclopedic memory. He knows all the stats of all the players. He knows about their character and personal lives. He's a valuable resource, in the role he's in here.
Had to copy/paste this fan comment following a Tony Grossi article on espncleveland.com:
He likened them to a construction crew. Do you want a house built overnight (with cheap materials and hastily), or one that's well planned? Solid foundation. Insulated. 50-year roof.
I still like my temper-tantrum "now now now!" analogy in re the impatient fans he's addressing.
I keep hearing it. Same old Browns. The owner is in his second season, the Joe Banner and the coaches in their first! "Same old"? Slap yourself, okay?
Sure, we've been through this over and over, and been disappointed every time so far. But NONE of these guys was here! And no, there's NOT a bunch of loser or stupid in the water! These guys are great at what they do, and will keep being great.
Oh yeah, Lombardi. Well how much damage has he done so far, aside from getting that bumb Hoyer in here?
By the way, Joe Banner is technically in charge of personnel. He takes input from Lombardi and the coaches, so Mikey is just one of five voices (don't forget the highly regarded Farmer).
More on Lombardi: Okay calling the Weeden pick "panic" was idiotic, but he was right about Weeden, and right about Hoyer. He came here being blamed for the Oakland Raiders drafts, as if he actually made ANY of those picks.
Whether or not he's really a great judge of talent, he has something in common with Gil Brandt: an encyclopedic memory. He knows all the stats of all the players. He knows about their character and personal lives. He's a valuable resource, in the role he's in here.
Had to copy/paste this fan comment following a Tony Grossi article on espncleveland.com:
I like Campbell for Hoyer's backup next year. Draft one of the studs coming out, develop him for a couple years, and stick with Hoyer as starter for 2 seasons and let's see where it goes.
Now here's a guy who gets it. 'Nuff said.
I watched a Peter King interview of Josh Gordon, which was my first chance to hear the guy speak in person. He seems pretty together and intelligent. I doesn't neccesarily mean that he'll stay out of trouble, but it's a good sign.
By the way, do you remember when that reporter who accused him of loafing here, he had a bumb wheel? I do. They don't want him aggravating an injury so they probably TOLD him to take it easy DUH.
More on this: Teddy Bruschi: "He's obviously not Calvin Johnson but--"
What's he got to do? And just in general, what's with all this "turning into--", "emerging as" stuff? That was last season. He's been lights out all this season! He HAS emerged! He IS an elite reciever, and might be BETTER than Johnson!
Quit rolling your eyes look at the stats! Think with your brain, not your preconceptions--ADAPT! He is doing what he is doing, period. Go with the stats: That is Josh Gordon having missed two games.
We're negative around here, just in general. Like Campbell: He kicks ass for two games, then injures his ribs. So now he sucks. Why doesn't it occur to anybody else that his injury caused this? Why does it have to be "that's Campbell--up and down" when that's not true either!
He's not good coming off the bench. He was putrid in one game in Chicago. But for most of his career he's been fairly consistant as a good-but-not-great quarterback. If he was "up-and-down" I guess that's fluctuating between average and great.
But this is Cleveland. Instead of just accepting the articles about his rib injury, you read that and keep repeating this "up-and-down" crap!
WEDONE is up-and-down! He's not in the same ballpark as Campbell! (and no I didn't misspell his name by accident).
It probably won't be enough to beat Doctor Evil and company in New England tomorrow, but at least they're talking like the week off helped his ribs heal, so he should be able to do some damage if he gets any time...
And I doubt that because Bill will attack to keep the offense to 3-step drops and Gordon from going vertical on him.
But there's an outside chance here, because the crosses and slants are Campbell's favorite passes, so in a way Bill has to play to his strength.
I just think this will be his approach because Gordon is scarier than Campbell.
Not that Bill has much to worry about. Josh could score like 4 times and Brady will just outscore him.
Yeah I know. Now I sound negative too.
You know what could save the Browns? If the damn offensive line can actually pick up a blitze once in awhile.
Ah yes, the screen pass. Give it up. They don't have a guard who can get in position quickly enough.
And anybody can be stopped, including the Pats offense. Okay well I mean slowed down. This defense does have the horses inside to cave in that pocket and get Brady off his mark.
See some people don't know this, but preventing a QB from stepping up is the real key, and this could even include a decked defensive lineman laying there. The QB can't step on him so he has to throw off his back foot or move.
Taylor, Rubin, and company can get that done, even against this offensive line.
Then they'll run all over us ok I give up.
Mock Drafts: Some mock drafts don't have the Browns' drafting a quarterback with their first pick. I'm not sure I understand why, since I'll bet if you ask the same people what they think of Hoyer, they'd be uncertain.
As usual, many are clueless: One identified inside linebacker as a "glaring need", and several seem to think that wide reciever is urgent.
More urgent than running back, guard (RT), and in some cases quarterback.
Another stud wide reciever would be great, but the problems the Browns offense have been having in both the pass and the run are more about the offensive line.
The inside linebacker one--wow. Sure a superstud would be an upgrade, but you identify this as a top need?
Carr seems to be the QB most often mentioned. One thing scares me about him: His brother.
Currently ranked ninth overall and second at quarterback by CBS, for the moment he looks pretty good, and a great fit. He's a pocket passer who has really nice mobility as a bonus.
He's a senior, so he has some experience. According to Bob Rang, this season he's refined his touch to go with his great arm, and throws with anticipation (very very important--Weeden didn't).
I doubt that any of this has anything whatsoever to do with why many mock drafters see the Browns' drafting Carr. It's all about being number nine and number two, respectively. That's an easy wild guess to make.
One mocker had them drafting Manziel seventh overall. I doubt that.
Brett Hundley has slid all the way to 41 overall and fourth among QB's (behind Manziel), but I can't really see why.
His analysis was another maddening one. He's very accurate but his placement is a work in progress. He sets up and delivers quickly, and scrambles with his eyes downfield extremely well, but must work on feeling the rush and finding targets quicker.
This analyst has all his bases covered, doesn't he?
He fits well here too, as he runs an aggressive deep-ball offense. He's both bigger and faster than Carr, and sounds a little like Cam Newton.
One thing I saw about Carr that Hundley doesn't show is those anticipation throws. It's very hard for some guys to throw the ball to a reciever whose back is to him; to throw to the "spot" where the reciever is supposed to meet the ball.
Hundley has a 10:1 touchdown-to-pick ratio, which is pretty stunning considering that he throws so many deep passes. He plays at a higher level of competition than Carr (but like I've said big deal he's a quarterback).
UCLA has a bad history with quarterbacks who are drafted. They haven't panned out. This could force his stock down too.
Hundley might not even come out in this draft, but I hope he does. Norv can figure out the anticipation thing, he wouldn't have to start right away, and it's even possible that he could go in the twenties; that the Browns could (YES,TONY) trade down and still get him, or get him with their second first-rounder.
Disclaimer: I know nothing about any of these guys other than what I read.
Like, I know that Hundley is very accurate but isn't, has a quick release but holds the ball, eludes the rush but can't feel it...
Mock Drafts: Some mock drafts don't have the Browns' drafting a quarterback with their first pick. I'm not sure I understand why, since I'll bet if you ask the same people what they think of Hoyer, they'd be uncertain.
As usual, many are clueless: One identified inside linebacker as a "glaring need", and several seem to think that wide reciever is urgent.
More urgent than running back, guard (RT), and in some cases quarterback.
Another stud wide reciever would be great, but the problems the Browns offense have been having in both the pass and the run are more about the offensive line.
The inside linebacker one--wow. Sure a superstud would be an upgrade, but you identify this as a top need?
Carr seems to be the QB most often mentioned. One thing scares me about him: His brother.
Currently ranked ninth overall and second at quarterback by CBS, for the moment he looks pretty good, and a great fit. He's a pocket passer who has really nice mobility as a bonus.
He's a senior, so he has some experience. According to Bob Rang, this season he's refined his touch to go with his great arm, and throws with anticipation (very very important--Weeden didn't).
I doubt that any of this has anything whatsoever to do with why many mock drafters see the Browns' drafting Carr. It's all about being number nine and number two, respectively. That's an easy wild guess to make.
One mocker had them drafting Manziel seventh overall. I doubt that.
Brett Hundley has slid all the way to 41 overall and fourth among QB's (behind Manziel), but I can't really see why.
His analysis was another maddening one. He's very accurate but his placement is a work in progress. He sets up and delivers quickly, and scrambles with his eyes downfield extremely well, but must work on feeling the rush and finding targets quicker.
This analyst has all his bases covered, doesn't he?
He fits well here too, as he runs an aggressive deep-ball offense. He's both bigger and faster than Carr, and sounds a little like Cam Newton.
One thing I saw about Carr that Hundley doesn't show is those anticipation throws. It's very hard for some guys to throw the ball to a reciever whose back is to him; to throw to the "spot" where the reciever is supposed to meet the ball.
Hundley has a 10:1 touchdown-to-pick ratio, which is pretty stunning considering that he throws so many deep passes. He plays at a higher level of competition than Carr (but like I've said big deal he's a quarterback).
UCLA has a bad history with quarterbacks who are drafted. They haven't panned out. This could force his stock down too.
Hundley might not even come out in this draft, but I hope he does. Norv can figure out the anticipation thing, he wouldn't have to start right away, and it's even possible that he could go in the twenties; that the Browns could (YES,TONY) trade down and still get him, or get him with their second first-rounder.
Disclaimer: I know nothing about any of these guys other than what I read.
Like, I know that Hundley is very accurate but isn't, has a quick release but holds the ball, eludes the rush but can't feel it...
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Fantasy Experts
If anybody has Alex Tanney on his fantasy team...wow.
Anyway, these experts all generally assume that if Weeden/Campbell can't play vs. Dr. Evil and his Patriots, the Browns will start Caleb Haney over Tanney.
That makes sense, since it seems obvious, and most Head Coaches are masters of the obvious. Obviously you go with the experienced guy every time, right?
I'm glad that Chud doesn't always do the obvious.
Starting Tanney would be sheer suicide, right?
Now just wait one minute: Are you telling me that Caleb Haney is better than Tanney?
Well, of course he must be, since he has been a carreer backup for a long time, and has even played some actual NFL snaps!
But is he better? Is he more accurate? Does he have a stronger arm?
Well no, but experience--
That's it. You can't use that word any more. Experience is obviously important, but you guys seem to forget that Tanney was signed as an undrafted free agent the season before this one. He's been working with NFL coaches on NFL teams since then. He's not a rookie any more.
Preseason experience is better than nothing, and Tanney has some.
Tanney has had his nose in the Browns' playbook since last week. Haney just got here. Does his experience mean he'll learn terminology and personel at twice the speed of the younger player?
I haven't studied Haney yet, but if Gordon is suddenly 30 yards downfield and boogyin', can Haney lay it out there so he doesn't have to slow down for it and let somebody catch up? I don't think so. We know Tanney can.
Can Haney scramble? (I honestly don't know yet). Tanney can, and can throw while moving (which is rare).
I know I know: This is Doctor Evil! He'll pull all sorts of insideously diabolical trickery and deciet to make him screw up! Haney has a better chance of figuring it out in time, because he's seen more evil plots and booby-traps.
That's true, but Bill knows Haney. He doesn't know Tanney. Moreover, as of now, he has to lean his preparation towards going against Haney. He can dig up Tanney's limited preseason and ancient college tapes to try to find weaknesses, but that can't help much.
He'll have to come up with generic mine-fields and snake-pits and hope Tanney will step on one.
I don't know. Maybe it would indeed be Haney, but I'd consider Tanney, and I know Chudnorv will too.
Anyway, these experts all generally assume that if Weeden/Campbell can't play vs. Dr. Evil and his Patriots, the Browns will start Caleb Haney over Tanney.
That makes sense, since it seems obvious, and most Head Coaches are masters of the obvious. Obviously you go with the experienced guy every time, right?
I'm glad that Chud doesn't always do the obvious.
Starting Tanney would be sheer suicide, right?
Now just wait one minute: Are you telling me that Caleb Haney is better than Tanney?
Well, of course he must be, since he has been a carreer backup for a long time, and has even played some actual NFL snaps!
But is he better? Is he more accurate? Does he have a stronger arm?
Well no, but experience--
That's it. You can't use that word any more. Experience is obviously important, but you guys seem to forget that Tanney was signed as an undrafted free agent the season before this one. He's been working with NFL coaches on NFL teams since then. He's not a rookie any more.
Preseason experience is better than nothing, and Tanney has some.
Tanney has had his nose in the Browns' playbook since last week. Haney just got here. Does his experience mean he'll learn terminology and personel at twice the speed of the younger player?
I haven't studied Haney yet, but if Gordon is suddenly 30 yards downfield and boogyin', can Haney lay it out there so he doesn't have to slow down for it and let somebody catch up? I don't think so. We know Tanney can.
Can Haney scramble? (I honestly don't know yet). Tanney can, and can throw while moving (which is rare).
I know I know: This is Doctor Evil! He'll pull all sorts of insideously diabolical trickery and deciet to make him screw up! Haney has a better chance of figuring it out in time, because he's seen more evil plots and booby-traps.
That's true, but Bill knows Haney. He doesn't know Tanney. Moreover, as of now, he has to lean his preparation towards going against Haney. He can dig up Tanney's limited preseason and ancient college tapes to try to find weaknesses, but that can't help much.
He'll have to come up with generic mine-fields and snake-pits and hope Tanney will step on one.
I don't know. Maybe it would indeed be Haney, but I'd consider Tanney, and I know Chudnorv will too.
Oh, so Now It's the PLAYCALLING? Good Grief!
Now Grossi and others are blaming playcalling for the second-quarter meltdown. This is familiar territory in Cleveland. Once you've worked over the quarterback real good, your hunger for "brains" isn't satisfied, so you have to start lumbering towards the coaches.
This offense has been trying to run the ball all season, with mixed, but usually negative, results. This is why Turner has incorporated more shallow slants and crosses into his normally vertical offense.
These are much higher-percentage throws, and the reason why West Coast quarterbacks usually have a higher completion percentage than those playing in descendants of the Coryall system.
This is an offensive coordinator making the most of what he's got. What the Browns are running now is not the system Turner wants to run. A priority for next season will be to get the two or three new players it will take to set up a more consistant running game.
Meanwhile, they have to pass a lot.
Grossi was here all the way through the Marty years. When Marty got a lead, he'd start running the ball over and over again. It often did work to eat the clock and still march into scoring range, but his team was built for it.
Is that what Tony wants? No, I doubt that. Tony gets that the Browns have a hard time running the ball. So...what were they supposed to do instead?
Oh, I think I know! Stop throwing the ball downfield! Have I got that right? No more deep passes? Is it the drops? Do you think that in this situation the defense can sell out to stop the deep pass? Do you get that the Browns had the lead?
I'm just guessing here. Anyway I'm glad Chud came out and said that they'll always go for the points, and not worry about the bad things that can happen.
Listen: Weeden's judgement should have told him not to make those throws. If not, he should have put them on the mark. HE melted down.
And after reading a Tom Reed article, I now realize that Weeden was much better in the second half. It's just that I and my fellow witnesses were too angry and impaired to realize it. Nor does it make up for the melt-down, because by now we know that he'll do it again.
Anyway, there's nothing wrong with the playcalling.
What is wrong (besides Weeden being the guy Peter Smith thinks Campbell is)? Run-BLOCKING.
McGahee isn't the back he once was, but is still okay, and only last season racked up impressive numbers. Obgannaya averages what--is it still like 6 YPC?
But the thing we see most on runs is an absence of holes. Our linemen engage, but don't MOVE the defenders. The back has to cut right or left to find daylight, wasting time and allowing the rest of the defense to converge.
TRich might have danced too much in the backfield, but it wasn't all him. There weren't any holes for him to hit. McGahee just tries to ram into that wall and wiggle through because it's all he can do.
Aside from Joe Thomas, none of these linemen are really athletic enough to pull. Defenders beat them to the mark, and running backs have to either run past them or wait (and waiting never works).
I was high on Mitchell Schwartze, who did a decent job as a rookie last season, and could sometimes push people around. But evidently defensive coordinators have studied him and found his weakness. Instead of trying to get their best passrushers and blitzers past Joe Thomas, they're zeroing in on Schwartze and getting penetration on both sides of him with their fastest/quickest players.
This is why I and lots of people who know way more than I do look forward to replacing him with a more athletic right tackle, and moving him to guard, where I think he could be pretty damn good.
A DeCastro-type athletic run-around guard to go with this would totally transform the offensive line.
Looking at the 2014 draft rankings, I see Bridgewater still at or near the top, and every other quarterback dropping. I sort of trust this, as it reflects current performance/progress in real games.
Because there are several of them, I'm now starting to think that there won't be a trading-frenzy over anybody but Bridgewater. IF the front office likes a "lesser" quarterback as much as Bridgewater, that guy could fall to them, even at six or seven.
Remember, Hoyer will be back, and Campbell could well be retained. Other stuff could happen, like Tanney could surprise everybody, and show too much promise to just try to sneak onto the practice squad.
So Turner could take a guy who "needs some work". Most teams in need of a quarterback need him to start NOW, so they won't be looking at anybody without experience in a pro system, or a lot of games under their belts.
For this reason, the Browns could draft a not-Bridgewater with their top pick. Maybe they could even trade down and accomplish this. Possibly they could even get him with their second pick.
If they don't trade down, and draft a guy the "gurus" projected at 15 or 17 higher, the barstool GM's will be out with the ropes and torches, but in the real world it's a quarterback, and you have to do what you have to do.
Imagine that: They got (hopefully) the quarterback of the future, and now they draft low in the first and high in the second rounds! This is where you get your DeCastro, and a solid wide reciever or big running back (I'll take a fullback/RB hybrid) or even the best ILB prospect in the draft.
Keep thinking: Two third round picks, and you can get all sorts of good stuff on day two! How 'bout a true blocking fullback who can catch? How 'bout a blocking tight end who can also catch? There's a stud ILB for you, another safety or cornerback---
For that matter, the fourth round (two picks) often yield some really nice down-the-road developmental talent.
Two offensive linemen would amount to basically a rebuild. Now they could run Turner's scheme as it's meant to be run, and that offensive line makes every skill player better.
I feel Joe's pain, but he's there in the trenches fighting his heart out. I'm out here looking down the road apiece, and I know Joe understands, his time will come in 2014. Not 2015 or 2016. It's right around the corner, Joe! They've got it all set up!
I don't even need to wait for the draft or free agency. I'll tell you now that the 2014 Browns will be the best team in the AFC North. They will run a full-blown Norv Turner offense, and rack up gobs and gobs of points.
And they'll do it not only because they'll lose a lot late (and maybe upset Pittsburgh for redemption haha there's your culture), but because they turned Richardson into a first round pick and two picks last year into a third and fourth this year.
Because they kept their powder dry and will have 25 million to spend resigning core players and adding one to four not overhyped, not past their prime free agents.
"Wait and see"? Banner has done this before. Every move he's made (or NOT made) so far has made sense, including not prematurely signing a third quarterback.
Then, the playcalling will look a lot better, Coach Tony.
Unless, of course, Norv tells the new guy to throw interceptions.
This offense has been trying to run the ball all season, with mixed, but usually negative, results. This is why Turner has incorporated more shallow slants and crosses into his normally vertical offense.
These are much higher-percentage throws, and the reason why West Coast quarterbacks usually have a higher completion percentage than those playing in descendants of the Coryall system.
This is an offensive coordinator making the most of what he's got. What the Browns are running now is not the system Turner wants to run. A priority for next season will be to get the two or three new players it will take to set up a more consistant running game.
Meanwhile, they have to pass a lot.
Grossi was here all the way through the Marty years. When Marty got a lead, he'd start running the ball over and over again. It often did work to eat the clock and still march into scoring range, but his team was built for it.
Is that what Tony wants? No, I doubt that. Tony gets that the Browns have a hard time running the ball. So...what were they supposed to do instead?
Oh, I think I know! Stop throwing the ball downfield! Have I got that right? No more deep passes? Is it the drops? Do you think that in this situation the defense can sell out to stop the deep pass? Do you get that the Browns had the lead?
I'm just guessing here. Anyway I'm glad Chud came out and said that they'll always go for the points, and not worry about the bad things that can happen.
Listen: Weeden's judgement should have told him not to make those throws. If not, he should have put them on the mark. HE melted down.
And after reading a Tom Reed article, I now realize that Weeden was much better in the second half. It's just that I and my fellow witnesses were too angry and impaired to realize it. Nor does it make up for the melt-down, because by now we know that he'll do it again.
Anyway, there's nothing wrong with the playcalling.
What is wrong (besides Weeden being the guy Peter Smith thinks Campbell is)? Run-BLOCKING.
McGahee isn't the back he once was, but is still okay, and only last season racked up impressive numbers. Obgannaya averages what--is it still like 6 YPC?
But the thing we see most on runs is an absence of holes. Our linemen engage, but don't MOVE the defenders. The back has to cut right or left to find daylight, wasting time and allowing the rest of the defense to converge.
TRich might have danced too much in the backfield, but it wasn't all him. There weren't any holes for him to hit. McGahee just tries to ram into that wall and wiggle through because it's all he can do.
Aside from Joe Thomas, none of these linemen are really athletic enough to pull. Defenders beat them to the mark, and running backs have to either run past them or wait (and waiting never works).
I was high on Mitchell Schwartze, who did a decent job as a rookie last season, and could sometimes push people around. But evidently defensive coordinators have studied him and found his weakness. Instead of trying to get their best passrushers and blitzers past Joe Thomas, they're zeroing in on Schwartze and getting penetration on both sides of him with their fastest/quickest players.
This is why I and lots of people who know way more than I do look forward to replacing him with a more athletic right tackle, and moving him to guard, where I think he could be pretty damn good.
A DeCastro-type athletic run-around guard to go with this would totally transform the offensive line.
Looking at the 2014 draft rankings, I see Bridgewater still at or near the top, and every other quarterback dropping. I sort of trust this, as it reflects current performance/progress in real games.
Because there are several of them, I'm now starting to think that there won't be a trading-frenzy over anybody but Bridgewater. IF the front office likes a "lesser" quarterback as much as Bridgewater, that guy could fall to them, even at six or seven.
Remember, Hoyer will be back, and Campbell could well be retained. Other stuff could happen, like Tanney could surprise everybody, and show too much promise to just try to sneak onto the practice squad.
So Turner could take a guy who "needs some work". Most teams in need of a quarterback need him to start NOW, so they won't be looking at anybody without experience in a pro system, or a lot of games under their belts.
For this reason, the Browns could draft a not-Bridgewater with their top pick. Maybe they could even trade down and accomplish this. Possibly they could even get him with their second pick.
If they don't trade down, and draft a guy the "gurus" projected at 15 or 17 higher, the barstool GM's will be out with the ropes and torches, but in the real world it's a quarterback, and you have to do what you have to do.
Imagine that: They got (hopefully) the quarterback of the future, and now they draft low in the first and high in the second rounds! This is where you get your DeCastro, and a solid wide reciever or big running back (I'll take a fullback/RB hybrid) or even the best ILB prospect in the draft.
Keep thinking: Two third round picks, and you can get all sorts of good stuff on day two! How 'bout a true blocking fullback who can catch? How 'bout a blocking tight end who can also catch? There's a stud ILB for you, another safety or cornerback---
For that matter, the fourth round (two picks) often yield some really nice down-the-road developmental talent.
Two offensive linemen would amount to basically a rebuild. Now they could run Turner's scheme as it's meant to be run, and that offensive line makes every skill player better.
I feel Joe's pain, but he's there in the trenches fighting his heart out. I'm out here looking down the road apiece, and I know Joe understands, his time will come in 2014. Not 2015 or 2016. It's right around the corner, Joe! They've got it all set up!
I don't even need to wait for the draft or free agency. I'll tell you now that the 2014 Browns will be the best team in the AFC North. They will run a full-blown Norv Turner offense, and rack up gobs and gobs of points.
And they'll do it not only because they'll lose a lot late (and maybe upset Pittsburgh for redemption haha there's your culture), but because they turned Richardson into a first round pick and two picks last year into a third and fourth this year.
Because they kept their powder dry and will have 25 million to spend resigning core players and adding one to four not overhyped, not past their prime free agents.
"Wait and see"? Banner has done this before. Every move he's made (or NOT made) so far has made sense, including not prematurely signing a third quarterback.
Then, the playcalling will look a lot better, Coach Tony.
Unless, of course, Norv tells the new guy to throw interceptions.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Players are Grown-Ups.
First, check out Peter Smith, who seems to have read my last article but really filled it out. I just love it when that guy gets ticked off and sounds like me!
Peter says that the local media is more embarrassing than the Browns, and he's right. I just listened to some of the Rizzo show. Grossi and Kosar called in.
The buzzword, as anticipated, is "culture". The losing culture in Cleveland is doing "far more damage than people realize". Oooo, scary!
Bernie is ticked off that the front office guys won't look him in the eyes or otherwise acknowledge him. Yeah, that would tick me off too, and seems pretty stupid, I might add. BK's thoughts and insights could be very helpful.
But I'll not make a mountain out of that mole-hill. When asked about the "lack of leadership", Bernie said that it comes from the top. He's right--but I just wonder what they're really talking about.
I mean, this is getting mystical again. I thought Jackson, Reuben, Thomas, etc. were leaders. I don't get it: Is Chud supposed to stomp up and down grabbing facemasks and shouting? Or maybe call out individual players? What--maybe bench somebody for a drop?
What the hell is "leadership" and do these guys have the foggiest idea of what it is? Oh yeah. It's this mystical kinda aura-like kinda thing sorta...
How can Weeden be a leader when he sucks? How can Campbell lead when he's injured and can't play? How can Hoyer lead? Who do you suggest? Do you really think their losing has more to do with a lack of leadership than it does with three interceptions?
Grow up.
Rizzo's whinery kept hammering at quarterback. They shoulda signed a third guy when Hoyer went down. The HAD two quarterbacks--why tf do you need to tie up a third roster spot with a QB named Joe when most teams only have two QB's active on game day?
They signed a backup after Campbell got his concussion, and had two active quarterbacks last week. What's the big deal? And quit the Tanney-bashing. He's been working in the NFL through two preseasons and came from a similar offensive system. There's no reason to expect him to be ready for primetime--OR not!
Rizzo and company seemed to feel that not finishing strong would permanently scar the players' little ids permanently! I heard something like "People who think the can keep losing this year and come back next year as if nothing happened don't understand--"
Oh, we understand just fine. It begins with the Coach's good-bye speeches: "Now you've got a year under your belt in this system. You'll have the offseason to work on your individual games and study the tapes to see what went wrong and what went right. You'll come back and play faster, because you won't need to think as much. You'll be used to eachother. Next season was the one we built for from the beginning; we'll make our move then, and I pity every team that gets in our way".
Then, they watch the draft: "And the Browns select--"
"Did you see who they took first? He rocks!!! And we STILL got Hoyer!"
"We're loaded, man! Check this guy's tape out! We got a playa!!!"
"Better do your homework, man--this guy's after your job!"
Same for free agency. Then for the camps. New faces. A familiar routine that now comes naturally and automatically.
Look around. See how old Big Ben looks? Is Polumalu still there? Dalton--chuh we got Hoyer, X, AND Campbell! Cameron looks really pissed. We're stacked, man! Who's better?
Forget last season. We've just turned over ten roster spots, but we've kept Hoyer, Gordon, Cameron, and all the rest of the younger core players who are a year more experienced now. What TF does 2013 have to do with now? This is a better and deeper team that won't screw up nearly as much.
Bring it on! Bring it on!
Mysticism drives me nuts. Leadership. Culture. They're legitimate factors-I don't deny that. But the media has turned these buzzwords into some sort of religeon, and seems to think of the players as despondant teenagers.
"I'm bummed, man. We're all a buncha of losers, man. Hoyer won't help. The new guy will suck because now he's one of us. Quit bogarting that bong, man."
Ahh, bullcrap! If you think like that you're too emotionally fragile and immature to play any sport, let alone football.
Public statements aside, Joe Haden, TJ Ward, and the rest all understand exactly what's happening here, and will slog through it with the same eye to 2014 as the other adults in the room.
Anyway, Rizzo (who has now labelled Campbell "fragile" because he's now been injured twice in his career) seems to think that he's done for the season or something, but he's not.
It is possible that poor young Tanney will get baptized into the NFL by none other than DR. Evil in New England, but didn't we all pencil that one in as a loss anyway?
There's an even chance that Campbell will be back for that game, and a pretty good chance he can play out the season after that. Peter Smith still sees him as Mister up-and-down, but in reality he'll be up when he can throw the ball without pain and think straight.
It's hard to find a win in the last few games (aside from the Squealers, of course), but they should compete in every game that Campbell can start. Even if they lose, they'll be "in" these games, and the players will know this, and just how close they are to going for all the marbles.
If you score 30 points and lose, it doesn't mean you didn't score 30 points. It doesn't mean you don't have possibly the best wide reciever in the NFL. Winning is the ultimate metric, truly, but it doesn't negate all other evidence of progress or quality in any rational mind--including a football player's.
Mystics say that stuff. Players say it for PR purposes, but it's just a ritual (a religeous rite, of you will--to placate the congregation. To show adherence to the orthodoxy).
Grossi points out that there's no Andrew Luck in the coming draft, as if to say that therefore it doesn't matter where they draft. There's more irrationality for you:
Is Bridgewater Luck? No. RG3? Maybe! Not quite as athletic, but a little bigger and stronger. Look what Washington gave up for that guy! Bridgewater is regarded by many as head and shoulders above the rest of this crop.
I have no idea whether or not Norv Turner et al agree with this, but what if they do? For Tony, it doesn't matter. They should win as much as possible even if it prevents them from getting into the top 2 or 3, which is what it will take to get this guy.
That's irrational, especially for a guy who, on the same show I listened to, said himself that the players all know that one player; the quarterback, makes the difference between this team as-is winning or losing. Who always refers to this position as the most important in football.
...Except it's more important to win games that don't count in a lost season. So, you know, the players can feel good about themselves and have self-esteem and stuff sorta...
ARRRGH!
Peter says that the local media is more embarrassing than the Browns, and he's right. I just listened to some of the Rizzo show. Grossi and Kosar called in.
The buzzword, as anticipated, is "culture". The losing culture in Cleveland is doing "far more damage than people realize". Oooo, scary!
Bernie is ticked off that the front office guys won't look him in the eyes or otherwise acknowledge him. Yeah, that would tick me off too, and seems pretty stupid, I might add. BK's thoughts and insights could be very helpful.
But I'll not make a mountain out of that mole-hill. When asked about the "lack of leadership", Bernie said that it comes from the top. He's right--but I just wonder what they're really talking about.
I mean, this is getting mystical again. I thought Jackson, Reuben, Thomas, etc. were leaders. I don't get it: Is Chud supposed to stomp up and down grabbing facemasks and shouting? Or maybe call out individual players? What--maybe bench somebody for a drop?
What the hell is "leadership" and do these guys have the foggiest idea of what it is? Oh yeah. It's this mystical kinda aura-like kinda thing sorta...
How can Weeden be a leader when he sucks? How can Campbell lead when he's injured and can't play? How can Hoyer lead? Who do you suggest? Do you really think their losing has more to do with a lack of leadership than it does with three interceptions?
Grow up.
Rizzo's whinery kept hammering at quarterback. They shoulda signed a third guy when Hoyer went down. The HAD two quarterbacks--why tf do you need to tie up a third roster spot with a QB named Joe when most teams only have two QB's active on game day?
They signed a backup after Campbell got his concussion, and had two active quarterbacks last week. What's the big deal? And quit the Tanney-bashing. He's been working in the NFL through two preseasons and came from a similar offensive system. There's no reason to expect him to be ready for primetime--OR not!
Rizzo and company seemed to feel that not finishing strong would permanently scar the players' little ids permanently! I heard something like "People who think the can keep losing this year and come back next year as if nothing happened don't understand--"
Oh, we understand just fine. It begins with the Coach's good-bye speeches: "Now you've got a year under your belt in this system. You'll have the offseason to work on your individual games and study the tapes to see what went wrong and what went right. You'll come back and play faster, because you won't need to think as much. You'll be used to eachother. Next season was the one we built for from the beginning; we'll make our move then, and I pity every team that gets in our way".
Then, they watch the draft: "And the Browns select--"
"Did you see who they took first? He rocks!!! And we STILL got Hoyer!"
"We're loaded, man! Check this guy's tape out! We got a playa!!!"
"Better do your homework, man--this guy's after your job!"
Same for free agency. Then for the camps. New faces. A familiar routine that now comes naturally and automatically.
Look around. See how old Big Ben looks? Is Polumalu still there? Dalton--chuh we got Hoyer, X, AND Campbell! Cameron looks really pissed. We're stacked, man! Who's better?
Forget last season. We've just turned over ten roster spots, but we've kept Hoyer, Gordon, Cameron, and all the rest of the younger core players who are a year more experienced now. What TF does 2013 have to do with now? This is a better and deeper team that won't screw up nearly as much.
Bring it on! Bring it on!
Mysticism drives me nuts. Leadership. Culture. They're legitimate factors-I don't deny that. But the media has turned these buzzwords into some sort of religeon, and seems to think of the players as despondant teenagers.
"I'm bummed, man. We're all a buncha of losers, man. Hoyer won't help. The new guy will suck because now he's one of us. Quit bogarting that bong, man."
Ahh, bullcrap! If you think like that you're too emotionally fragile and immature to play any sport, let alone football.
Public statements aside, Joe Haden, TJ Ward, and the rest all understand exactly what's happening here, and will slog through it with the same eye to 2014 as the other adults in the room.
Anyway, Rizzo (who has now labelled Campbell "fragile" because he's now been injured twice in his career) seems to think that he's done for the season or something, but he's not.
It is possible that poor young Tanney will get baptized into the NFL by none other than DR. Evil in New England, but didn't we all pencil that one in as a loss anyway?
There's an even chance that Campbell will be back for that game, and a pretty good chance he can play out the season after that. Peter Smith still sees him as Mister up-and-down, but in reality he'll be up when he can throw the ball without pain and think straight.
It's hard to find a win in the last few games (aside from the Squealers, of course), but they should compete in every game that Campbell can start. Even if they lose, they'll be "in" these games, and the players will know this, and just how close they are to going for all the marbles.
If you score 30 points and lose, it doesn't mean you didn't score 30 points. It doesn't mean you don't have possibly the best wide reciever in the NFL. Winning is the ultimate metric, truly, but it doesn't negate all other evidence of progress or quality in any rational mind--including a football player's.
Mystics say that stuff. Players say it for PR purposes, but it's just a ritual (a religeous rite, of you will--to placate the congregation. To show adherence to the orthodoxy).
Grossi points out that there's no Andrew Luck in the coming draft, as if to say that therefore it doesn't matter where they draft. There's more irrationality for you:
Is Bridgewater Luck? No. RG3? Maybe! Not quite as athletic, but a little bigger and stronger. Look what Washington gave up for that guy! Bridgewater is regarded by many as head and shoulders above the rest of this crop.
I have no idea whether or not Norv Turner et al agree with this, but what if they do? For Tony, it doesn't matter. They should win as much as possible even if it prevents them from getting into the top 2 or 3, which is what it will take to get this guy.
That's irrational, especially for a guy who, on the same show I listened to, said himself that the players all know that one player; the quarterback, makes the difference between this team as-is winning or losing. Who always refers to this position as the most important in football.
...Except it's more important to win games that don't count in a lost season. So, you know, the players can feel good about themselves and have self-esteem and stuff sorta...
ARRRGH!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)