| GREEN BAY PACKERS (4-2) |
WEEK 7 |
CLEVELAND BROWNS (1-6) |
 |
VS. |
 |
| 31 |
|
3 |
Embarrassed in our own home stadium. Before the season started, I was hoping that we could make it to the end of the season without seeing fans with bags over their heads. We didn't meet that goal; heck, we couldn't even make it to the half-way point of the season to reach that point.
As goofy as Mangini sounded in his post-game press conference, he was right about the things the team needs to work on:
(On the style of play he is hoping to get from his players every week)- "Aggressive, intense, tough, physical, finishing, being able to respond to a successful play that our opponent has and come out and create a successful play ourselves, consistency, execution, communication. Good, solid, sound, fundamental, tough football. Physical football. Intense football. That’s what I want every week. That’s what I want every single week. We’ll make mistakes and there will be plays that aren’t executed as well as they should [be] or things that we can do better, but if you play at that level every single week, you give yourself the best chance to succeed."
In summary, we need to work on everything. For a "veteran" head coach, shouldn't we be much further along at this point?
Let's get to the review of the game...
WEEK 7 - GREEN BAY PACKERS VS. CLEVELAND BROWNS (COMPLETE GAME REVIEW)
GOAT OF THE GAME:
- Derek Anderson: On the Browns' second series of the game, I was really impressed with Derek Anderson. He made quick decisions to the right players, and his passes were thrown at chest-level with a little bit of speed taken off of them. And then...the timeout came. After that, it was a complete meltdown at the quarterback position. Fumbled snap. Forcing the ball to a triple-covered receiver at the goal line. Horrible accuracy. Anderson should have lost his job with this effort, but Mangini said that's not happening.
- I could list a lot more goats, but then I'd have nothing left to talk about in the "general notes" section.
AWARDING GAME BALLS:
- Michael Gaines: That's right. A tight end we just signed as a backup while Robert Royal and Steve Heiden are out gets the game ball. All he had to do was catch 2 passes for 30 yards too. Both times he caught the ball, it helped us move closer to the end zone. Both catches were ones that Royal probably would've dropped too. Gaines' second catch was pretty spectacular, as the big man reached underneath and through his defender to haul in the pass while falling to the ground.
GENERAL THOUGHTS
- One Wildcat Play: Two years ago, the Miami Dolphins were the worst team in football. Last year, they improved upon that because they had the coaching staff that was creative enough on offense to implement and stick with the Wildcat formation. They didn't have the pieces to the puzzle at receiver to be a traditional offense, so they utilized whatever assets they had. It paid off, and it didn't even matter who was in the Wildcat either! It worked!
Mangini should've known that first hand from playing the Jets twice. We saw some more promise against the Steelers last week in using the formation more, but this week we only saw it once. Mangini claimed it was because we fell behind to quickly. I can understand that if you're down 21-0 in the first quarter, but half-way through the second quarter, it was still a 7-3 game. Our offense is clearly struggling, and for whatever reason we're failing to use our next best weapon after the departures of Kellen Winslow and Braylon Edwards.
- Stop Rolling to the Left! The only reason Derek Anderson should be rolling to the left is if it's a designed play, or if he steps ahead of the protection because the pass rusher was angled into the backfield. Instead, we again got to see Anderson roll to his left when Joe Thomas had his defender dominated.
- Cundiff Still Perfect: Kicker Billy Cundiff still hasn't missed a kick since joining the Browns, which is pretty remarkable given his lack of accuracy historically. He shanked his 22-yard field goal attempt in the second quarter, but it got a lucky bounce off the upright and still went through. Can you believe that? We were up 3-0 in the second quarter.
- Smart Football: The Packers played smart football against the Browns (although it was pretty easy to begin with). Case in point: as soon as the Browns brought S Abram Elam on a safety blitz, Rodgers immediately fired the ball to slot receiver Donald Driver for a 70+ yard touchdown. Compare that to Anderson, who always points at the defense as if he recognizes something, only to see him throw it into double coverage or see a running back run the ball right into a stack of defenders.
- Missing Edwards: Considering the lack of production we're seeing from the receiver position, I'm certainly missing the threat that Braylon Edwards offered. Brian Robiskie was targeted minimally and was held without a catch, and I don't even remember seeing Chansi Stuckey take the field. Mohamed Massaquoi was targeted several times, but the passes were usually way off.
- Lack of a Pass Rush: The lack of a pass rush was more embarrassing against the Packers than any other game this season. What has changed that in Week 1, we were pressuring Brett Favre early and often, but that in Week 7, we can't even lay a finger on Aaron Rodgers, one of the most-sacked quarterbacks in the league? We're too "average" on the defensive line with no youth to speak of. I don't think Shaun Rogers is "quitting" on the team, but I can't imagine he's giving it his all when everyone else around him is playing like crap. I don't blame him, because all of his work usually goes for nothing when other guys are getting dominated.
- Patience With Maiava: I can't jump too much on Kaluka Maiava because the only way to see if he can be a starter in the future is to let him get some reps now. There was a noticeable dropoff from D'Qwell Jackson though, and it showed when Ryan Grant gashed the Browns' on the ground all game long. Although it was nearly impossible to do, I believe the announcers also commented that Maiava was the man who came over late when Elam blitzed on Driver's big touchdown catch and run. Maiava was also flagged for a personal foul.
- Rogers' Tripping Penalty: Can someone offer clarification on how Shaun Rogers was called for a tripping penalty? I'm not saying he didn't do it, but it seems unusual for a defensive player to do that, and I couldn't find the foul when they showed a replay of it.
- Cribbs Fumbles Again: I said this earlier in the season: the Browns need to stop putting Joshua Cribbs into situations where he's going to catch the ball and get hit right afterward. He's a catch and run receiver. He's still to blame for fumbling the ball on his short catch, but the play doesn't utilize his strengths to begin with.
RB Ryan Grant tore through the Browns' defense for his first 100+ yard performance of the season.
- Kicked Ball Out of Bounds: The Packers kicked the ball out of bounds twice. That removes the chance for some excitement from Cribbs, but it does give us great field position, something that the contending teams in the NFL would take full advantage of. Instead, we punt the ball and watch the opposition drive 90 yards in a play or two.
- Too Much Regression: As bad as Brady Quinn and Derek Anderson have been this season, I don't believe this is the best that either of them have to offer. Both quarterbacks showed a lot more under the previous regime -- why have they regressed instead of improved? Sure, they've lost "weapons" on offense, but that's not what the problem is. The accuracy, decision-making, and overall confidence are just down the drain.
- Case in Point: In the third quarter, Derek Anderson fired the ball...right to Charles Woodsen. Even Woodsen looked surprised, because the ball was thrown to his outside shoulder and the receiver he was covering had already broken on the inside, pretty well ahead of him.
- Losing Streak at Home: The last time the Browns won a game at home was last season's "WTF" performance against the New York Giants. That was the last Browns game that I personally attended. I might be attending the Monday Night Football game against the Baltimore Ravens. If we win, something fishy will be going on...
- Poor Officiating Decision: The officiating wasn't really a problem this week, but it didn't make sense for the officials upstairs to not call for a booth review when Ryan Grant lost the ball heading into the end zone just after the two-minute warning in the first half. The replay might not have been conclusive enough to overturn the call, but it seemed like enough to warrant a review. Boo.
- St. Clair's Scuffle: When John St. Clair was mentioned on the Browns' first offensive series for getting into a "scuffle", it was the first time I've heard his name mentioned since Week 2 or Week 3 (which is a good thing, I suppose). Since St. Clair used to play for the Chicago Bears, I wonder if his past rivalry with the Packers had anything to do with the early push-fest.
- Put in the Rookies: If we're going to lose in a blowout, then I at least want to have the rookies gain some experience. That includes playing Jerome Harrison, David Veikune, and Coye Francies more. Francies was inactive again, and Veikune was only seeing reps on special teams it appeared. It's smelling like Crennel all over again.
- Brownies: I couldn't find anything positive about this game except Gaines' performance, although TE Greg Estandia also had two short catches...I'm worried about blackouts occurring later in the season...the Browns gave up another big run to a quarterback, this time to Aaron Rodgers for 19 yards...I can't believe I picked the Browns to score 28 points in this game, although I still correctly picked us to lose...I didn't mention the running backs for a reason -- they were a non-factor.
Up next, the Browns will head to Chicago to face the Bears. The Bears were atrocious against the Cincinnati Bengals this past Sunday, but they know they are a better team than that. If Jay Cutler gets time, he will rip a defense apart. Considering the lack of pressure we're generating, it looks like it'll be another long day for our defense.
Tough to take anything positive away from this one. Let’s break down Mangini’s press conference and see where we’re at:
Aggressive= No
intense =No
tough= No
physical=No
finishing= No
being able to respond to a successful play that our opponent has and come out and create a successful play ourselves,= No
consistency = Well, consistently awful, if that’s something. I’ll give him that one..
execution = No
communication = Doubtful. Anderson does point a lot though.
Good= Definitely not.
solid = No
sound= No
fundamental = No
We’ll make mistakes= That’s an understatement.
There will be plays that aren’t executed as well as they should [be] or things that we can do better = Yes, yes there will be. I’m right there with you on that one.
but if you play at that level every single week, you give yourself the best chance to succeed.That is what we would like to do.= Read: If we play better than the other team and score more points at the end of the 4th quarter, we will win. That is what we would like to do. Thanks. Thanks, Eric. I was wondering how that worked.
johnnyphoenix - October 28, 2009
That’s not what he said.
golanbatrac - October 28, 2009
Of course that’s not what he said. Bolded print means it’s JP’s answers. Your blocked quote is JP generalizing how generic Mangini sounded. And in layman’s terms, that’s basically what Mangini said.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
You don’t say.
No, it isn’t. Mangini offered a reflective critique of the Browns performance. No comparison was drawn to the performance of any other team.
golanbatrac - October 28, 2009
You have an over zealous love of blocked quotes.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Bernie19Kosar - October 29, 2009
golanbatrac - October 30, 2009
Buckeye Brad - October 30, 2009
It could be worse.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 30, 2009
OK, now you’ve gone too far . . .
Buckeye Brad - October 31, 2009
Anderson’s pass to Woodson was the most accurate I have seen from him this season.
Roger Dorn - October 28, 2009
Haha
Sadly, this is absolutely true.
rose_11 - October 28, 2009
Ouch and so true!
Brownsfan4ever - October 29, 2009
Rec for truth.
Bernie19Kosar - October 29, 2009
also justice and the American way.
drjeo - October 29, 2009
On the pass to Cribbs, isn’t this the exact type of pattern you expect them to use him on? A short pass where he is supposed to catch and run with it? Just because it was well covered doesn’t mean the coaching staff was misusing Cribbs in that situation.
Also, the tackling is atrocious. The Browns really need to get some speed and tackling ability from their safeties.
Cols714 - October 28, 2009
Ideally, you’d like to hit Cribbs in stride; not make him stop, go to his knees to catch the ball, and then try to run with it.
golanbatrac - October 28, 2009
Yes, this was my point.
Chris Pokorny - October 28, 2009
I just don’t think he is an NFL wide receiver.
Roger Dorn - October 28, 2009
Neither do I.
golanbatrac - October 28, 2009
Agreed.
Cols714 - October 28, 2009
no, he isn’t. returning kicks does not make you a good WR. if we’re going to have him play a position other than KR, i don’t even think WR is at the top of the list. I think he’d make a better RB than WR.
Dawg Nuts - October 28, 2009
It made Devin Hester a great receiver. But then again, he gets hit in stride when there is ample space around him to run. Damn Lovie Smith, he’s just too smart…
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
At the risk of sounding a bit like mooncamping, Devin Hester is built like a wide receiver, Cribbs is built like a running back.
golanbatrac - October 28, 2009
this is absolutely correct, but a part of me wonders if moon had posted this, would i have taken it seriously?
notthatnoise - October 28, 2009
I try to give my best effort to read everything he writes seriously.
Roger Dorn - October 29, 2009
I think if you can be amused and not annoyed when you fail at this, you’ve uncovered the key to truly enjoying his style.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 29, 2009
Devin Hester is very short for productive receiver though. Just saying.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
He has loose hips though. That’s the point.
Also, Hester is two inches taller than Steve Smith.
golanbatrac - October 28, 2009
I have a bias against short receivers. I just never believe their height allows them to do much in their position.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Steve Smith. He is ridiculous.
rufio - October 29, 2009
I am convinced that Steve Smith jumps higher than anyone else in the NFL.
Roger Dorn - October 29, 2009
Which one?
TheRealSlimShady - October 29, 2009
The short Steve Smith.
SpecialBrownie - October 29, 2009
They are both short.
TheRealSlimShady - October 30, 2009
The really short Steve Smith.
SpecialBrownie - October 30, 2009
The black one.
Bernie19Kosar - October 31, 2009
Hester is two inches taller than Steve Smith and Wes Welker, the same height as Greg Jennings, and an inch shorter than Roddy White and Reggie Wayne.
We’d all be shittin’ kittens if we had any one of these ‘short’ receivers.
golanbatrac - October 31, 2009
There are still RBs who can catch the ball well and be productive as pass catchers, and WRs with tightish hips who succeed.
rufio - October 29, 2009
Hester also runs like a 4.2 40. Cribbs is fast, but not anywhere near that vicinity.
Roger Dorn - October 29, 2009
how tall is he
TheRealSlimShady - October 29, 2009
Fixed.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 29, 2009
woodsmeister - October 29, 2009
I thought of that after I posted, and then suspected I wouldn’t be alone. Nicely done, sadly true.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 29, 2009
Chemo - October 29, 2009
That is what you get with DA at QB
Brownsfan4ever - October 29, 2009
everything he said is just “coach speak”, its not like he gave us any insight whatsoever. that gets to be exhausting, but that’s the kind of guy we have.
as far as the quarterback switch, i tend to agree with him that he shouldn’t switch back yet. what would happen when he switches back and quinn is just as bad as before, or worse? it would be complete turmoil. if we point to a mistake, it was yanking quinn in the first place instead of letting him fight through the whole season to see if he’d develop. he started out against some elite teams and never really got a fair shake. i’ll admit anderson looked better when he came in as a replacement, but how long did that last? a game and a half maybe?
Dawg Nuts - October 28, 2009
Well, of course Quinn was yanked early, I agree with you. We know what we have in Anderson as he’s started 35 times now. He’ll never be our answer at QB. The travesty is that we don’t really know what we have in Quinn — 2.5 games to start the year in his third year with the team isn’t a full evaluation. Only an organization as truly inept and incompetent as our Cleveland Browns could find a way to allow uncertainties to persist as to the talent and/or potential of a first round draft pick.
That said, quite frankly, the Browns will fail in 2009 regardless of who is under center. That’s not to say I don’t wish they had given Quinn 16 games to make or break, but we had a very modest draft, we traded our playmakers away and now the true debate is whether or not players are quitting out on the field or not. That’s not conducive to winning in the NFL.
Western Reserve - October 28, 2009
yes. exactly what i was saying. if we were doomed to have a losing season either way, why not get a full evaluation on BQ. the evaluation on DA is more than complete.
Dawg Nuts - October 28, 2009
Do you truly go to Western Reserve? If so, I live near you.
Just a fun fact of the day.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Nah, just in regards to NE Ohio — part of the old Connecticut claim.
Western Reserve - October 28, 2009
Ah, of course. I forget that a large valley is called the Western Reserve and that it does not only apply to the High School.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
interesting you said high school, i’m at CWRU and assumed that’s what he was talking about.
notthatnoise - October 28, 2009
I live in the city of Mount Union College. Pierre Garcon’s Alma Mater.
Western Reserve High is 15 min. from my former High School.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Where did you go to school? Are you talking to the Western Reserve HS in Collins, because my cousins went there and they’re in the same conference as my alma mater (St. Paul).
Buckeye Brad - October 28, 2009
I went to Alliance High School. I’m speaking of the Western Reserve near Atwater, Ohio.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Ah, I knew there was another Western Reserve in Ohio.
Why do they have more than one high school in Ohio with the exact same name? Isn’t that pretty dumb? The school I teach at is called Highland, and I know there’s at least two schools with that name (and another one spelled Hiland). And I know of at least two Crestview High Schools.
Buckeye Brad - October 28, 2009
Every time I hear that St. Thomas Aquinas is ranked #1 in the country I double take, then I understand that it’s not the one on route 62 toward Canton. Haha.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Yeah, obviously many Catholic schools have the same name. There are a ton of St. Mary and St. Joseph and St. Paul and St. Peter and such. You’d think with public schools they could come up with some more original names.
I don’t even know why my school is called Highland — it’s not on any high land from what I can tell.
Buckeye Brad - October 28, 2009
Haha. Mine is obviously the public school of the city, named of which because it was made of three communities that came together in an Alliance.
Once again, only on the map because of MUC and Len Dawson.
And sadly, Dawson always exclaims he’s from Canton. Embarrassing.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
well, there’s western reserve academy and western reserve high school, so far as i know.
DontCallMeJoey - October 29, 2009
Well, we were talking about public high schools, and there are at least two public Western Reserve high schools (as far as I know) — one in Huron County and one in Mahoning County. So if you include Western Reserve Academy then I guess that makes at least three Western Reserve high schools in Ohio.
Buckeye Brad - October 30, 2009
Len Dawson graduated for AHS.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
From* Darn
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Your point about switching back to Quinn is a good one. Of course, there’s always Ratliff to try, and I’m beginning to think that might not be the worst idea. If they were to try him and the offense continue to look abysmal, then you would have to wonder about the entire offensive design (as many of us do already, I suspect). Mangini has placed himself in the “dance with the one what brung ya” situation with Anderson right now. If a change were to be made, though, the bye week is the time to do it. Contract issues or not, I don’t expect that to happen. We’re stuck with DA for the rest of this miserable year.
drjeo - October 28, 2009
i’m not so sure. as bad as anderson has been, mangini has the air cover to make a change after the bye. i think you see a new qb behind center after our week off…i’m just not sure if it’s quinn or ratliff…
DontCallMeJoey - October 28, 2009
Or maybe he’ll just sign someone else and let them play for a game and a half. I really have no clue as to what his thought process in all of this has been.
JustBob - October 28, 2009
i think if he were going to sign someone else, that would have happened already.
DontCallMeJoey - October 28, 2009
I smell a Garcia signing…
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
that would be something, wouldn’t it?
tribe71 - October 28, 2009
If they go Ratliff, then it would officially be confirmed that Mangini personally hates Quinn. Or it’s about money plain and simple.
I think Mangini has no real plan — which is virtually the worst case scenario considering, you know, he’s the head coach and all. He’s clearly struck out moving to DA. Will he make the move back to Quinn? Perhaps, but at this point we are still looking at a 3-13 team. The move then, to me, seems almost irrelevant.
So where do we go from here and what are we building for the future? Maybe Mangini feels he needs his own guy because he’s an ego maniac and control freak. But then why not pursue Mark Sanchez in the draft? I think we are closer, for next season, to a Garcia-like signing: a worthless and washed up veteran to go through the motions of playing QB for the Cleveland Browns.
Western Reserve - October 28, 2009
you have to play DA because somehow we’re still not guaranteed a top 5 pick. The NFL is that sad this year. So in some weird way playing DA could lead to real QB play in the future- a higher draft choice.
L Train - October 28, 2009
I certainly think that’s a possibility, yeah, that Mangini wants to draft a QB. I hate the prospect of that, but it’s definitely possible.
Western Reserve - October 28, 2009
I have been saying this for a bit now.The only reason to keep DA in is to make sure you get the draft spot you want.
The whole “DA gives us the best chance to move/win/score” is just a song and dance.
Brownsfan4ever - October 29, 2009
And what is the draft spot we want? Don’t say we want it higher because no coach wants to lose. That’s ridiculous.
And it can’t be lower, because like you said, it’s a song and dance.
The only reason in my opinion is the money. I won’t argue about it, it’s been done here already. Some agree, some don’t.
skipkirk - October 29, 2009
i’m not going to sit here and say DA is a good or even average qb, but how many sustained drives has he had? at least 1-2 a game. how many did quinn have? 0.
notthatnoise - October 29, 2009
I guess you’d be in the draft a QB, or get a lousy veteran, or play Ratliff(!) camp then because we know what we have in Anderson — but we just had to give him one last test drive just to make sure he still stunk — and apparently a total of about 5 career starts in his whole body of work is enough for you to know Quinn is not fit to be a QB in NFL.
Western Reserve - October 29, 2009
I know a lot of people disagree about quinn, but come on, this isn’t his rookie year. If he were a rookie i would say give him more time, but as someone who has been on an nfl team for 3 years now, i would expect to see SOMETHING. He didn’t show even a spark here or there where he did something good. if he had strung together a few nice plays even every once in a while, i would feel much better about him, but the sad truth is he has shown absolutely nothing.
Its just my opinion of course, but i haven’t seen anything to make me believe he’ll be getting any better any time soon.
notthatnoise - October 30, 2009
Of course you haven’t seen anything — because he’s on the bench!
Right, he’s not a rookie, but he might as well be with 5 career starts to his name.
I wish Mangini would have been half as stubborn in sticking with Quinn as he’s been with sticking with DA now. Again, I’m not saying Quinn would have solved all our problems, and at this point, this season is a lost cause, but we could have at least — finally — figured out what we had in him. If he’s a total bust, fine, we get a new QB like we are going to have to do anyway.
The only continuity the Browns know is losing.
Western Reserve - October 30, 2009
i meant i haven’t seen anything in those five games, i thought that was implied, but i guess not.
As for him still essentially being a rookie, thats false. Aaron rogers had 0 starts his first three years and came in and played great right away, due in large part because of his time on the sideline. Using that as an example, its not outrageous to expect quinn to be able to show some progress from his freshman year of high school.
notthatnoise - October 30, 2009
There is a big difference there.Rodgers got to pick the mind of Farve while Quinn picked the mind of well Mr.I can’t throw right Anderson.
Yes not all QB’s need a great QB to learn from but have a great team help’s som of them young QB’s out.
Brownsfan4ever - October 30, 2009
He also had two fantastic wideouts and and a solid run game.
golanbatrac - October 30, 2009
With all due respect, your Rogers comparison is bogus. Once Favre — finally — was out of the picture, Rogers was giving the full faith of the organization and the reins to the team. We put Quinn through a QB competition, kept him on a short lease and then benched the kid after 2.5 games. Also, as was already pointed out, Rogers was actually afforded some talent surrounding him to work with.
Western Reserve - October 30, 2009
Exactly. Maybe it’s the much discussed money issue, or maybe Mangini just instinctively feels at this point that BQ is utterly hopeless, but it’s hard for me to logically ascertain why DA is not on the bench this week after his level of performance the last few games.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 30, 2009
i hope you’re kidding here, b/c what a ridiculous thing to say. perhaps playing ratliff would mean something crazy, like, mangini thinks ratliff gives the team the best chance to win?
DontCallMeJoey - October 29, 2009
Best chance to win? So after a weeks long QB competition in camp — that, in retrospect, obviously was good for nothing by the way — in which the depth chart went Quinn, Anderson, Ratliff, suddenly the third string guy gives us our best chance to win? So Mangini had the order completely reversed? That’s appalling. Or alarming. Or both.
Folks, this season ended when Quinn was pulled and Anderson was put into the game in the second half of the Baltimore game. And, no, not because Quinn is the Chosen One. But because it showed the wheels were coming off and our head coach didn’t have a plan.
Look at the schedule ahead. This team’s best chances of winning are if an opponent is as generous as Buffalo and gives us one.
Western Reserve - October 29, 2009
It’s been said before, but Magini’s actions in regard to the QB slot seem at odds with his philosophy elsewhere. I’m not sure why that is really.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 29, 2009
well, now that we’re 7 weeks into the season, can you honestly say that there is no chance ratliff gives us a better chance to win? DA completes 4% of his passes, and quinn’s confidence seems to be shaken to its core. i’m not saying i think ratliff is the guy, but the other 2 have been so bad, i’d have a hard time railing against mangini for playing ratliff. my ultimate point is that there’s zero possibility that mangini isn’t playing quinn b/c he doesn’t like quinn. that’s preposterous.
also, as relapse says, the qb situation is bizarre. i think that mangini’s plan is quite clear…for every position but the qb (as kwoog has said elsewhere), which is just strange.
finally, i can’t get past this “buffalo gave us a win” trope. why did they give us that win? the browns played world-class special teams, outstanding defense, and demonstrated poise and discipline (3 penalties). the offense stunk, but that in and of itself doesn’t mean we didn’t earn that win. 2 of the 3 phases were dominant.
DontCallMeJoey - October 29, 2009
No, I cannot be intellectually honest and say Ratliff has a 0% chance of giving us a better chance to win. But I’d say the chances are slim enough that I’d rather they not insert our third string QB and expect any miracles.
I think it’s preposterous how the QB situation has been handled this season with Mangini reneging on his word to give Quinn the reins to this team and have the confidence to at least show us what he’s got — boom or bust.
So far, the only semblance of a plan from Mangini is to establish alpha male at the price of alienating his players and any potential future free agents; creating a big question mark at QB; and claiming he wants to ‘win now’ even though he’s in the process of trading away our playmakers.
The Buffalo game is nothing to write home about.
Western Reserve - October 29, 2009
If that game would have been a shootout and we would have won 33-30 or something, nobody would be saying they gave us a win, even though that situation would mean the offense played great and the defense was terrible. But because fans focus so much on offense a 6-3 game is awful and an undeserved victory
notthatnoise - October 30, 2009
Without trying to take anything away from our league worst defense, it was a still a dismal football game. The AP branded it a ‘battle of ineptitude.’
As for the offense, sorry if as fans it’s hard to miss a QB performance that is 2/17 for 23 yards.
Western Reserve - October 30, 2009
my point is that everybody sees it as a dismal game because it was boring to watch. In a 33-30 game our defense would have been equally as bad as our offense in the 6-3 game, but nobody would have complained.
Just because a team was inept on offense doesn’t mean the whole team was inept.
notthatnoise - October 30, 2009
It wasn’t a dismal game because its was boring to watch/low scoring. It was a dismal game because of the gross ineptitude on display. It seemed much more like a battle of gummy bears than a battle of titans.
JustBob - October 30, 2009
the browns’ defense and special teams were far from inept. the game was viewed as “dismal” b/c people are obsessed with offense.
DontCallMeJoey - October 30, 2009
This.
Why isn’t a 33-30 game a display of “gross ineptitude” by the defense?
Buckeye Brad - October 30, 2009
Do you guys ever look around the NFL and see what’s happening around the league? Do you really believe this was some herculean defensive struggle?
By the way, I’ll say it once more, it is hardly for only the offense obsessed to think a 2/17, 23 yard performance is completely unbecoming for a starting QB in the NFL. Pathetic and indefensible.
Western Reserve - October 30, 2009
No. Never. Are there really other teams in the NFL?
I don’t think anyone argued otherwise. Nobody said the QB was anything but terrible.
The point was that a bad performance by the offense does not mean that the entire team played poorly. The defense and special teams both played very well, and to state otherwise is purely false.
Buckeye Brad - October 31, 2009
can you honestly say we’ve been better off without Garcia? I doubt he would want to sign with this team though.
L Train - October 28, 2009
Been there, done that.

Bernie19Kosar - October 29, 2009
I miss those unis. Thank God Madden brought them back!
SpecialBrownie - October 29, 2009
Worst Jersey’s ever.
kwoog - October 31, 2009
I couldn’t watch the game and didn’t realize it was THAT bad. Although the score did speak for itself.
How did the O-line look? Was DA being pressured all game?
Brownie's Year - October 28, 2009
By the end he was under pressure, but he had all day to throw during the first half.
golanbatrac - October 28, 2009
Yea, I thought the O-line was good enough. I also saw a number of holes that Jamal realized he was too slow to get through and decided to take a different route. It was embarrassing.
Roger Dorn - October 28, 2009
Thanks
Brownie's Year - October 29, 2009
You are right to worry about blackouts. Here in Columbus, it’s going to be a steady diet of the Bengals and Steelers. Looks like I’ll be spending Sunday afternoons in sports bars the rest of the year.
woodsmeister - October 28, 2009
So at least something positive has come out of this season.
drjeo - October 28, 2009
I receive Youngstown local channels through my Dish receiver. For some reason, an Ohio city thought it better to play the Steelers game over the Browns game. Way to go Youngstown. Way to go.
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Youngstown does have a lot of Steelers fans (I went to college there). After all, it’s almost exactly halfway between Cleveland and PIttsburgh.
Buckeye Brad - October 28, 2009
I’d still like to think there should be state pride in that situation but money talks…
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
I get what you’re saying, but I don’t know how much the state matters. There are many Detroit fans in Toledo and many Chicago fans in Indiana. Plus, Y-town is right on the border so I’m guessing there are some Pennsylvania cities which get the Y-town TV stations.
Buckeye Brad - October 28, 2009
Dish refuses to switch my feed to Cleveland. I don’t see a problem except for the fact that they love to piss me off. But I get phone and internet discounts through them so I’m not about to get kicked off Dish anyways…
SpecialBrownie - October 28, 2009
Also, does this mean it would be perfectly normal for someone to be an Indians fan and a Steelers fan for his whole life?
Cols714 - October 29, 2009
No. Only a complete moron would be both an Indians fan and a Steelers fan. Thank God I don’t know anyone like that.
Buckeye Brad - October 29, 2009
i know someone who is a cavs and steelers fan.
emily522 - October 29, 2009
I know lots of people who are Browns/Reds/Penguins fans.
golanbatrac - October 29, 2009
I think the Browns/Reds combo is pretty common from people in the southern half of the state. Guys 50+ or so didn’t have the Bengals around to cheer for and the Browns were really good back when they were kids. I think that has the potential to pass down another generation. ON the other hand the Reds had one of the largest and established fan bases in the country back then AND they were really good in the 70s, all while the Indians absolutely blew.
Ryan Kelsey - October 29, 2009
Normal maybe, but unfortunate.
Roger Dorn - October 29, 2009
Better than being an Indians fan and a Browns fan, that’s for sure.
Cols714 - October 29, 2009
This is the only status that can make you pure.
Ryan Kelsey - October 29, 2009
Nothing is worse than a Browns/Cubs fan. Obviously I enjoy depression.
Villeslgr - October 29, 2009
I am with you but i took it to another level.I am a Browns/Cubs/Indians :(
Grew up watching WGN with Maddux,Sutclif,Sandberg,Dunston and Dawson on the Cubs.
Brownsfan4ever - October 30, 2009
I wouldn’t trade being a Browns fan for anything.
Roger Dorn - October 30, 2009
100% agree with you there!
Brownsfan4ever - October 30, 2009
As hard as it is some weeks, and as much as I managed to get away from it for a couple of years, nor would I at this point.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 30, 2009
It’s a joyous time to be a Browns fan.
golanbatrac - October 30, 2009
….if you’re a masochist.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 30, 2009
Really, halfway between Cleveland and Pittsburgh? Wow, I didn’t know that…(joking)
Cols714 - October 29, 2009
just wtf
This has to be the worst team in football right now.. Wait, rephrase: This IS the worst team in football. Not because of their overall play, their record, their heart, their “teamwork”, their poor coaching and failure to utilize their weapons properly.. Did the Browns actually WIN a game? No, they made less mistakes than the other team. No one would pick this team to score 28 points. To think that this person did is laughable. What were they basing that on? a HOME game? They still have yet to score more than 20 points this season and only did so based on special teams, I think a LOT of teams are just going to kick the ball out of bounds now that they realize how pathetically easy it is to dominate that offensive… wait, no… DEfensive… no, that still doesn’t work.. oh the whole goddamn team, lol. I can’t wait til Mangini ships out Cribbs to a REAL team so his talents aren’t wasted week in and week out.
Jack R - October 29, 2009
Hi Jack R. I see this is your first post on this site. Welcome, and I hope you continue to contribute. There are a number of things in your post I didn’t really understand:
So, if they’re the worst team in the NFL, but not because of these things, then what else are you basing it on? We’ll all be able to respond better if we have a clear idea what you’re thinking.
Well, I’m pretty sure the Browns actually won the Buffalo game. True, they made fewer mistakes, but that’s closely correlated to winning, no? Maybe your point was that the Browns wouldn’t have won if Buffalo hadn’t made so many mistakes, but then you could argue that they would have won if they just played better. It’s a circular argument.
Insulting people isn’t perhaps the best way to introduce yourself. Plus, it invites people to respond in kind.
Actually, I’m pretty sure that the Browns are a real team – they get paid, they have uniforms and everything! (Well, not cheerleaders, but that’s still pretty optional).
I’m not trying to be condescending here – just trying to promote rational and intelligent discourse. As you read the posts, I’m sure you’ll see what I’m talking about. There’s lots of room for divergent opinion here, but most arguments are based on some sort of facts or statistics. Emotional rants don’t really go over that well.
Again, welcome and good luck.
drjeo - October 29, 2009
Haha are you gunna do this for every single newposter?
In for a tough time drjeo.
skipkirk - October 29, 2009
Us regulars should form a committee to deal with new posters who throw flaming cleveand.com style garbage up for the first post. We can rotate who will deal with them and make them feel silly until they either leave or think their thoughts through a little more.
Ryan Kelsey - October 29, 2009
i’m in.
Dawg Nuts - October 30, 2009
In.
SpecialBrownie - October 30, 2009
I’m in
-but only if mooncamping signs on, too.(If this were physical reality, I’d be running right now.)
Seriously, I think that would be comedy gold there…..
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 30, 2009
I guess I don’t know if I’m a regular or not. I post fairly frequently, but not in the game threads, so maybe that makes me just a semi-regular. I only responded to Jack R because we have a lot of newer posters (see “downhill” fanpost about that), and thought that some response was appropriate. I think it’s a good idea for regulars to sort of “police” the site and respond to unproductive comments. Look how well Brad has done with promoting the ‘reply’ button! Somebody mentioned modeling this site more like LGN, and this would be a step in that direction. I’m not really in favor of the vitriol sometimes shown there to new posters, though. So, I guess I’m in too.
drjeo - October 30, 2009
I’d say you qualify as a regular. I only do game threads when I happen to be at my computer during the game. Usually, I’m at a Browns Backers bar though.
Ryan Kelsey - October 31, 2009
Indeed.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 29, 2009
That is how you win football games..all games in general.
Also we’re not the worst team in football.
We have a Win, there are three teams that haven’t done this yet (Rams, Buccaneers, Titans).
29-10 the combined records of teams that have beaten us (some of those losses were when the teams played each other). So far I think it’s safe to say we have played at least 3 playoff teams, very possibly 4. Not very many other teams have had that kind of schedule.
I have always felt the worst team in football is the team who picks first in next years draft…..The Browns are not going to be that team.
The only way I will agree that we are the worst team in football is when we play the Lions, Chiefs, Raiders, Jaguars and lose to them all.(not going to happen)
When Mangini took over this team it was like a building that could only be build 3 stories tall because of a shitty foundation. The only way to fix the foundation is to knock down the building and start it all over. Give him time he might be able to build a skyscraper.
The Brown Note - October 29, 2009
Do you believe that record is a direct indicator of how good a team is?
The Licensed Pessimist - October 31, 2009
Pretty direct but not absolute.
Roger Dorn - October 31, 2009
The saddest part of this game was the lack of pass rush.
Sunday was the first time all season that Rodgers wasn’t sacked all season. Rams sacked him twice. Lions got him 5 times. Browns 0.
Bernie19Kosar - October 29, 2009
couldn’t agree more. i’ve given up on caring about the offense…the qb’s, wr’s, rb’s and coordinator are a total disaster, so it’s hard to give a shit—but the intensity on defense has to stay high. zero qb pressure on the most sacked guy in football is atrocious.
DontCallMeJoey - October 29, 2009
I would like to see Cribbs run the wildcat for an entire game. After all, could it get any worse on offense? Empty out the cupboard. Throw it against a wall. Who knows, maybe we can find something that works. Who cares if it sounds/looks dumb.
After all, how many people snickered at the thought of the Dolphins running the wildcat? Hell right now, I would let Paul Johnson run the triple option with the Browns.
Bernie19Kosar - October 29, 2009
I would like us to use Cribbs as a RB more.He should be used the way we used Metcalf back when we used him.Line him upas a RB place him in motion make the other team put a safty on him and hit him wht swing/slants and screens.Run a few around the ends do some toss’s and RB screens.
Brownsfan4ever - October 30, 2009
Speaking of the offensive offense, has anyone heard if Kosar has even met Dabol yet? Is he meeting regularly with anyone or does he just come in and drink coffee with Jim Brown and tell sea stories?
JustBob - October 30, 2009
Massaquoi had too many misses. I count at least two incompletions that hit his hands and a couple more that an NFL receiver would have had to show athleticism, but were attainable.
Rodgers made a pass to his receiver in the end zone with 1-1 coverage. The receiver just turned around and he threw it at the knees, where only the receiver could reach it. Why don’t we do that? We seem to like to lob over the defender – a relic of the BE era?
tribe71 - October 29, 2009
Why don’t we do that?
Derek Anderson right now is the least accurate passer in the NFL. That’s why.
Bernie19Kosar - October 29, 2009
i feel like this was the week where i noticed a big part of why rookie receivers struggle. momass is clearly a gifted guy, but he gets called for a blatant push off, can’t get separation at the line in a bump and run scenario, doesn’t quite take his routes to the “open” spot when he gets a little separation downfield. not saying he won’t get better, but it was very interesting to see the little technical things that braylon does to be successful (as far as getting open) were absent from momass’s game.
DontCallMeJoey - October 29, 2009
Quarterback Controversy
Mangini was asked post-game if he had ever considered putting Quinn in the Packers game. His answer was, “Absolutely not. Derek’s my guy.” Here’s my question: If Derek is really your guy, why would leave him in the game all the way to the final second of a laugher, when you could be risking injury to “your guy”? Quinn or Ratliff deserved time on the field in the fourth quarter.
toledomudhen - October 29, 2009
Probably because if Quinn even looks like he is about to touch a football, the calls for Quinn will get louder and Mangini has made it obvious he doesn’t want Quinn as his QB right now.
Villeslgr - October 29, 2009
is
an actual quote?
DontCallMeJoey - October 29, 2009
If it is, I’m getting drunk. Really M’Fing drunk.
Bernie19Kosar - October 29, 2009
I watched the post game press conference and don’t remember him saying that.
golanbatrac - October 29, 2009
Not sure he said the Derek is my QB but he did say he never though of changing out the QB
Brownsfan4ever - October 30, 2009
i don’t believe you should ever put your second string in when you’re losing. Thats the same as forfitting. I don’t care what the score is, i don’t ever want to see my coach admit defeat before the fourth quarter, that would just be insulting.
notthatnoise - October 30, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.