Cleveland Browns Training Camp Stuff

My usual practice is to scan my favorites list of Browns' coverage sites and note the dumb, inane, and incompetent alleged analysis so I can bash it.  This time I was pretty disappointed, because most of it was pretty insightful and intelligent.

For a moment I suspected that everybody was reading this blog, but no...I'm still kind of like the AMWAY Browns analyst--trying to get my family to read my blog.  

I've stopped trying to get a gig with the Bleacher Report and Dawg Pound Daily.  They have to admit that I know my stuff, but being as abrasive--nay, acidic and offensive as I am, they probably got to the first insult and skipped to the next submission.  Might have got through two sentences.

But you know, I'm old enough to remember Pete "Why don't you gargle with a pack of razor blades?" Franklin.  Very popular.  What about Greetham and Sobo on Scout.com?  Sometimes they get ticked off by the same inanities and mindlessness I do, and rant about it too.

I'm a niche guy, I guess.  A very tiny, very private, niche guy who would make a lousy politician.  Sometimes the truth is that somebody is a dumbass, and I say so.  And you know what else?  Dumbasses shouldn't be allowed to vote, either--how 'bout that?

Anyway, Travis Wakeman on the Bleacher Report was a pleasant surprise this week.  I only check the Bleacher Report occasionally, because some of the writers are...wrong. (see?  No insult!  That took a real effort!  I think I hurt myself!)

But Wakeman listed five veterans who might not make the roster, and before that, five unknown longshots who might.  His analysis was logical and thoughtful, and, (try as I might) I couldn't find fault with it.

Nor is he parroting others, as so many do.  He's an original thinker.  Kellen Davis was one of the players he saw as a potential cut, owing to undrafted FA Travis Tannahill.  Nobody else except Peter Smith on Dawg Pound Daily said anything like that.  Barnrdge was also one of his players to watch.

It's sad that he's also right about Jordan Norwood.  That kid is damn good, but the numbers may have overtaken him.  It's amazing, though, that this team will have to release some players who will last about ten seconds on waivers because it has too much talent.

Bob Fisher on Dawg Pound Daily's breakdown of some of the Turner offense was educational and deep.  Bob uses game photos with telestrator-like arrows, circles, etc. to illustrate various plays as they unfold, and explains the principles at work.

I don't remember if it was Bob, but a couple weeks ago I read another article using similar illustrations which explained some of the Ray Horton defense.  That one wasn't fluff: along with the good stuff, it pointed out the flaws in Arizona; namely the fact that that defense was sometimes gashed severely by the run.

It's true: An aggressive, high-pressure defense which relies on man coverage is always trading punches.  To knock somebody out, it has to get close and take some shots.

Marty Schottenheimer once said that "statistics are for losers".  Expressed more diplomatically, the only stat that really matters is wins and losses.  I'm sure that he is as sick of fans' obsession with run defense as I am, and this is why:

A defense can surrender 130 yards on the ground.  That sucks, right?  Not neccessarily.  Not when one out of five run attempts are blown up in the backfield for a loss, four out of five gain under 3.3 yards, it forces two fumbles, gets four sacks and two interceptions.

The hell with the 4.3 yards per-carry or whatever if they're taking the ball back by force, and forcing second and third and longs leading to punts.

For that matter, when your offense doesn't score points and you're playing from behind, other teams try to protect their lead and play it safe by running at you, and the way to attack a blitzing defense is to run and use screens.

Ray Horton knows this.  He knows that he'll give up some long runs here and there.  It's just that the setbacks, turnovers, panic, and confusion he causes makes that a fair trade.

Yes, the Steelers defense has been ranked near the top in run defense for years.  That's true, but it's partly because of Troy Polumalu and the fact that they've been together in this system for a long time, so they don't make mistakes.

And those long runs are always either a mistake or one guy getting beaten one-on-one, because in theory every hole created by a blitze is covered by design.

The 2013 Browns are still very young, and they will make mistakes and give up some long runs.  But it doesn't mean the sky is falling.

Comments on camp observations:

As I predicted, Mingo is not here exclusively to rush the passer, but also to cover.  This is how they've used him for the first couple days, and the early results are naturally as I had predicted.  He has not just the speed, but the hips and the quickness to stay with most big recievers in man coverage all over the field, and will be a big part of the Browns' answer to the "new" NFL tight end.

This was obvious to me because I think.  Jackson and (especially) Robertson can cover, and TJ Ward can cover big people, but they're physically overmatched by 6'5" tight ends.  They can stay with them, but can't do anything but make the tackle on a well-thrown ball they can't reach.

Opposing offenses will rely heavily on tight ends to exploit this defense in particular.  This is where it's most vulnerable in the passing game.

Mingo is here partly for that, and before long every NFL team will want a Mingo of their own.

Not every team has a super-tight end like Cameron will be if he remains healthy.  Those teams are on MORE trouble, because he'll blitze them more.

Somebody else wrote an article about how these questions about Mingo's weight are getting rediculous.  The writer suggested that the Browns should have security people escort the next person who asks that question out, and he bets the other reporters would applaud.  Bet it was Greetham.  

What I wrote before is partly why Horton isn't worried about it: The most important thing for Mingo, in the real role he'll fill, is that he remain as quick and fast as he is now.

At the end of 2013, he might not have more than 5 sacks, but he'll also have an interception or two, along with several breakups.  And when a real analyst looks at stats, the conclusion will be: "Opposing offenses tight ends did not do well against the Browns."

Correcting Cleveland Browns Assumptions

1:  Trent Richardson does NOT have to stay healthy/have a great year for the Browns to succeed.  The Browns have great depth at running back.  While TRich is important, he's not critical.  If he is injured, the commitee that replaces him will do fine.

2: Josh Gordon is the fastest wide reciever in the 100.  Benjamin is the fastest in the 40.

3: Weeden's periodic inaccuracy deep was due to poor mechanics as he moved around the pocket.  It was never an issue when he released the ball on time with his feet set.  These are correctable mechanical issues.

...Whether or not he corrects them isn't guaranteed.  But I'd make that bet.

4: Smelley is labelled a tight end, but his role is much more diverse.

5: The West Coast offense doesn't use a blocking fullback, and this is one of the reasons Lawrence Vickers was released.  I'm no Pat Shurmer fan, but I have a functional cerebral cortex--which I use.

6: The very young Browns in new systems don't realistically expect to contend before 2014.  They are building the team to remain good for a long time, like the Ravens, Steelers, pre-2012 Eagles, and Patriots.  Lawrence Vickers is 30.  The end.

7: Evan Moore is a Jordan Cameron who can't block.

8: 3-4 DE's only seem to grow on trees.  Hughes doesn't project to have a substantial role in that rotation.  He doesn't have the same range as the other guys, and is more a nose tackle/DT.

He's good enough to have a good chance of making the final roster, and to play on some running downs as well as be a secondary backup at DE, and maybe rotate in/out at nose, but DE is no way his best position.

9: The Browns base defense will be labelled a 3-4, but it will spend the majority of it's time in some sort of nickel or dime coverage, so it doesn't mean that much.

Mingo could well be in coverage on some of these units, along with Roberts, with both Sheard and Kruger on the line.

What they call it hardly matters.  It might even LOOK like a 3-4.  Who cares?

YOU STAND CORRECTED.

The guys on NFL Radio don't agree with local permabashers about the Browns.  Some have picked the Stoolers to end up in the basement, with the Browns ahead of them.

"Adrian", a Pittsburgh fan who always sounds drunk but isn't (might have a neurological thing there), and has moments of lucidity, immediately called in when he heard this to defend his team.

This time, Pat Kirwan and Ryan hung up on him.  They asked him about the old guys, offensive line, injuries, fading elites and why he thought the Steelers would go 12-4.  He started talking about tradition.  

That's because he had nothing else.

While I have heard Adrian do some pretty impressive and pragmatic analysis of his own team, his attitude towards division rivals has always irked me.  He dismisses the Bengals and Browns out of hand.  To him, what has always been always will be.

They hung up on him when he announced that he was about to "break down" each of the Stoolers' losses in 2012.

If only.  What if.  Like the Cleveland Browns couldn't do this.

The difference is that the Browns are YOUNGER, and being close matters, because the young guys are getting better, and the old guys aint.  Yo Adrian!  DEAL with it.

Browns Ranked 30th. Uh-huh.

This one is too easy.  Any objective analysis of any team begins with the quarterback, and that's where the current edition of the Browns have questions.  To win a championship, you need a franchise guy, and the Browns don't know if they have one.  Ok so stipulated.

But the Browns DO know that they have at least a competant quarterback in Jason Campbell should Weeden fail.  And we're not talking about a championship here, but about ranking this team 30th.

Even if you ONLY consider the quarterback, you still can't get away with ranking this team that low!

Where to rank the other units is debatable, but where would you rank the running backs?  And I mean not just TRich, but the four guys behind him?  30th?  Huh?

How about the tight ends?  Yeah I get that can Cameron stay healthy?  Nobody but Chud and I seem to like Barnidge so I'll let you be wrong about him.  But I think it would take some mental gymnastics to pound this unit down to 30th.

Wide recievers?  Again debatable.  I believe they'll be one of the best groups in the NFL, but I assume that even the permabashers would have a hard time getting them into the bottom third, no matter how much torture their alleged logic can endure.

Offensive line?  Defensive line?  Outside linebacker?  Can you somehow manage to put any of these below the middle?  

Sure, we wonder if Robertson can hold up inside, and have questions about starting corner and free safety.  But there are some pretty bad safeties and cornerbacks in this league, you know?  And we're talking about a ranking.  Are only two starting cornerbacks and free safeties in the NFL going to be worse than Gipson, Bademosi, and whoever plays cornerback?  Why?  Because of their undrafted status?  Because they're Browns?  Oops!  Think I nailed it!  It's because they're Cleveland Browns, so you demote them.

What about coaching?  How many overall staffs do you think are better than this one?

New system.  Maybe they consider that.  I mean it would be smart of them to consider that, but I doubt it.  The new system is tailor made for their second-year quarterback and the two fastest recievers.  It also turned a pretty good 4-3 defensive line into and extremely talented and deep 3-4 version.

Turner's system is also much less complex than Squarepeg Shurmer's West Coast, and the Browns will run a lot.  The transition won't be anywhere near as difficult as a rookie gunslinger trying to master the most complicated offense in football, and not being allowed to do what he does best.

Where the hell is the logic here, when you can go position-by-position across this young, talented, improving roster and (if you're being honest with yourself), and have a hard time putting any of them in the bottom third of the league?   I mean, even if you default a cornerback and the free safety to the worst starters in the NFL?  Even if you call Robertson the worst inside linebacker?

Thirtieth?  

That's a joke.  YOU STAND CORRECTED.

State of Cleveland Browns Analysis Analysis

Terry Pluto, as usual, is on the money as he talks about the speed on the new Browns' defense, and it's possible weakness.

Mary Kay Cabot takes a lot of flak from chauvenists and ignoramusses, but is really pretty good.  You've just got to be literate enough to comprehend that when she says "The front office says--" or "Chudzinski feels--", what follows those words are not her personal opinion.  She also usually niether endorses nor questions this.

MKC is more of a true journalist than most columnists, and because she reports on the plans and opinions of those running the Cleveland Browns, her columns tend to sound positive.  

Oh, for shame! 

Dawgpounddaily is mostly nailing everything.  Peter Smith is right up there with Terry Pluto and my humble DaVinci-like self.  This time he talks about the perilous situation at tight end, and he's mostly right.  Cameron has all the ability in the world, and is ready to take a big step up in this new offense.  But will he keep getting hurt?

Where he misses something is on Gary Barnidge.  He was a depth/utility player, but can get downfield and catch.  He can effectively back up Cameron in every phase.

No, he didn't catch many passes early in his career, but he was stuck on the same roster with some pretty good tight ends, and is only now due to hit his peak.

...Ok but it's a minor point, and I'd probably lose the debate.  But stay tuned: Barnridge will impress.

He mentions Travis Tannehill from Kansas State as a possible sleeper.  I hadn't realized that his offense was run-oriented and didn't give him many pass-catching opportunities.

The OBR has a good article on these running backs in the Turner offense by Fred Greetham.  It's gratifying that it has begun to occur to others besides me that Turner won't neccessarily use a pure blocking fullback.  I was hoping I could pick on Fred this week, but I can't.

Hey, Tony Grossi is pretty good.  He's kind of down on the last draft, and I see his point.

However, while you can't credit this regime with Josh Gordon, you do have to consider the fact that they had no second round pick.  You must also consider that the Browns now have an extra third and fourth round pick in the next draft.

I believe it was a very good draft.  You just need to give Tom Heckert his props for grabbing Gordon, warts and all.

I read another assessment by this LaCanfora guy.  He repeats that the offense lacks playmakers.  

Right.  All they have are TRich, Benjamin, Gordon, and Cameron.  Buncha bums!  

This guy is just downright dumb.  In discussing the offensive line, he wonders if Schwartze will suck again, regards Mack as basically "ok", and infers that every guard on the roster is a bumb.

He's just determined not to even give Weeden a chance, and is wondering which quarterback will take over for him after he fails miserably.

I keep coming back to the "lack of playmakers" thing, and something else I've heard all over the place about Greg Little:

Little isn't the deep threat that Gordon and Benjamin are, but for crying out loud he's not just a possession guy!  He won't be used in that role in the Turner offense!  HE can make big plays.  Greg Little can be a playmaker! You want to get stuck on clock-times?  You really want to go there?  He clocked two tenths faster in the 40 than Jerry Rice, and about the same as Braylon Edwards.  What a bunch of blockheads.

Oh yeah I forgot.  Lombardi didn't draft Little, Gordon, Weeden, Cameron, Benjamin, Mack, Schwartze or TRich, therefore they must not be very good.  

Every article this guy writes about the Cleveland Browns reeks of subjectivity and bias.

At least guys like Jaworski, Jim Miller, Pat Kirwan, Gil Brandt etc. are out there, axe and grinder free, just telling the truth as they see it.

Dawg Pound Daily Just Got Better

Every time Dawg Pound Daily casts it's net for new writers, I make a pitch to them, and they ignore me.  That's ok it's their rag, and I'm pretty abrasive, sarcastic, offensive, insulting, etc.

I'd been a little frustrated with this publication mainly because it was anything but "Daily" and updated so infrequently.  Peter King may or may not have found his writers, but he himself has become more active.  

I was surprised to find two new articles by him, niether of which contained much ass umption or any ignorance.  And this is rare.  I mean, even the great Terry Pluto screws up occasionally!

In re Peter's two articles (on the guard spot and the running backs), I can't find anything to pick on.  I especially liked it when he pointed out that Hardesty's reputation for drops came mostly from ONE ONE ONE horrendous game very early on, and that Hardesty is in fact an effective reciever.

Since Peter doesn't want to offend anybody, I will do it for him.  People who make up their minds about a player after one game, very early in his carreer, and stick with that regardless of his performance ever since are morons.

Little is an excellent example.  People who say he drops too many balls are idiots.

I was also thrilled and shouting "AMEN!" When he raked Shurmer over the coals for running TRich into the ground despite the fact that Hardesty was there ready to kick butt.  And Obi--that guy was used almost exclusively as a reciever, and in reality he's a very effective ball carrier.

Pete's right: Defenses saw Obi in the game and knew that Shurmer would not allow him to run the ball.  

Amen, Pete: TRich had broken ribs, and never had the chance to get healthy.  Pat Shurmer almost certainly shortened his carreer and weakened him by refusing to take him off the field for not one but THREE other pretty good running backs.  It was just insane.

And I agree that, at least in re TRich and the other backs, the new coaches are handling things far more intelligently.  Richardson could practice, but it makes no sense not to let him heal as thoroughly as possible...especially since he's only had about five months to recover from what Pat Shurmer did to him.

Running back is the most instinctive position in football, which is why so many rookie running backs start immediately and kick butt.  While learning protections is a little harder, and many need to learn to read coverages and run precise routes, these hardly apply to TRich.  

Chris Ogbannaya is being worked at fullback, by the way.  This supports my theory that Turner/Chud may be looking at more of a Mack/Byner two-back than the version requiring a large, slow fullback who never carries the ball.  Who perhaps can catch...for four yards.

Norv Turner has usually carried a blocking fullback on his roster, but the inference that this guy was included in his base set is wrong.  Turner used extra recievers more often than not, whether they were tight ends or wide recievers.  The fullback was a role player.

Turner no doubt has plans for short yardage or goal line lead blockers, and there are several players who have a shot to fill that niche.  That role.  That situational role-player niche DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

But I love that he's experimenting with Obi at fullback as well.  

Ogbannaya at around 6', 225 could share the backfield with Hardesty or TRich without giving the defense any keys.  He's a converted wide reciever with good speed, and if he's running upfield at the snap it doesn't neccessarily mean he's a lead blocker.  In fact, it could well mean that he needs to be covered.

Turner will use play-action a LOT in this offense, so the defense can't even trust the combination of a potential handoff to the other back and Obi running upfield on the same side to indicate a run.

As for actual blocking, I know it looks real cool when somebody gets knocked on their butt. In reality, though, a downfield block is equally as effective as long as the defender can't interfere with the running back.

Further, I still believe that defenses will run versions of nickels even against this 21 set due to Obi's recieving ability, which includes the chance that when the huddle breaks, he'll line up in the slot anyway--and that they will blitze a lot, even on neutral downs.

Vs. a "big" nickel, there's one less big guy (lineman or linebacker) and one more safety or safety/linebacker hybrid.  If you've got five guys back in coverage and you have to "send" five, you've got one sideline-to-sidelne type linebacker to actually "mirror" the running back and head him off on a run.

Obi can nail that guy in space.  He won't bounce off or get out-reached and shunted aside.  He has the reach and size to make that block on that player, and for that matter to go on and cream a safety or cornerback.

Just a theory, and I digress.

Anyway it was good to read some competant analysis.

Searching for Signs of Intelligent Life in Sports Media

La Canfora sort of reminds me of his pal Lombardi when he, too, was an alleged analyst.  Let's go hunting with hand grenades.  Let's go fishing with dynamite.  The guy just doesn't seem to care about collateral damage.

Maybe he's like a lot of college professors.  The reality is that when you say outrageous stuff, a lot of people think that makes you a genius.  

Here's a copy/paste comment from one of these:

Rose-colored glasses? I can understand. Browns fans have had to use them for quite a long time. Always looking for something where it doesn't really exist.
I know the pain. I know the reality. 58 years worth of being a fan. But.....it continues......reality is what it is.....

Interesting philosophical question here: Do TRich's healed ribs really exist?  Did Gordon really catch over 50 passes as a rookie after a year out of football?  Did Greg Little really drop a total of four passes in his last eleven games?  If a tree falls in the forest, could this guy please be under it?

I'm even a little disappointed with Grossi.  No, you DON'T judge a GM by a team's win/loss record in his first three seasons when that involves a rebuild and coach/system change.  Not when the team is the youngest in the NFL.

Fortunately, the vast majority of analysts agree that the Browns have a LOT of talent, and that Tom Heckert did that.  That is real, and you can see it when you take off your excrement-colored glasses.

Bill Ayers recently said that every American President this century should have gone to prison for mass-murder.  Another gaping rectum called the 911 victims "Little Eichmans".  I think they both got a raise and maybe a book deal.  I think La Canfora is the sports' world's version of that.  "Oh wow nobody else talks like dat, darefore dis guy must be a geenyuss!"

Warren Sapp isn't one of those.  He's just extremely lazy.  A couple weeks ago, while analyzing the three teams he's seen more than a couple clips of from last season, and being forced to include the Browns because they're in the AFC North too, he showed it.

He said that the way to attack the Steelers' and Ravens defenses was to spread them out.  Then he asked which offenses could do that.  He prefunctorally said he KNEW the BROWNS couldn't.

Devone Bess can play outside, but is primarily a slot reciever.  Slot guys only play in a 3 or 4-wide set.  Turner's offenses use a lot of that, and by design spread defenses out both horizontally and vertically; often also splitting a tight end out.  Both Cameron and the massively underrated Barnridge can do a lot of damage in this offense in the intermediate and deep middle.

Warren appears to be oblivious to Bess AND Turner.  All he knows is they run this old West Coast thing with this Weeden guy who was bad last year next topic please.

Now that Adam Scheinn has left NFL Radio (thank you God), most of those guys seem to make an actual effort to know what they're talking about, (even about teams that sucked last season.)

Rich Gannon remains kind of sketchy on the Browns, but is Einstein compared to Sapp and La Canfora.  At least, being a quarterback himself, he's automatically checked Weeden and the other quarterbacks out, and gives an objective, insightful, and reasoned assessment.

He's not sure if Weeden can become a franchise guy quickly either, but regards it as a foregone conclusion that in his second season, in Turner's offense, he'll be better.  That's all I ask for from an analyst.  Common sense.

And some of the same fans who parrot what they heard others say about the criticality of the quarterback position bash the whole team, when Weeden was THE problem with the offense last season.  (Well, he and Square-Peg Shurmer's offense).

No, it wasn't the recievers, or the line, or the tight ends.  ALL of them were above average!  Even TRich vs. stacked fronts with broken ribs didn't suck!

Weeden held the ball too long, took unneccessary sacks, tried to throw without his feet set,   and had a lot of bat-downs because he was being forced to throw short and to the middle.

It doesn't mean he sucks, either.  He was a rookie in a complex system that didn't make the most of his unique skill-set.

I now have one more reason to root for Weeden this this season:  If he fails, some of that crap La Canfora threw at the wall will have stuck, and he will have accidentally been right about something.  Darwin would be spinning in his grave.

Browns Guards

NFL personnel people and coaches, unlike many Browns' fans, have a healthy respect for the Cleveland Browns' guards.  Perhaps they should agree to disagree, and that the fans are wrong.

Statisticly Luavao last season was dowright bad.  But the others, including Pinkston who has returned, were average at worst.  More young potential guards have been added through the draft and free agency, and Luavao is in his third season (injured as a rookie).

As Tony Grossi has pointed out a lot, the issue with these new/improving guards is that they're not very mobile.  None of them appear to be pulling guards who can get outside ahead of the running back.

It's sort of a trade-off, though.  Whichever two end up starting will be strong drive-blockers, good pass-protectors, and capable of reaching linebackers in space ahead of them (so they're not completely lead-footed.)

This would seem to mandate a 250 lb. blocking fullback, but instead, the Browns have stockpiled running backs.  So they don't know what they're doing, right?

Instead of trying to run the team, why not try to figure out why Norv Turner and company do what they do?  Because, you know what?  They know a little more about football than you do.

As Joe Thomas has tried to tell you, the deep passes in this offense pull defenders away from the line of scrimmage.  That's a clue.

Most of the offensive sets mandate nickel or dime defenses.  And since that's based on matchups and tendancies more than how the players are labelled, in some cases this even applies to two-backs or two tight end sets.  In general, the defenses will want to attack on neutral downs and risk getting stung by the run.

Weeden isn't a threat to run, so containment is not an issue, and they'll seek inside penetration to deprive him of a pocket and make him scramble.  Improved footwork should make him more accurate as he moves, but he'll never be as effective outside the pocket.

The outside rushers won't worry about opening a gap for Weeden to run for yards, and generally do have to commit to attacking him, which (more often than not) means trying to get around the tackles.

So with all those gaps, why would the running back need a lead-blocking fullback?  Especially a back who can run over half of the defenders?  

Of course, obvious run downs, and late in games when the run is the best way to drain the clock and protect a lead, are different.  Here, the fact that a blocking fullback is useful to the defense as a key doesn't matter so much.  They pretty much expect the run and can key the running back anyway.

Here you might see a big running back or tight end at fullback, or offset as an H-back or something.

This offense is much different than Square-Peg Shurmer's in that it spreads the defense out verticly as well as laterally, and mandates blitzes.  It's also far more important for the interior linemen to be stout and physical than to be athletic.

Vs. the West Coast, more defenders could be closer to the line and between the tackles because the recievers slant and cross the short and intermediate areas of the field--between the tackles.  Vs. this offense, it will be very, very hard to stack the box.

You need a blocking fullback or a pulling guard against seven or eight guys.  Not against five.

In a perfect world, the left guard would be Alan Fanika, but those guys are rare, and it's not at all realistic to expect perfection.

As Tony points out, they've invested heavily in the center and two tackles, and this will be one of the best offensive lines in the NFL overall.

Last week, I read another analysis that pointed out that Gil Brandt cited the prevalence of two tight end sets featuring te/wr hybrid "wing" tight ends in the NFL as a strong and growing trend.  That's true.

But the article went on to conclude that the Browns might or might not have the depth at TE to run it.  The implied premis is based on sheepthink.  The assumption is that Chud and Norv are obliged to stick with the flock.

Why?  They're the ones who come up with stuff like this.  Everybody else copies them.

Plus, like I said before, it's an arms race.  Just as the two tight end sets are becoming more prevalent, defenses are being built to stop them.  The smartest coaches don't want to be like everybody else.  If this defense is built to stop two tight ends, it's better of my offense uses something different DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

This is one of the reasons I think they might be setting up for a lot of two-back (with two running backs).  The guy they got to match up to that wing tight end doesn't match up so well with a quick/fast running back.

But it's deeper than that: You see, Jordan Cameron IS that tight end, so in a 21 grouping (two backs, one tight end) they still probably need to use that guy.  So who's got the other running back, who might line up in the slot?  

Further, everybody seems to think that Jordan will only line up split out.  Buy a clue.  He wasn't a great in-line blocker when he was drafted (but in reality was ok), and he was chosen mainly for his potential as a reciever, but you will see a complete tight end who can line up next to the tackle and take on defensive ends.  And this makes the guy who's supposed to cover him a liability against the run, because Cameron can smash him, and he's not built to stop the run.

Different defenses come up with different answers.  More often than not, they hope they have an extra safety they can use for the second running back.  It might look like a conventional front seven, but it's not, because one of the "linebackers" is a safety.

It's a lighter front which will attack the backfield, and the running backs can block blitzers or safeties downfield.

Just a theory.  But the main point is, don't think like a sheep.