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.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
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!
Friday, November 29, 2013
Overrating a Winning Culture, Real Needs
As Marty Schottenheimer said, winning is a habit. These were much wiser words than "the officials can't affect the outcome of a game".
However, for the 2013 Cleveland Browns, it aint all that. Here's why:
You'd think that strong finishes mean strong subsequent starts the following season, but they often don't. A strong finish kept Eric Mangini here as head coach for the first year of the Holmgren regime. How did that work out?
In fact, it's pretty common for teams who finished strong to stumble out of the gate the following season. In fact, it's more common for bad teams to come back as good teams.
And that's a context: This is the last five games of a first season. Even if the Browns go 1-4 the rest of the way, it really won't affect 2014. New season. New hope. New players. In fact, more determined players.
That winning "habit" begins with the first win of 2014. You just need to try to make that game one. Game 16 of the previous season might as well have been a decade ago.
Why do we get all mystical and superstitious about this stuff?
What would winning out this season accomplish? Well, the frustrated children would be temporarily appeased, but in the real world it would only accomplish lower draft picks.
Most people who post comments like second place is last place, there can be only one, etc. are generally parroting catch-phrases they heard. They fantasize a lot. They're emotional, and they haven't ever been there. Nor are they thinking, so much as feeling.
The cold, detached, logical mind breaks it down thus: If the Browns finish badly, they will draft higher in every round. This is THE year that they can trade up, if neccessary, to nail down a franchise quarterback, and then draft offensive linemen, recievers, and everything else they need.
2014 would have them in immediate contention; a more talented and formidable team with depth at the most critical position; the missing piece. (I actually think Hoyer is all that, but let's grab the 22 year old stud for insurance and the future).
If the Browns were to win out and finish 9-7 and out of the playoffs, yipee! Their highest pick is now at least in the high teens, and here we go again not having enough ammo to get the franchise QB, or else trading away half their picks to get him.
Congratulations! Now you need to cross your fingers Hoyer doesn't get hurt or fall on his face, and you won't get another chance at a franchise guy for the forseeable future. You're now drafting in the low teens in every round, and can't draft the same quality players you could have ten or so slots higher.
Good for you, temper-tantrum guy! You've established a winning culture in a season that didn't matter anymore, and made it much harder for this team to get on top and stay there for the next twelve or so years! I'm so happy for you!
You ate candy til you puked every Halloween, didn't you? Just couldn't save any for later, could you?
I'm kind of hoping the Browns lose. That's right--I'm a heretic! Burn me at the stake if you can find me and I don't plug you first! Go ahead, issue your fatwah! "This guy thinks with his brain! Kill the traitor!"
As for the Browns needs, I don't hate Greg Little as much as a lot of you do, but I would like to see another scary wide reciever opposite Gordon. Devone Bess has been inexplicably disappointing, and that reciever could even be a slot-type who does what Bess was supposed to do; running around underneath.
I believe that Norv and Chud retain high hopes for Owens, and Obgannaya is a keeper, but I'm sure that they'll look for another big running back.
Maybe indeed that battering ram fullback for short yardage, if he can also catch the ball.
The offensive line isn't the disaster it's being painted to be, but Mitchell Schwartze hasn't developed as well as hoped at right tackle. He would look better at guard. Rather than target a guard, I suspect they'll look for a right tackle and move Schwartze over to effectively upgrade two positions.
While not critical, an inside linebacker would help a lot. Tank Carder isn't bad, but can't cover well, as we saw when Roberts went down.
Cornerback is always a need, even of you have three good ones, which--come next season--I believe they will.
The '13 Browns aren't as deep as they should be at some positions, and this is why after the quarterback is nailed down, the Browns could go best available the rest of the way.
Fortunately, right tackles, guards, and slot recievers slide to the second or even third round, and blocking fullbacks and inside linebackers go even lower.
Many of these "needs" aren't really needs, either. This is a pretty talented team. It has some soft spots to address, but not really any "holes".
If they can just get that quarterback, the rest should slide into place, and the team can be loaded for bear between the draft and free agency. Ready for prime-time.
...if they don't win too much now.
However, for the 2013 Cleveland Browns, it aint all that. Here's why:
You'd think that strong finishes mean strong subsequent starts the following season, but they often don't. A strong finish kept Eric Mangini here as head coach for the first year of the Holmgren regime. How did that work out?
In fact, it's pretty common for teams who finished strong to stumble out of the gate the following season. In fact, it's more common for bad teams to come back as good teams.
And that's a context: This is the last five games of a first season. Even if the Browns go 1-4 the rest of the way, it really won't affect 2014. New season. New hope. New players. In fact, more determined players.
That winning "habit" begins with the first win of 2014. You just need to try to make that game one. Game 16 of the previous season might as well have been a decade ago.
Why do we get all mystical and superstitious about this stuff?
What would winning out this season accomplish? Well, the frustrated children would be temporarily appeased, but in the real world it would only accomplish lower draft picks.
Most people who post comments like second place is last place, there can be only one, etc. are generally parroting catch-phrases they heard. They fantasize a lot. They're emotional, and they haven't ever been there. Nor are they thinking, so much as feeling.
The cold, detached, logical mind breaks it down thus: If the Browns finish badly, they will draft higher in every round. This is THE year that they can trade up, if neccessary, to nail down a franchise quarterback, and then draft offensive linemen, recievers, and everything else they need.
2014 would have them in immediate contention; a more talented and formidable team with depth at the most critical position; the missing piece. (I actually think Hoyer is all that, but let's grab the 22 year old stud for insurance and the future).
If the Browns were to win out and finish 9-7 and out of the playoffs, yipee! Their highest pick is now at least in the high teens, and here we go again not having enough ammo to get the franchise QB, or else trading away half their picks to get him.
Congratulations! Now you need to cross your fingers Hoyer doesn't get hurt or fall on his face, and you won't get another chance at a franchise guy for the forseeable future. You're now drafting in the low teens in every round, and can't draft the same quality players you could have ten or so slots higher.
Good for you, temper-tantrum guy! You've established a winning culture in a season that didn't matter anymore, and made it much harder for this team to get on top and stay there for the next twelve or so years! I'm so happy for you!
You ate candy til you puked every Halloween, didn't you? Just couldn't save any for later, could you?
I'm kind of hoping the Browns lose. That's right--I'm a heretic! Burn me at the stake if you can find me and I don't plug you first! Go ahead, issue your fatwah! "This guy thinks with his brain! Kill the traitor!"
As for the Browns needs, I don't hate Greg Little as much as a lot of you do, but I would like to see another scary wide reciever opposite Gordon. Devone Bess has been inexplicably disappointing, and that reciever could even be a slot-type who does what Bess was supposed to do; running around underneath.
I believe that Norv and Chud retain high hopes for Owens, and Obgannaya is a keeper, but I'm sure that they'll look for another big running back.
Maybe indeed that battering ram fullback for short yardage, if he can also catch the ball.
The offensive line isn't the disaster it's being painted to be, but Mitchell Schwartze hasn't developed as well as hoped at right tackle. He would look better at guard. Rather than target a guard, I suspect they'll look for a right tackle and move Schwartze over to effectively upgrade two positions.
While not critical, an inside linebacker would help a lot. Tank Carder isn't bad, but can't cover well, as we saw when Roberts went down.
Cornerback is always a need, even of you have three good ones, which--come next season--I believe they will.
The '13 Browns aren't as deep as they should be at some positions, and this is why after the quarterback is nailed down, the Browns could go best available the rest of the way.
Fortunately, right tackles, guards, and slot recievers slide to the second or even third round, and blocking fullbacks and inside linebackers go even lower.
Many of these "needs" aren't really needs, either. This is a pretty talented team. It has some soft spots to address, but not really any "holes".
If they can just get that quarterback, the rest should slide into place, and the team can be loaded for bear between the draft and free agency. Ready for prime-time.
...if they don't win too much now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)