Matt Sullivan - Getty Images
over 1 year ago: CLEVELAND - OCTOBER 03: Defensive lineman Kenyon Coleman #90 of the Cleveland Browns celebrates after sacking quarterback Carson Palmer #9 of the Cincinnati Bengals at Cleveland Browns Stadium on October 3 2010 in Cleveland Ohio. (Photo by Matt Sullivan/Getty Images)
Watching the Cleveland Browns face the Cincinnati Bengals on Sunday, the script seemed to be playing out like it has the past three weeks: have a lead in the fourth quarter, and then lose it.
Holding a 23-13 lead at the start of the fourth quarter, Carson Palmer was feeling it in the no huddle offense, pretty much shredding the Browns' defensive backs most of the game. With plenty of time left in the fourth quarter at the 10:33 mark, Palmer ran a shuffle pass to running back Brian Leonard, bringing the Bengals to within three. That was the beginning of what seemed to be the downhill trend we've become so accustomed to.
On the Browns' next offensive series, they went three-and-out. The Bengals then proceeded to drive down the field with ease. They had gone from their own 14-yard line to the Browns' 31-yard line in just a couple of minutes. With 5:20 left in the game on 3rd-and-3, the Browns finally came up with a third-down stop, but faced a tough decision. Chad Ochocinco was called for offensive pass interference, and the Browns had to decide whether to accept or decline the penalty.
In terms of game strategy, it was as easy of a call as it gets: accept the penalty to take them out of field goal range. With that said, seeing how our cornerbacks had been torched by Terrell Owens all game long, who didn't fear an easy first-down conversion? The Browns accepted the penalty, and the defense came up big as Matt Roth delivered a sack, further taking the Bengals out of field goal range.
With 4:41 left on the clock, the Browns' offense had a chance to ice the game. Unfortunately, on first down they came out passing and Wallace's throw was incomplete. On second down, the Browns ran the ball with Peyton Hillis and a Bengals defensive lineman was called for holding. It was a tacky call in my book, but it ended up being the difference maker. With a fresh set of downs, Brian Daboll finally had some sense knocked into him: run the ball with Hillis.
What did we see the rest of the drive?
The Bengals were out of timeouts, so a couple of kneel-downs later, the Browns won the game, improving to 1-1 in the division. The Bengals beat the Ravens, the Ravens beat the Steelers, the Browns beat the Bengals, and the Ravens beat the Browns. The division race should be interesting in the AFC North.
While the secondary was torched, props go to Kenyon Coleman, Matt Roth, and Scott Fujita for their efforts today. I'll have my full review up in a day or two, but for now I think we should all milk this win as much as we can.
0 recs | 1192 comments
GO BROWNS!
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
but for now I think we should all milk this win as much as we can.
hell yeah!
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
Hillis is the Juggernaut, B***H!
BrownDawg1409 - October 3, 2010
Meh, the pic is cool but without it, that nickname is lackluster.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
DavidPuddy - October 3, 2010
Wrong picture.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
yeah, that helmet looks like, a, um, you know, a man helmet
Les Fleurs Du Mal - October 4, 2010
Absolutely correct picture.
DavidPuddy - October 4, 2010
Please refer yourself either to the bottom of the thread or to “Nickname for Hillis”
Then you shall see it’s the wrong picture.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Enough already, you do know this shit is make believe,don’t you?
dawginhouston - October 5, 2010
What are you talking about, bro? The Juggernaut character was completely based a real guy named Lane Carsho. Born in New York City in 1928. Carsho was drafted into the US Army in 1950, and served in the Korean War. It was there he was presumed KIA after a collapse in a cave Carsho’s platoon was ordered to raid. Only… Lane wasn’t dead. No one knows how, but he managed to escape from the cave and Korea. He returned to the United States but much to the dismay of his friends and family, he just wasn’t the same. He had a serious mental illness and would go on seemingly endless fits of rage. Doctors were blown away by his physical strength, but psychiatrists deemed him incurable and demanded he be restrained from then on. He spent the rest of his life at the Gracie Square Hospital, heavily sedated at all times. As nearly any attention whatsoever was considered to be a catalyst for outbursts, he was basically shutout from the rest of the world from that point forward. He eventually died on Janurary 21st, 1986. Most forgot his story until an ambitious Stan Lee was rummaging through some old backlogged newspaper articles in the New York Public Library, looking for ideas for an future comic strip. He found a rare piece on the one known as Lane Carsho. He was instantly taken by it, and understandably so. It was then and there the legend of the Juggernaut was born. Lane’s story lives on throughout Stan Lee’s fictional world of the X-Men, and in our hearts, the ones aware of the true Juggernaut, Lane Carsho.
Seriously, bro. Look it up.
But there’s actually more to the story. It’s a well known fact by those close to Peyton, one his favorites things to do as kid was read comic books. And as you might have guessed, he loved X-Men. His favorite character, as you may have guessed, the Juggernaut. It’s said he was so inspired by the Juggernaut character in the comics that he mimicked him as a child and even later in his younger football days. The sport of football gave him the opportunity to be just like the Juggernaut, his play style matching the character perfectly, he loved it. He also quickly excelled at it. In high school he set several school rushing records and was received countless rewards. It was rumored the spirit of Lane Carsho was incarnated in our running back, the big fan of the Juggernaut himself. This gave the man we see today the ability to plow through defenses like they aren’t even there. Perhaps not literally, but Lane’s spirit rages on within Peyton whether you believe it or not. Afterall… he… is… the JUGGERNAUT bitch!
Either that, or maybe you shouldn’t be a big ol’ douche.
Simmsinns - October 5, 2010
a) I tried to look up stuff on Lane Carsho but couldn’t find it
b) its all irrelevant because “Juggernaut” was created by 2 jews.
Eat that world!
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Wow, incredible.
rufio - October 5, 2010
Well, bravo.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
Very good…I found myself immersed in your story even when I knew it was BS. Bravo!
Kimble_79 - October 5, 2010
Well done.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
its still real to me, dammit!
troy145 - October 5, 2010
Disagree. The Juggernaut is easily the best username. Very fitting, and genuinely badass.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
nickname, not username, typo
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
na
dawginhouston - October 4, 2010
Don’t take any nickname advice from SB. He’s hit on 1 so far, out of like 5.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Most won’t get it though. We will as DBN meme but that’s it.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Anyone who knows who the Juggernaut is from X-men. The character is an exact exaggeration of Hillis running style. Or perhaps Hillis’ running style is an exaggeration of the character.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I think I’m stuck on using “the Vanilla Gorilla”
love it better than the “Albino Rhino”
Neither are mine, I’m just stealing them.
doggrad87 - October 3, 2010
“the Rhino” would be another comic-book reference. Perhaps more applicable since Hillis doesn’t derive his powers from a mystical source.
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
I’m pretty sure “the Rhino” would be a horned mammal reference.
Chemo - October 4, 2010
The comic book version was also a horned mammal reference.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
You don’t say…
Chemo - October 4, 2010
He does: Joe Thomas blocks for him.
rufio - October 4, 2010
recrecrecrecrecrec
Adrock2099 - October 4, 2010
hey oh!
discoinferno083 - October 4, 2010
Didn’t see most of the game, bad feed, girlfriend, etc. Looks like another opponent underestimated us and just couldn’t stop Hillis. 0-3 was not becoming of this team.
Oh yeah, we have another quarterback controversy coming. :(
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
I think they’re going to throw Delhomme back in.
I’m worried about chemistry issues.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I’m worried about Delhomme sucking, throwing INTs and ruining our gameplan.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Wallace didn’t do much better…
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I’m thinking he has more of a limited downside compared to Delhomme.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
but his “good days” are pretty awful. I know I dislike Wallace more than most, but the guy is simply a bad quarterback. I maintain that Delhomme will be much better once he’s healthy and isn’t asked to throw the ball 40 times.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
saying he’s simply bad just doesn’t seem accurate when he’s completing +60% of his passes, has 2 TDs to 1 INT and only allowed 3 sacks.
Thats not BAD. Theres plenty of teams in the NFL that would love that kind of ball security from a starting QB at this point.
troy145 - October 3, 2010
The dude is average who makes some bone head moves everyonce in a while.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
THIS. I totally agree with you on this one. My opinion of him is the guy that every once in a while will make a bonehead move (like the pitch last week) but usually will avoid the game-losing mistakes. He also generally won’t win you a game.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
This is the perfect description of Jake Delhomme.
Bernie19Kosar - October 3, 2010
I suppose both but I like Delhomme more.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
sure. That does not a bad quarterback make.
troy145 - October 3, 2010
Copy of my comment fail.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
what?
troy145 - October 3, 2010
he is below average. like I’ve said, I may hate on the guy more than others, but in my opinion he should not be trusted to start more games than he absolutely has to. He looks lost half of the time.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
Derek Anderson is simply a bad quarterback. Brady Quinn is simply a bad quarterback. Seneca Wallace is a serviceable quarterback and a pretty solid backup. I want to see Delhomme back in as well, but saying Seneca is a bad qb is not accurate. He has done his job better than anyone else we’ve had start three games in the last several years.
TheDriveStillHurts - October 3, 2010
Comparing him to past Browns QBs is the wrong way to look at it. DA and Quinn and pretty much everyone since ‘99 have been downright awful. Wallace is an upgrade, but he’s still bad. If he weren’t bad, he wouldn’t be a career backup.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
tim couch wasn’t bad. that is all.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
Agree. That is all.
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
Yeah, but he was a crybaby. That is all.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
we can’t keep saying “that is all” if we’re going to keep sayign things, because that’s not all.
that’s all.
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
Hey, I just noticed your sig. Good stuff. That is all.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
I agree with you. That is all.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
tim couch was one of the best things about the Browns when they came back.
9James - October 5, 2010
That is the most depressing thing I have ever read.
Roger Dorn - October 5, 2010
You are right about that,he, is a lot better then what we’ve had back there for some time.However i still think Delhomme,will be much better, once he’s back into the flow of the team,the offence will be much more effective.
dawginhouston - October 4, 2010
I would say Wallace did a good job. Escaping atleast three sacks that would have ended the drive leaving points on the field. Delhomme would have been put down. Good effort on Wallace’s part
The naome40 - October 4, 2010 via mobile
Hahaha, Anderson had another interception returned for a touchdown
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
I’m actually half rooting for Anderson, but I’m glad he’s not playing for us.
As for here, I think Delhomme is a poor starter at the moment, whilst Wallace is a good backup. That doiesn’t mean I think Wallace should start: ultimately I don’t think either of these guys is the answer.
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
I agree, but I’d rather keep the serviceable backup on the field right now. Delhomme didn’t play well at all in the first game and the offense is finally (sort of) clicking.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Delhomme had a pretty good first half, got injured, and then couldn’t move the ball. I’m perfectly willing to give him a mulligan on that because he was hurt and they still asked him to throw 40 times. Wallace hasn’t played any better but he doesn’t have any excuses.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
Ask Marty about continuity and see if you still want to keep Wallace in.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Hmm, 4 weeks in and playoffs. I think there’s a bit of a difference there.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Wait, i think I got myself confused. What I said hurts my argument…
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
How could you half root for a guy that says we don’t deserve a winner?
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
How could you root for such a terrible player, period?
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
This
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
British love of losers I guess.
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
Hey, I’m not the only Browns fan in Europe right now! Great!
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
Anderson’s been benched for an undrafted rookie. Call it a career?
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
No way!
Skelton or Hall?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Hall
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Oh. He’s a Mormon right? Weird.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
No idea. Arizona just became a poster child for “QB is the most important position in football” theory.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Just saying, the team collapsed without Warner. It’s kind of obvious.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
They weren’t prepared. If they had done a Green Bay or SF route, they would’ve been fine.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
they thought they had gone that route with Leinhert.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
Never believe in a USC QB.
I hope the Browns don’t get sucked into Barkley in the years to come.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
What about Notre Dame QBs?
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Montana being the exception, same.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
agreed. Not a big fan of Barkley or Crist.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Christ is already in the NFL. Didn’t he get drafted by Denver late in the first this year?
rebuilding year - October 4, 2010 via mobile
This could be said about almost every program. The fact is that franchise NFL QBs are so rare that excepting 1 QB per school, almost no one has developed them.
rufio - October 4, 2010
that brings up an interesting question: Has any school produced more than one franchise QB, and which school(s)?
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
Define “franchise” — if it means HOF’er, that’s tough. But I think you gotta define it broader than that. Here’s a few:
Notre Dame is the one that instantly comes to mind (ironic because someone upthread used them as an example of not a good QB school): Joe Montana, Joe Theismann, and Daryle Lamonica (the latter I didn’t know went to Notre Dame but the first two I knew).
Stanford had John Elway and Jim Plunkett. Elway is obvious, and Plunkett was really, really good; a two-time Super Bowl winner — halfway surprised he has not gotten any serious HOF attention.
Miami had Kosar & Jim Kelly. The latter is definitely a franchise QB and Bernie was the franchise for five or six seasons for us.
BYU had Steve Young and Jim McMahon — the latter was close to a franchise QB; probably same as Bernie (true, even though people here are going to crucify me for saying it).
Washington State had Drew Bledsoe and Ryan Leaf. . . . Oh wait, the latter one didn’t work out too well, did he?
Sure there are others.
TheDriveStillHurts - October 4, 2010
This is my point. You can’t say “X team doesn’t produce good QBs consistently” especially if you add “if you exclude Y player” on the end of the statement.
Then schools have ~1 guy at best to their credit.
rufio - October 4, 2010
In case there was any confusion, I agree completely with your point — I just thought it was a good exercise.
I bet Bross is researching the issue as we speak.
TheDriveStillHurts - October 4, 2010
actually, I really don’t care plus I gotta go to work in an hour
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Fair.
rufio - October 5, 2010
Alabama had Joe Namath, Kenny Stabler, and Bart Starr.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
Two HOF’ers, and could be three if Stabler made it (which he should). First school that we’ve come up that has two HOF QB’s.
TheDriveStillHurts - October 4, 2010
They’ve got two more coming down the chute with AJ McCarron and Phil Sims waiting in the wings.
Purdue also had Brees, Griese and Chris – errr, Jim Everett.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
Kyle Orton
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
sucks due to being a Raven and does not count
Kimble_79 - October 5, 2010
He’s with the Broncos and played for the Bears before that. He’s never been a Raven.
Buckeye Brad - October 5, 2010
I think he was thinking Boller.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
Right. The arguments above are so silly, built on bias and anecdote.
Western Reserve - October 4, 2010
Yes. Everyone know that OSU has the best QB legacy in the NFL — Troy Smith, Craig Krenzel, Joe Germaine, Bobby Hoying, Kent Graham, Art Schlichter. Look at all those franchise QB’s!
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Don’t forget Justin Zwick!
rufio - October 4, 2010
Boeckman for the Championship!
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Was he ever in the NFL for even one minute?
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
I think he was an UDFA by someone. Colts or Panthers I think.
I don’t think he ever made it out of camp though.
Bernie19Kosar - October 4, 2010
This is what I thought too.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I think they might.
emily522 - October 3, 2010
Yeah, any team that can replace one HOF’er with another is usually going to be fine.
TheDriveStillHurts - October 3, 2010
Precisely. Add eagles to that if Kolb even lasts there.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I am still not convinced Kolb is any good at all.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Indeed.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
He seemed serviceable today at least.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
You don’t get rid of a franchise QB and possible HOFer for a “serviceable” QB or as it’s turned out, a backup QB. If the Iggles didn’t have Vick, they’d be up a crick without a canoe.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
We don’t know that. If Kolb had been the starter for the past two weeks then he probably would have looked much better on Sunday because he would have been practicing with the first team all month.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
You are correct that we don’t know, but I maintain that I doubt Kolb’s ability to be a great QB in the league. I doubted it on draft day and I still doubt it.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I look at him as just another system qb. He had a chance to prove himself at the last of year and did not make a very big impact. An injured Vick is better than a healthy Kolb
GroundRuleTriple - October 4, 2010
I think you need to look at his numbers from last year again.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
He was great last when we he got two starts, so I’m not sure why you say that he didn’t make a very big impact.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
valid point. I looked at the stats from his season as a whole and did not realize the impact he had made in the last 2 starts. As a Hokie myself I tend to be bias towards Vick and loved the spark he put into the Eagles before he got hurt. Interested to see how this plays out
GroundRuleTriple - October 4, 2010
I didn’t think he was all that great. Good or solid maybe, but not great.
rufio - October 5, 2010
All go in Arizona eh?
I don’t see any real issue in keeping Wallace on either- he understands Holmgrens offense, and is as good a placeholder as any. Guys like McMahon, Simms and co have wo the big one by letting the supporting cast get the job done and not doing anything stupid.
And I’m not sure whether McCoy will be the answer either.
How is BA?
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
Dirty, noisy, unsafe and more expensive than it should be. Tourists love it for some reason though.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
I liked it.
Considering where I’m based at the moment, that’s hardly surprising.
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
You don’t like London?
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
I’m not in London, I’m from London ;-)
Where I am slaughters BA in terms of dirt, danger, noise & excessive cost.
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
You’re in Baltimore?
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
That does sound like Baltimore to me!
bbstirrd - October 3, 2010
He did say “slaughter”, could be “manslaughter”.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
I was thinking Detroit.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
:-)
Actually, I’ve never been to Baltimore. Is it that good?
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
I used to live there. The only thing I would add to the descriptors is depressing. That place seriously sucks
bbstirrd - October 3, 2010
Poe killed himself right?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Yup. And this where he lived is only a couple of blocks from Ravens stadium
bbstirrd - October 3, 2010
I’m sure Baltimore had something to do with his suicide.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Actually Poe’s death is a point of contention. He was found in the street almost dead wearing someone else’s clothes, and it’s never been clearly explained how he got that way. He was apparently yelling someone’s name all night, but was never coherent enough to explain what happened.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
…ugh. Dude.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I realize it ruined the joke, but I actually think it’s really interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Allan_Poe#Death
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
This seems fitting.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
that’s awesome.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
Great game Brownies
HenryDawg - October 3, 2010 via mobile
On an unrelated note, The Eagles game once again shows terrible officiating.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Oh, yeah.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
dear god, and I thought we were pissed about some bad calls against the chiefs. at least we admitted we deserved to lose. The cinci SBN site is downright delusional.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
I was going to say the exact same thing. Pretty stupid fans over there.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Minus us, the AFC North is full of idiots.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
It’s funny how the intelligent Ravens, Steelers, and Bengals fans had to come to our sight to have some decent football conversation. Props to us.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
Oh give me a break
worldtrip - October 4, 2010
I only had to read the post game article.
The refs helped them lose? Bullcrap. And on the pass to the endzone, it was not text book, I’m pretty sure it was uncatchable in the first place, not to mention Brown barley touched him.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Hahaha, that’s funny. if they don’t like the defensive holding call, be mad at your defense for holding.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Be mad at your D-Lineman for grabbing an Offensive Lineman’s facemask and pulling.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Wasn’t able to see the game, can someone elaborate on who the culprits were on defense in our secondary getting eaten up?
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
One Eric Wright who was getting matched up with all kinds of WR’s to allow yards. He made some good plays, but still kind of bad.
BrownDawg1409 - October 3, 2010
Brown fell on a huge TD toss and Wright played.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Eric Wright was the primary one again. Sheldon Brown gave up the big TD to Owens after he fell down.
Chris Pokorny - October 3, 2010
Do you know who was on Ochocinco most of the game? Besides that one big play, he had a pretty quiet day.
Western Reserve - October 3, 2010
They moved Haden onto him at once instance.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Mangini said he was getting double-teamed so they left Owens in single coverage.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
because Wright sucks?
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
No, Wright was usually the guy in single coverage on Owens.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
I’m pretty sure at one point they moved Wright on the slot receiver, usually Shipley, and Haden matched up on TO.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
Occasionally, yes, which is why I said usually. Wright was on TO most of the time that I saw.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
That explains it. Thanks.
Western Reserve - October 4, 2010
TO gave him a nice little piece of arm to help him “fall”. Smart, subtle play by TO.
rufio - October 4, 2010
This is false (ha, self-mockery anyone?!)
From Pluto:
kwoog - October 4, 2010
Rec for the self-mockery.
Buckeye Brad - October 5, 2010
I only saw a random selection of plays, but I saw Haden beat twice, Brown beat once for a huge gain and Wright beat once.
Roger Dorn - October 5, 2010
Making a play for the ball doesn’t count getting beat in my book so I saw Haden beat once.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I don’t think this is exactly true, though I can’t always fault a guy for trying to make a play either.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
This is a strange way to watch a football game.
Chemo - October 5, 2010
TO owned us, but I wonder how many times of those we were blitzing. On the big play, for instance, safety help wasn’t happening.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
Wright mostly. Sheldon Brown tripped and fell and gave up the 70 yarder to Owens, but it was Wright getting beaten time and time again.
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
As I mentioned below, many times he was in single coverage because of all the blitzing. We sent a lot of DB’s in our blitzes. Wright also made a couple nice pass breakups, including the one in the end zone where Ward got the flag for the helmet-to-helmet hit (and a very stupid play by him, by the way).
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
And he failed in single coverage. I think going forward, we should not put Wright in any situation where he doesn’t have help. He’s not just getting beat; he’s getting torched.
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
Since I again didn’t see the game, I had to read the stat line and a couple of recaps. I assumed that with the 4 sacks and the forced fumble that the Browns were blitzing all out which puts the DBs on islands with their receivers. I figured that when Palmer wasn’t getting sacked he was getting the ball away quick and there was no way to prevent big gains.
As far as Ward’s hit, he’s gotta learn from that. We want him to be the intimidating hitter, but not a dirty player. He said he didn’t see anything wrong with it and he’d do it again. I hope the coaching staff straightens him out. I good hit might have resulted in a FG instead of a TD.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
Please read the thread.
In no way was it dirty.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
No, I saw the replays. He didn’t intend on hitting the helmet. But you can see how others could call it a dirty hit.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
I would say that if the same situation happened in reverse to a Browns WR then many people here would be claiming that it was a dirty hit. It all depends on your perspective. Most Browns fans are going to see it one way and most Bengals fans are going to see it the other way.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
I don’t think this is true, maybe a few people. The only really dirty hit I have seen on a Browns player that I was upset about was Suh on Delhomme in the preseason.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
I really think you have to hit like that in that particular situation. You can’t be sure when you are starting the motion if it will be a reception or not. A big hit in that situation could make a huge difference in the game.
Brownsyup - October 4, 2010
I wouldn’t have minded it if it hadn’t cost us a TD, he did not have to hit him that hard. guys pull up on the QB all the time, Ward could have pulled up just a little. the ball had already hit the ground well before Ward made the hit.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
No way, if you have the ability to hit a guy hard, you do it. It’s unfortunate that he ended up hitting Shipley’s head, but hard hitting is part of the game.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
hard hitting is part of the game unless it’s against the rules. guys don’t lay out the QB every time because it would be a penalty. All I’m saying is Ward could have shown the same restraint.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
…No, he couldn’t of. Of all people you should understand the ideas of force and inertia. Regardless, if the only way to save a TD was to jar him, you do it.
I mean, really? You want a football player to use restraint on a possible game winning touchdown? How about we just bubble wrap the players then. Your argument is ludicrous.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
HUGE straw man. his hit in no way prevented a TD. we’ve been over this a million times. also, of all people, I understand how quickly you can pull up and not crush someone. If a D-lineman can do it, so can a safety.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
There was not enough time to see the drop and stop, in my opinion.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
I’m going to change my username to HugeStrawMan. Or perhaps MajorLogicalFallacy instead.
Sorry, that W over there on the right side of this page is still making me giddy.
DBN: Where PeyHill and the OL is the Plan for the Second Half!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
I think he showed restraint.
He didn’t leave his feet. He didn’t lower his head. He put his shoulder into the chest of Shipley.
Here is a video of the hit I found.
Bernie19Kosar - October 4, 2010
I mostly agree, but he connected straight to shipley’s chin, which is a no-no.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
The force of the hit was not the illegal part, despite my dislike for that rule.
It doesn’t say you can’t hit a player in the head with more than 100 lbs of force, it says you can’t make contact with the helmet with your head, shoulder, forearm, etc.
rufio - October 4, 2010
but if he doesn’t hit the guy hard the penalty doesn’t get called.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
Disagree, if he hits his head in any scenario the penalty flag is thrown or else the refs aren’t interpreting the rules correctly. There is not one rule in the rule book about how hard someone is hit.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
I know that wouldn’t be according to the rule, but that is how it would be called.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
While you are correct about the rule, NTN is correct about the call; it wouldn’t be made, which is bad IMO.
A soft hit/pull up also does not guarantee the drop or dissuade other WRs from going across the middle/Palmer from throwing those balls.
rufio - October 5, 2010
I actually think if they called the soft hits too there would be more of a public outcry over the rule, because then the rule would be obviously stupid to everybody.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
Agree.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I thought the hit on Watson was clean and should not have been flagged either.
rufio - October 4, 2010
He hit him with his shoulder and bicep. There was not helmet to helmet and Ward had momentum. Palmer hung Shipley out to dry over the middle in the endzone – sorry but that’s what you get. The statement had to be made.
browndawgbacker - October 4, 2010
I like the hit on shipley. Though I never wish injuries on other players, he separated him from the ball. One instance where more head is a bad thing.
The naome40 - October 4, 2010 via mobile
No, he didn’t Wright had knocked the ball away before Ward hit him. The hit didn’t cause the incompletion.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
This. Wright had already hit Shipley and knocked the ball loose before Ward made his hit.
woodsmeister - October 4, 2010
I’d be amazed if Ward was aware.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
So?
Thos.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Wow, I misspelled This.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
My comment (and woods’ agreement) wasn’t about the legality of the hit, just that the hit had nothing to do with him not catching the pass as naome40 stated. If you read all the comments above then you would see that.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
I just didn’t understand why it was that important to be “This-ed”
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
I didn’t know that saying “this” required a certain level of importance.
But, if you want to say that, then I could say the same thing about your “this”.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
It was a “Thos.” Completely different.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Thos.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
Thus.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
thys
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
balls.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
My bad.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
As defensive player (wright teammate in the recent week or two) I’m not leaving it up to someone else to make a play. Ward’s, hopefully, mindset was to make a play on the ball.
The naome40 - October 4, 2010 via mobile
I think Ward saw Wright covering him and was like “HOLY SH*T.”
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Ward didn’t try to make a play on the ball though, he was going for the hit the whole way.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
That doesn’t necessary mean he wasn’t paying for the ball. More times then not, when you hit that hard, the ball pops out.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
you are having all kinds of trouble with terminology between this and “illegal.”
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
In case you didn’t see it right above, just to correct your mistake:
From Pluto:
kwoog - October 4, 2010
He caught ten, btw. So that’s 8 against Brown and Haden.
kwoog - October 4, 2010
This is what I remember. I was fairly certain I saw Wright moved to the slot for most of the second half.
Villeslgr - October 5, 2010
So, I don’t know if you saw my comment in Ryan’s article but I used to play against Swigert. Never knew he’d be a legit WR for BC though.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Didn’t see that. The game last night was painful to watch. Our WRs don’t even get a chance to do anything because we have some of the worst QB play I have seen for a halfway decent college program.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Swigert took what he could get and shined though. Dude was always in the headlines around here.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Hopefully we can get him a better QB next year, would like to see what he can do then.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
The move he made for that TD was sick.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
crap. I assumed it was Wright who fell like a dumb@$$.
the good news is, our secondary (not to mention the rest of the D) is stronger than it appears. This could have non-Boldin-having opponents play into our hands.
Can someone explain our sudden appearance of a pass rush today?
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
Rogers.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Marcus Benard and Shaun Rogers were both back. Plus, the Cincy O-Line is not really anything to write home about.
Browns town - October 3, 2010
thanks guys.
is Rogers healthy, now?
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
healthy enough to play, but not 100%
bross09 - October 3, 2010
hope he keeps playing/gets to 100%.
we need a pash rush/FG blocker.
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
Cinch d-line is built to run but they keep passing like idiots. If they committed to the run they might be good.
rebuilding year - October 4, 2010 via mobile
is Daboll their OC too?
discoinferno083 - October 4, 2010
The Browns blitzed a ton, often with CB’s. Haden actually looked good on a few blitzes. The blitzes got pressure on the QB but they also left our secondary exposed and Wright in single coverage on Owens, which is why he got so many yards. If we’re going to be a good defense then we need to find some pass rushers so we don’t have to blitz all the time and leave our secondary in single coverage.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
I think overall for the first 4 games the defense has been good, but we are susceptible to big plays because of our need to bring a lot of guys. Overall, I am pretty happy with the defense.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
any chance we trade for another good CB and cut Wright?
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
thankfully, no
kwoog - October 3, 2010
Yeah, I’m sure teams are just looking to trade their good cornerbacks.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
Haden did a really good job of timing his blitz on one that I remember. Cincy was going left to right across the screen, and Haden came in from the bottom. Palmer was in shotgun and had to look the snap in, so as soon as he looked to get the snap, Haden started creeping in.
rufio - October 4, 2010
If we had run them correctly, the blitzes would have been more effective. I am not sure we need to get one studly pass rusher (though it would help), we just need more athleticism across the board in the front 7.
rufio - October 4, 2010
All three of our top DBs were beaten at least once. Most of the big plays where our CBs got burned came on blitzes, a lot of man-0 blitzes. Wright probably was beaten the most if I had to name one of them off the top of my head, though he had a few nice plays today as well.
And I finally got to see replays of the TDs he gave up last week. The first was Cover-1 and he had perfect outside leverage, pushing the WR into the spot where the safety should have been, but the safety got sucked up playing run. Another was flat out embarrassingly bad technique/effort. The other one was just a better play by the offense.
We blitzed a lot, and we blitzed a lot of people a lot. In theory, I like the plan because I think Cincy has a line that is big but not very athletic, and hitting Palmer in the mouth is a good strategy. But we weren’t getting there on the blitzes consistently enough. We would get an overload, but we aren’t athletic enough up front to really create the space the blitzes needed.
For example, if a DE had to shoot inside really hard to clear space for a blitzing LB and DB from the same side of the formation, he wouldn’t get over far enough. So instead of the LB getting picked up by a blocking RB and the DB hitting Palmer (untouched) for the sack, hit, or hurry, the LB would get picked up by the back, and the DB was running in to a bunch of trash, not really blocked, but not able to get to the QB.
We tried to hide our blitzes pre-snap pretty consistently. If we were a lot more athletic up front, this would have worked, because we could have hit Palmer all day. But our lack of athleticism along with the consistent timing of the blitzes (late, post snap) gave Palmer a pretty consistent “clock” in terms of the time he had to throw.
I would really like to see us do a variety of things pre snap to change this clock. For example, show blitz pre-snap, then back out to give him time to throw into more coverage (long “clock”). Then show blitz and actually come with it to give him much less time to throw into less coverage (very short “clock”). Then mix in what we did today (medium “clock”). Without knowing how much time the QB will have, playcalling gets harder, sight adjustments get harder, chemistry on offense gets harder.
None of the DBs did anything particularly embarrassing today, at least not as embarrassing as Wright’s one TD last week.
rufio - October 4, 2010
So rufio, come the next draft, what do you think the Browns should target? More athleticism on the D-Line or a stud pass rushing LB? Either one would help out the pass defense. If we can get more pressure from one or two guys then it would limit the amount of blitzing the team would have to do, and then make the blitz even more effective. If one guy can be effective on rushing the passer then we could keep another guy back to help the DBs and prevent the big gains we’ve seen the last two weeks.
I’m also convinced at this point that we need a no. 1 receiver.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
I’d rather get a pass rusher and a QB before we go for that number 1 receiver.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
If AJ Green is there then he’d be very hard to pass up. I know you don’t like drafting WR’s high but he looks like a stud and he’d make our QB’s look much better.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Yea, I actually might be ok with the WR this year because i think it’s going to be the deepest WR class in awhile.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
and if not Green, I would love to snag Johnothan Baldwin in the 2nd.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
AJ Green or Julio Jones. I like Jones’ physicality, otherwise I’d say Greens a better WR – just so rail thin.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
I would rather have a guy who needs to put on weight than someone who has braylon-itis.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
We have so many needs that selecting any of those 3 could drastically improve this team.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
We could use any of those players. Without having gone through the college football video I have (to do as much real scouting as I’d like), I can speak to an abstract situation.
I see QB as far and away the most important position in the league. If there is a guy on the board who we strongly feel is a franchise QB and we like him, we should draft him.
Next most important would be a pass rusher, in my list of positional value. The way the NFL is now, you have to stop the pass. We already have a LT and a NT, so when looking at our needs, this comes next.
A stud wideout would probably be next in terms of positional value. There aren’t too many guys who are as good as Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Fitz, etc.
I think we can find guys who would play DE for us in the mid/later rounds. There seem to be a lot of these types of guys. It would probably be difficult to find a stud like Richard Seymor, but we could get younger and more athletic there with a 3rd round pick.
Now, all of this being said I’d set the draft board by ranking the players based on pure talent, then making small adjustments due to need/positional value. For example, if there is a pass rusher that I believe is the 15th best prospect in the draft, maybe he gets bumped up to 10th or 7th because of the position he plays. Offensive guards and centers might get bumped down. The result would be largely best player available, with only small changes due to position (except QB) based on a sort of value over replacement player.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Best player available is a given. We know it’s Heckert’s draft philosophy. It’s unlikely, but it would be great if McCoy actually turns out to be the QB. Unless we see anything resembling a Tom Brady Scenario, I’m sure that QB will still be at the top of the wish list come next draft.
I would love to see a Price-Johnson scenario. Remember how the Cavs drafted Mark Price and didn’t think we would amount to anything so they took Kevin Johnson. They realized that Price was a player so they bolstered the roster by trading KJ for Larry Nance. If the Browns draft a QB in the first round but McCoy turns out to be a stud then we could work a trade to strengthen the roster.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
I don’t even need Tom Brady, give me Eli Manning.
Bernie19Kosar - October 4, 2010
Yes.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
This.
emily522 - October 4, 2010
You can’t ever have too many NFL QBs.
What I was trying to say, though, was that we should not go purely on BPA. Value should be factored in because some positions are 1. more important than others and 2. harder to find good NFL players at. QB satisfies both of those criteria to the extreme.
rufio - October 5, 2010
Point taken. Let’s say that the Browns have another top 10 pick and there isn’t a QB or pass rusher valued high enough for their pick. What do you do? Hypothetically, what if there was a LT, a shutdown CB, or a true no. 1 WR. What position would you take?
Theoretically, we could take the LT and switch him to RT. It would shore up the right side, give a whole lot more depth on the O-Line, and insurance if JT were to get injured. (Depth on the OL is still a big need.)
Our secondary has been picked apart the last two games, so another CB could be justified. I know WR is lower on the value chart, but we’re not getting anything out of our receivers so far this year. If you don’t have a QB that makes his receivers look better than they are, then maybe having a WR that makes his QB look better could be a quicker fix and a little easier to find by comparison.
At this point, if McCoy isn’t ready to start next season, then we’ll have to wait at least another year before we find the guy.
dawgtribe - October 5, 2010
In that scenario I would probably go WR, depending on how comfortable I am with the pick. For instance, I would take Calvin Johnson but probably not Crabtree or Dez. At this point I don’t know if I would take Green.
Peterson out of LSU seems legit, I might go with him if he were on the board. Amukamara is not far behind.
The top tackles according to Scouts Inc are Nate Solder out of Colorado ad Costanzo out of BC. Both seem like left tackles to me, not RTs. I would probably say Solder is a better candidate for the switch, but I really feel that LT has much higher positional value than RT. Solder is very intelligent and seems to have pretty good character, and I am in position to be a judge on that.
rufio - October 5, 2010
Our right side has been playing pretty well though, not sure if it’s something I want to target.
Roger Dorn - October 5, 2010
The line still lacks depth and they should address it in the middle rounds.
dawgtribe - October 5, 2010
I wouldn’t mind dropping a third or fourth rounder on an O-lineman.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
I wouldn’t mind dropping a first or second rounder on an O-lineman.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
For a right tackle? No. And Lauvao looks to be panning out well when he comes back from injury
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I would consider dropping a 2nd rounder on a RT. Just because it isn’t as imperative as LT doesn’t mean it isn’t a decently valuable position. I think if you take a RT in the 2nd you expect him to be around for a long time and you expect him to be very good.
rufio - October 5, 2010
I’d go as high as mid-first round if the talent makes it a no-brainer.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
yeah, this is a pretty stupid discussion to be having at the beginning of october. what’s available will determine what we pick and when we pick it.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
Though I agree with what NTN said below that this is all stupid, I wouldn’t mind dropping a 2nd rounder on a RT either if it was the right guy.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
I agree with this. Right now, I don’t see it as as desperate of a need where we should drop a first rounder on it (WR#1, pass rusher, and QB are more pressing needs and these positions IMO are more top heavy in 2011 anyways than a RT), but I wouldn’t mind a middle rounder.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
I’m always in favor of taking quality linemen.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
I’d take the guy with the best work ethic.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
You just drafted me. I’ll be great.
Chemo - October 5, 2010
Good analysis as always, rufio.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
Thanks.
rufio - October 4, 2010
My final prediction (Browns 24, Bengals 20) was pretty close for once.
Chris Pokorny - October 3, 2010
Looks like Fujita had a nice game.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
He went Super Sayian.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Love the comment.
brownsboy14 - October 3, 2010 via mobile
Fujita, Coleman and Roth stood out to me on defense. Haden played fairly well too.
bbstirrd - October 3, 2010
He was pretty solid. Best game I’ve seen him play in a Browns uniform, but he wasn’t Patrick Willis.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Hopefully no one is expecting Patrick Willis.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
I’m expecting Patrick Willis. He should be here around 3:30.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
lame
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 4, 2010
I know.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Seriously. But a good game for Fujita, keeping in mind the context of calling it a good game for him.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Also just saw the Hillis TD. Should have been a false start on Vickers.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
I saw that but shh.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
We would have scored a TD anyway.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
I thought that too, he got quite the lean going there.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
Palmer was simulating snaps all day, and only got caught once. I think we can call it even.
tribe71 - October 3, 2010
This is true.
rufio - October 4, 2010
No doubt.
browndawgbacker - October 4, 2010
Jacksonville playing pretty well
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
It’s Bizarro day, apparently. Carolina nearly beat New Orleans.
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
Washington beating Philly too
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Not for long, Philly is surging back.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
… and not
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Question. Who takes the negative yardage from a sack? Isn’t it different in College vs. Pro?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
In college it counts against rushing yards. Pro counts it against passing yards.
BrownDawg1409 - October 3, 2010
but lets say Aaron rodgers throws for exactly 4000 yards by the NFL calculation. Is that including yards lost by sacks?
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Only caught the first half. Did Wright rebound in the 2nd half somewhat?
And if only Watson hung on to that football for the disallowed TD. Big fantasy points!
skipkirk - October 3, 2010
Wright seemed much worse in the second half; there was no “rebound.”
Chris Pokorny - October 3, 2010
Can Manning do it again? Down by 7, 2 minutes to go. All timeouts, ball at the 40. I say yes.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
A day for Peyton power?
LondonBrown - October 3, 2010
heartbreaking for JAX. They had an INT and lost it and now Indy has it at their 7.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Yeah… I hope to GOD Jacksonville can pull it out.
… And almost related- That Geico commercial with the pig is one of their worst I’ve seen. So annoying.
shep615 - October 3, 2010
I couldn’t stop laughing after that commercial. I thought it was hilarious.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Same. I dunno if it is that great of a commercial or it completely caught me by surprise.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Yup, Manning did it.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
I think it’s funny.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Holy balls. 59 yard FG. Let’s go Scobee!
shep615 - October 3, 2010
yup good job!
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Gee thanks Colts and your -4 points. And hey, Louis Murphy, thanks for one reception for five yards aka 0 points. Down 15 now.
emily522 - October 3, 2010
not meaning to be a jackass, but if you start an Oakland WR, it’s pretty much your fault.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
He got 11 points last week and 15 the week before.
Zach Miller has 17 points for me as well.
emily522 - October 3, 2010
I’d start Miller, but not the WRs.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
i agree. wtf?
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
Had to. It’s a bye week and Miles Austin is out.
emily522 - October 3, 2010
bye weeks are sad things.
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
What a tense game! The hit by Ward cost us (looks like we would have got scored on anyway), and I didn’t like Mangini’s challenge in the first half. Still, a win is a win, who cares how!
Heavysoviet - October 3, 2010
like one of the NFL tv guys said…“isn’t the defense’s job to knock the ball lose?”
yes. I will take a penalty for knocking the eff out of someone ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, as long as it doesn’t = TD or losing the game.
it is better than the alternative of the def playing like pansies.
all day.
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
but in this case it changed a field goal into a TD…
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
No, that was a stupid penalty. It cost us 4 points. There’s a difference between playing tough and knocking someone out by a hit to the head. That was dumb.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
…keep reading.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Ha, I see that now.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
from your keyboard to Rocland’s monitor….
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
I don’t fault Ward for the hit. It’s clear in the video replay that he hit Shipley with his shoulder. His options were to not hit him at all or make the hit how he did. In a split second like that, you only have time to react, and the fact that he didn’t lead with his helmet makes me think the hit was legitimate.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Would you agree that Shipley put his helmet in the way of his shoulder though? The idea that Ward wasn’t (nor could he really in that half second time frame) aiming at his head, Shipley got his head in the way.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
It wasn’t intentional but Shipley was crouching in anticipation of the hit. It’s unfortunate that his head ended up where it did, but you can’t expect a guy to be able to react in a split second and avoid making that hit. Ward’s play was clean.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Thank you.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Yeah, Shipley was most definitely not a defenseless receiver on that play, which is why I think the call was garbage.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
For some reason I was being called a moron in the game thread for thinking this.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I said it in the game thread too.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
These people were just trying to find ways to call me an idiot though. They could’ve cared less if you had the same mentality. It was the one where you told me to stop while I was ahead.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Well I can’t say if the play was called correctly, because I don’t know what the rule is exactly. The intent of Ward was clean though which is what I was talking about.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Apparently, the rule is that no body part can hit the head of a defenseless receiver.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
That was probably the case then, but not Ward’s fault, imo.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
No, you’re right it wasn’t.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
If Ward had hit him slightly lower it would’ve been a no call.
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
And if Shipley wouldn’t have crouched he wouldn’t have got hit in the head. It goes both ways, only it was harder for ward to get any lower than it was for Shipley to not crouch down.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
In hindsight it seems much cleaner than in the incident. the way shipley fell, the way Ward looked after the hit, and the way it all played out looked like not the cleanest intent. However on closer inspection, its much cleaner IMO than it looked at first.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
I thought it seemed clean at the time, as it does now. They showed it at least twice on replay and it looked clean.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I definitely agree that it looks clean now. I just think a lot of my initial reaction was about how ward kinda stood over him for a half second and also just how shipley fell.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Sorry, you guys can disagree with me all you like on this, but I love the fact that TJ knocked the hell outta somebody and then stood over them. I want every WR playing Cleveland to be thinking of that in the next weeks. I want them to have to turn their head for a split second before the ball gets there wondering if TJ is around. I love it!
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
standing over him does nothing to add to that second guessing. let the play speak for itself. encouraging that stuff creates people like TO.
Dawg Nuts - October 4, 2010
I wish it was TO he had clocked. At least then it definitely would have been his chest.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
At least he didn’t start beating his chest or screaming stuff at Shipley.
I thought it was entirely bearable and tame as far as intimidation looks go.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I don’t know what play you all were watching, but he definitely didn’t stand over him after the hit. He started walking away, and looked back to see him laying on the ground.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
I posted my comment before watching all the replays. Your exactly right. He never did stand over him like someone said above. He walked away. I’ve posted the link in here somewhere twice in this thread, but you can see it plain as a day at nfl.com. There was no intent for a dirty play and there was certainly no taunting afterwards. He laid the wood to the kid, then went about his business.
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
It was a comment to me. When watching the replays he didn’t seem to stand over him, but in the moment it felt like that and that, combined with the way shipley fell made the hit originally look worse than it was (this was my point)
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I found it’s easier to deal with those kinds of people by just posting humorous pictures rather than addressing them directly.
It is the internet after all.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Agree with the rule or not, that was a penalty, and called correctly.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
The rule is awful.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Agree! Loved the hit. Had he came in helmet to helmet on the kid I would say different. However, with a shoulder to the facemask, IMO, its clean.
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
Are you guys delusional?
Shipley did not see ward coming at all. That’s the reason why the hit was so brutal because he didn’t have the opportunity to brace himself.
The Licensed Pessimist - October 3, 2010
He’s a receiver running across the middle. Why do you think so many receivers are afraid to play that role? This is football. Getting hit is a risk you take.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
yea thats the truth, but the issue isn’t him simply being hit. It was the fact that he concentrated all of that force into his shoulder, and didn’t draw back when his head was the only target..
And it was tasteless for the fans on this board to cheer injuring a player like that. If that shit happened to a cleveland player you would be calling for the offending players head. I could even see if it was someone like Ward, but it’s Jordan Shipley
The Licensed Pessimist - October 3, 2010
Hines Ward that is
The Licensed Pessimist - October 3, 2010
It amazes me that you think he can just all of a sudden decide to change his body position in a matter of a second. Hardly anybody was cheering for the injury, but it’s nice to see somebody getting a little agressive and pissed. And as a matter of fact the injury came from his head bouncing off the ground, not the shoulder.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Correct.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I wasn’t in the game thread, but I would not cheer an injury. I would cheer a nice hit by our team which I deemed to be clean.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
The only injury I cheered is Vick’s, dude is a douche and deserves it.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
…uh. I don’t know about that either.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I’d rather not start a huge debate here and get this thread closed so I’ll just say that to me, what he did is unforgivable and leave it at that.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
Yup.
kingcrimson2 - October 3, 2010
what he did was reprehensible, but forgiveable in time. what ray lewis did is unforgiveable.
Dawg Nuts - October 4, 2010
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
If people don’t want to start a big argument, then they shouldn’t start one.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
Fair enough. So I’ll just say that to me, Vick is a monster and should have never played in the NFL again.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
and this is an entirely valid opinion on the matter. I personally disagree even with my love of dogs, but I respect your opinion and I doubt a long discourse would be able to change anyones opinion.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Well put, bross. Rec that.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
no problems here RDC. I believe your opinion is completely valid.
Dawg Nuts - October 5, 2010
Thanks DN, and back at you. This went well, really.
( holds breath )
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
So its up to Ward to determine, in the middle of a football game, whether or not a receiver can see him or not?
HenryDawg - October 3, 2010
He needs an air horn.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
This is my point. In a split second, he cannot make that judgment. He did not lead with his head.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
This has been my thinking all along.
I have no issue with trying to improve player safety.
What I do have an issue with is that safeties are supposed to be the hitters of the secondary. When the ball was thrown, Ward had maybe a second to read, react, and decide. Go for the ball, go for the hit. He went for the hit.
How the hell is Ward supposed to stop his momentum in literally hundredths of a second? If Ward doesn’t go for the hit, Shipley catches the ball and Ward will be rightly criticized for not doing his job.
I don’t blame the officials, I blame the NFL for a stupid rule. Guys get hit over the middle. It’s football.
Bernie19Kosar - October 3, 2010
exactly. It’s a penalty. The rule may be bad, but it wasn’t a legal hit.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
But with all the awareness of concussions the league has to be careful about hits to the head. I understand what they’re doing. Sure, you can say “it’s football” but maybe that part of football needs to change. There are many things in human history that we changed because we found out the way we did it was harmful; we can’t always say that’s the way it’s always been so that’s the way it wll have to be.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
What should Ward have done differently?
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
Known Shipley was going to duck his head into his shoulder.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Aim more for the chest area than the head. I probably didn’t see the replay as much as people at home, so maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think Ward hit Shipley’s helmet just because he ducked.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
If Shipley didn’t duck, Ward would’ve hit his chest.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Ward lowered himself to deliver the hit, anything more would have been unnatural unless he dove at Shipley’s legs which would not have been the right choice if you are trying to break up a pass.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Had Shipley been standing straight when he caught the ball, he’d have hit his chest. I have the link if you’d like.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
OK, then maybe I’m wrong. It didn’t appear that way to me.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
It’s still an illegal hit, I just don’t fault Ward. He’s young and was trying to make a play.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Me either.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
This game has always been harmful, and it will continue to be. In fact, that is probably a part of what makes it so successful. There will never be an elimination of harm from the game.
I understand that the NFL is trying to do something, but what they did is not working. Players will continue to make hits like this, and whether they are penalized or not, if these hits cause concussions, the concussions will still happen.
Get some bigger/better helmets.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I just saw the replay again. The ball had already bounced off the ground and Shipley’s head was already down before Ward made his move to hit him. He wasn’t charging Shipley he took about 3 steps as the ball was being thrown and then threw his shoulder into Shipley’s head.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
No
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Umm… he was right in front of him, if he couldn’t see that he shouldn’t be in the NFL.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
Shipley DID see Ward which is why he started to crouch to brace for the hit. The crouch resulted in Shipley’s head being in front of the rest of his body. An unfortunate sequence and a penalty by the current rule, but not a cheap shot.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Thank you.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
what are the chances the officiating/review/NFL people recognize this and DON’T fine him?
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
0 because he ended up hitting Shipley in the head.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Even if he didn’t see him, he’s a wideout playing at a level above high school, there is no way he doesn’t know a hit is coming in that situation.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Its like those roughing the passer calls where the guy has already committed his body and momentum to tackling the QB right as he throws and he doesn’t have time to move.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Not exactly.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Its not the same penalty, but the idea that after shipley drops his head and/or loses the ball (both of which are argued points) that Ward really doesn’t have time to change his body position is the same. definitely not the same penalty, but that is the same basic theory IMO
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Ward didn’t see anything wrong with his hit, which will likely draw a hefty fine from the league.
“I hit him with my shoulder,” Ward said. “They (Bengals) tried to yap at me, but I ignored them. I would do it again.”
Ward is right. And this shows why we got a great caliber player.
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
I was fine with the hit. Sucks Shipley got hurt but it was legal, Shipley’s head wasn’t there when Ward was already leading with his shoulder.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I thought it was a clean hit too. I’m glad that we found ourselves a tough safety!
tribe71 - October 3, 2010
It wasn’t legal. it should be, but it isn’t.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
I’d love for a replay. Where’s rufio?
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Sorry, I don’t have this replay. My guess is youtube will have it at some point.
rufio - October 4, 2010
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010100301/2010/REG4/bengals@browns#tab:watch
fast forward to about 1:26 or so. Here is the replay with a crappy camera angle. They show it twice.
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
Yeah thanks. I was actually able to find a replay already.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
I love Deion Sanders reaction to that.
Bernie19Kosar - October 4, 2010
You can see our blitz not arriving on the throw to TO where Joe Haden lays out.
Looking back on this game, we are very close to enough of those blitzes paying off. A split second more coverage or a split second less time to throw and our defense would have been lights out.
There were a few times not on that replay when we were embarrassingly bad at getting the free rusher to the QB though.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I think the fact that we are a split second away is promising and shows this defense is on the brink of being something very interesting.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
This is where getting some youth and speed on the DLine will help
dawgtribe - October 4, 2010
You said, and it’s pretty much accurate:
So, with that in mind, how was the hit legal?
I was disappointed with the call, especially at that point in the game. But like it or not, it was an illegal hit under the rules. The refs wasted no time throwing flags from every direction on that play.
Western Reserve - October 3, 2010
I guess I think it’s more a dumb rule than illegal.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
its arguable if it actually hit Shipley’s head. It isn’t clear by the replays i saw and it seems like there is legitimate doubt whether he ever hit shipley’s head.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
That’s what I keep thinking. Ward didn’t even think he hit his helmet. Wish they played it in my area so I could have DVRed it.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
He made contact with his helmet because Shipley started to curl.
Bernie19Kosar - October 3, 2010
But he did hit his helmet.
Bernie19Kosar - October 3, 2010
Yea I watched the replay over and over, and unfortunately I think you’re right.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
I’m wondering what exactly are defensive players supposed to do? Not hit the guy? Maybe stand there and give him a golf clap while he catches the TD?
HenryDawg - October 3, 2010
This is where I’m coming from. Funny thing too is it looked to me that there was more force from him running into Ward than from Ward hitting him, Ward barely moved at all.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
Movement ≠ force.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I don’t know where you are coming from here, you need movement to generate force.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
F=ma
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
this is exactly righty. In this case, the force Shipley feels is from his negative acceleration. Ward feels the same force, but the frictional force he also generates with the ground cancels out, because he’s braced himself (and thrown his shoulder forward a little). Shipley gets rocked because the friction between him and the ground isn’t nearly as strong as the force he experiences due to his acceleration.
This is easier to explain in terms of momentum, but force and momentum are largely interchangeable, so It makes more sense to just keep it in the terms being used. The short explanation is that impact is proportional to change in momentum. Interestingly, this means running into a wall going 60mph is the same as two cars hitting head on both going 60mph. the change in momentum per car is the same in both cases, so the impact is too.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
sorry, I’ve taken too many physics classes.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I do love that this discussion came around this way, though. Well done.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
Muscles generate force. There can be massive amounts of force exerted on things that don’t move, like two 300lbs linemen pushing on each other and not moving anywhere.
If Ward were just standing there and not exerting any force into Shipley, Shipley’s momentum would have knocked Ward over. Instead—and perhaps with Ward “barely moving at all”—Ward exerted a tremendous amount of force back into Shipley, doing exactly the type of thing I would like to see him continue doing by lighting him up.
rufio - October 4, 2010
All of this can be argued against, I just don’t feel like getting ito a large science debate at the moment.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
So in a non-science debate, you are telling me that it looked like Ward did not exert a metric s%$t-ton of force into Shipley?
rufio - October 4, 2010
He hit him, but it looked to me like he could have hit him a whole metric s%$t-to harder than he did.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
i.e. Ward had a buttload of potential energy and once shipley crashed into him, it turned into kinetic energy.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
this is not correct. Shipley stopped moving, so he completely lost his kinetic energy, and ward barely moved, so he didn’t generate much kinetic energy. And before anyone says “Ward’s energy was just in the opposite direction, so they canceled out,” energy is not a vector quantity, it’s scalar, it doesn’t have direction.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
but wouldn’t Ward’s potential energy be turned into the energy that brings Shipley down to the ground? I know part of that is gravity, but he went down quick (I am guessing if you calculated it, significantly quicker than 9.8 meters per second). I could be wrong though, I haven’t taken physics for a long time.
i do remember that Energy is scalar and not a vector quantity. the force of Ward’s hit would have vector quantity, but not his PE.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
-Shipley is running, he has translational kinetic energy.
-he runs into ward, transferring kinetic energy from the top part of his body to ward, but the lower half of his body maintains it’s kinetic energy (remember, unlike in most intro classes we can’t assume Shipley is a point mass). This is what causes Shipley to rotate towards the ground. In an intro class, you would say that if something lost part of it’s kinetic energy it would just slow down, but in this situation only part of shipley slowed down or stopped.
-since he is now rotating backward, he has rotational kinetic energy rather than translational kinetic energy. when he hits the ground, his rotation is stopped, and thus he loses the rest of his kinetic energy to the ground.
-Ward absorbed a little bit of Shipley’s kinetic energy, but because of the way ward had braced himself against the ground and leaned into the hit, that energy was immediately transferred to the ground.
-The net result is shipley has lost a good deal of kinetic energy, and the earth has gained the same amount, although to the earth it’s insignificant.
You can think of impacts in terms of energy, and use loss of kinetic energy in place of change of momentum, but it isn’t nearly as intuitive. you’re better off ignoring energy in a case like this.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I agree. When you put it that way, energy is confusing for someone who hasn’t taken physics for several years.
That makes sense that him falling to the ground was (i think this is what you are saying) just his kinetic energy, just he is going in a different direction.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
right. his kinetic energy changes from translational (side to side) to rotational. He retains some translational energy, but now we’re getting even more complex.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
All the while Ward doesn’t have much kinetic energy at all, and theoretically, Ward could have zero translational kinetic energy while still being able to unload enough force in a short enough period of time to alter Shipley’s movement like crazy.
Thus, force ≠ movement.
rufio - October 5, 2010
using a colloquial definition of force you’re right. using the specific physics definition you aren’t. using the strict definition the force would come from Shipley.
think of it like someone bunting, the ball changes direction, but not because the batter exerted any force.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
This is false. Ward’s body is accelerating, Shipley’s hits Ward, giving Ward the same amount of acceleration in an other direction, thus Ward does not move translationally but is still generating acceleration.
There was sure as hell a change in Shipley’s velocity.
And a bunting batter absolutly must exert force to bunt a ball. He isn’t one massive, solid brick wall waiting for the ball to bounce off of him. A bat doesn’t have the inertia to be able to stop a baseball thrown at 70+mph and change it’s direction. The batter must exert at least enough force to do this.
rufio - October 5, 2010
I’m sorry, but if ward doesn’t move, he doesn’t experience a net force. he experiences various forces in different directions, but they have nothing to do with acceleration Fnet=ma. if a=o then Fnet=0. You can not be still and be accelerating. acceleration is defined as dv/dt, or change in velocity over a time interval. if your velocity doesn’t change, you have no acceleration. you could not be more wrong about this point.
as to your second point, I believe I addressed it below (or above, I’m sort of lost here). yes, the batter applies a force to the ball, you are correct, but the magnitude of the force is proportional to how fast the ball was moving, and has nothing to do with the batter.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
From a PhD recipient in physics:
rufio - October 5, 2010
This is false.
rufio - October 5, 2010
yeah. if you read NTNs response he corrected me. I meant for this to more be a question but not a statement, and I forgot to put the question mark in.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Basically what I’m getting at is that with what you said about the linemen, they are definitely both moving even if it’s only small amounts, and with Ward, if you brace yourself, and apply leverage to the right spot, he most definitely would not be the one to hit the ground While he did throw a little bit into the hit it (and I can’t stress this part enough) >looked to me< like he barely put his shoulder in to the hit more that he braced himself correctly, used the correct leverage point, and as a result Shipley spiraled backwards to the ground. Now I very well could be wrong but that is what it looked like to me.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
you’re correct here. in a technical sense, Shipley provided the force of the hit, just like if you ran a car into a brick wall the car would be supplying the force, not the wall.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I love the brick wall for Ward simile.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
Except, unlike a wall, TJ Ward was moving to make the hit. So, unless I missed part of the physics lesson and am missing something important, it seems through all the complexities we’ve arrived in a parallel universe where Ward was just standing in the wrong place at the wrong time. But, of course, that’s not what happened.
Western Reserve - October 4, 2010
You’re right, ward was moving, but that makes this even more complicated. From what I saw Ward was not moving very fast, while shipley was, so Ward didn’t contribute as much to the hit. if I knew how fast they were moving, I could calculate who contributed what, but the assumption that I made for simplicity’s sake was that Ward’s contribution from his velocity was negligible compared to Shipley’s.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
after watching the replay again, it looks like wedge does a sort of jump stop before lunging into Shipley, which would slow him down. the close up shot really gives you a good view of how far Ward was leaning into the hit.
So my assumption is probably off, but it still looks to me like Shipley was traveling faster at impact, so his contribution would still be greater.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
The brick wall analogy is not a good one for multiple reasons.
Moving fast is NOT necessary to supply energy to the hit. F = MA not F = MV. Similarly, force does not necessarily mean movement. If you stand motionless with 300lbs on your back, you are exerting a lot of force up against that bar, the bar is just exerting exactly the same amount back down on you.
Even if all Ward has to do is “brace himself” without moving anywhere, his legs and core are still doing to have to exert a lot of force in order for him to not be moved, just as one would under a 300lbs bar. If Ward was exerting zero force, Shipley would have hit him and Ward would have been moved backward. Like if you rolled a bowling ball into another bowling ball, Ward’s zero momentum and zero force would have resulted in him absorbing kinetic energy from Shipley.
Assuming Shipley is not accelerating toward Ward, the only energy he brings to the equation is his momentum. Ward brings enough to alter Shipley’s path quite a bit.
rufio - October 5, 2010
This is entirely correct, but you’re missing the direction. his legs and core are applying this force to the ground, which is able to apply enough of a normal force to keep ward stable.
This is really all just a physics semantic argument though. I believe the original point was to determine who contributed most to Shipley being layed out, and since impact is proportional to momentum, it should be obvious that if shipley hadn’t been running as fast or at all, the impact would have been significantly less powerful.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
ignore most of this, I think I’ve got this whole thing figured out. We’re both kind of wrong and kind of right.
The law of inertia tells us who supplied the force, and that is Ward. He is the outside force that altered Shipley’s motion. However, the strength of this force is directly proportional to how fast Shipley was moving, so the severity of the hit stems from that.
The brick wall analogy is fine. Ward has muscles, the wall has mortar and bricks. they are performing the same function in this case. f=ma refers to the net force on a system, and since ward has no “a” he can’t have any sort of total force to use on another body. The normal forces bewteen Shipley and Ward are equal if we assume Ward doesn’t move, and the same must be true of the force between him and the ground. The magnitude of the force between the two players is going to be proportional to how fast shipley was moving.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
Again, you are completely right that Ward’s movement factors in, but just from eyeballing it, it seems to me that Shipley was moving much faster, and thus Ward’s contribution from movement isn’t very significant. Realistically, it’s probably not a good approximation to completely ignore it, but it still was far from the main cause of the force unloaded on Shipley.
p=mv. Ward had a small velocity compared to Shipley, so the main culprit in determining the severity of the hit is Shipley.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
I haven’t been on this thread since yesterday morning guys. forgive me for skipping science class. I’ll serve my detention if necessary.
Dawg Nuts - October 5, 2010
This thread is a real doozy.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
Aaand sloooow….
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
Only to Linux users…
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
Or people on mobiles. Really, the hardware is probably 90% of the issue.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
I’m on a windows 7 Netbook right now. If I were on my Linux box, I wouldn’t be having any problems.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
I think the netbook is the thing, probably because of the power of the processor. I am on windows 7, but on an AMD Athalon II X3 Processor.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
The netbook is ten years newer and three times more powerful than my Linux box. The difference is the Linux box doesn’t have to deal with the Windows bloat.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
ah.
I was more commenting that netbooks tend to have slower processors than computers.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
…It’s still a computer and also no sh*t.
It’s like 1/6th the size.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
didn’t say it wasn’t a computer. this whole thing started b/c golan said the thread was taking a long time to load and was stating that he was using his netbook. You said it might be because of linux, but he said his newer netbook is more powerful than linux. I merely pointed out that the slower processor in the netbook is what is likely causing the slow speeds, not linux.
bross09 - October 6, 2010
An atom processor is far from slow.
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
Uh, no. My netbook is miles ahead of my Laptop.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
No, Wards force is independent of this. If Shipley was moving slowly before the hit and Ward applies the same force in the same amount of time, Shipley just goes faster in the other/rotational direction after Ward hits him.
Ward is generating “a”, he just gives it all to Shipley and therefore does not move.
Unlike the mortar, Ward’s muscles can generate a heckuva lot of force. And they did.
rufio - October 5, 2010
I’m sorry, but you must have slept through physics. without velocity there is no acceleration. If you don’t think that’s true, I can’t help you.
acceleration=dv/dt
if v=0, dv/dt=0
I can’t be any more clear about this. If ward is standing still, his muscles are generating force in the exact same way as the mortar in a wall. you’re in college, if you don’t believe me, go ask a physics professor.
I think where you’re getting mixed up is in the f=ma part. you can have force without acceleration. but the NET force on a system what is described in that equation, it is not a definition of force. if there is no acceleration, there is no NET force. this doesn’t mean there aren’t any forces being applied, it just means they all cancel out.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
No no no, there was plenty of acceleration, it was Shipley’s acceleration after Ward applied a metric s$%* ton of force to him.
rufio - October 5, 2010
And did you really need to sink to this?
rufio - October 5, 2010
Because he knows he’s losing
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
Bare knuckle blows over a physics discussion in a football forum. God love you people.
(But not, you know, in a religious way or anything, because I don’t believe in religion.)
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
Boy am I ever glad I didn’t get into the middle of this one! This specific argument never goes well.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
This is why I said I didn’t want to start a science argument…..
North Coast Flea - October 5, 2010
Ward essentially lowered his shoulder, jumped a little bit, and held his ground while Shipley barreled into him. If Shipley hadn’t been going so fast, Ward wouldn’t have been able to deliver the same amount of force.
In this case, the effect of a wall is similar — it generates a lot of force merely by holding its ground. Ward did a little more than hold his ground, but the impact still would have been much less if Shipley hadn’t been moving.
Chemo - October 5, 2010
Not true. If he wasn’t going as fast, he would have had less energy and had Ward hit him as hard, there would have been a different result after the hit.
Ward’s leg muscles function independently of how fast Shipley was/is going.
rufio - October 6, 2010
I know I’m going to be in the minority here, but I don’t like the idea of a league where this sort of hit can happen. That’s the sort of thing that could have ruined Shipley’s life if the angle had been a little bit different. It’s hard to blame Ward, because he was playing the game, but I think the NFL has to flag that sort of thing just to try to protect players. I know a lot of people will say “That’s football, man up!” and they have a point, but that’s the part of football I don’t like. I don’t have a solution, of course.
Incidentally, Shipley ducked because it’s human instinct to curl up and protect your belly. It wasn’t a decision on his part; if he hadn’t curled, he might have had broken ribs instead of a concussion.
Of course, I don’t have solutions to any of this. Just thinking out loud.
Chemo - October 4, 2010
Rule Changes
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
Is this meant to be a reply to me?
Chemo - October 4, 2010
No, i just put it after your comment because you were talking about the NFL protecting players. I wasn’t criticizing you or anything it just seemed that link would make the most sense in the thread following your comment about the NFL.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
It was a good, clean hit. I hate what the NFL is doing with this crap, and I hated the personal foul call against the CIncy DB who hit Watson, too.
This is football. There will be hits. Some of them will involve helmets.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I think where the NFL is screwing up is that they are focused on the wrong kind of concussion prevention, and not enough on how players recover from concussions. Better helmets would certainly help (not that the current ones are bad) but my understanding is that the really bad problems suffered by retired players are from playing while still concussed.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
Yes, this is true. Or coming back too soon. Steve Young.
rufio - October 4, 2010
yes, that is what i meant, playing through and coming back while still feeling it’s effects.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
sheeit! 59 yd fg by josh scobee puts the jags in the lead with 5 secs left to go. wow!
davus - October 3, 2010
the mascot caught the ball too, haha
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
That has to be Evil Knevil in that suit.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
You know what I love about Hillis also?
Instead of dancing like an idiot when he scores, he kneels and thanks God.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
You mean he doesn’t get flagged for doing the dougie?
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Exactly.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
what is the dougie??
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Omg. And you’re a college student?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
well…I am a college student that listens to pink floyd and watches classic movies. I do not have the same taste as most and I rarely pay attention to the new dance of the year (the crank dance, the stanky leg, etc…)
bross09 - October 3, 2010
and lot of college students don’t listen to pop music. college is where a lot of people come to appreciate good music.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
Some not a lot.
A lot listen to a slosh of Lady Gaga/ techno due to alcohol poisoning.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
A terrible “urban hiphop” dance.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Teach me how to Dougie!
Euurrrrrrrbody love me.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Eeeeerrrrrrrrrr body llllluuuuu me!
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
The V and E in love are entirely optional.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I think it’s Euuuuuuuuurrrrrr more than Eeeeeeerrrrrrrrr
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
You’re probably right. I wasn’t entirely sure how to properly spell out in English the audible projection for the ebonics term for “every.”
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I think I have heard this, just don’t know the dance.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
I figured as such. I tried to search it and found a video but couldn’t tell from the video what the actual dougie dance was.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
sorta like Eric Wright.
oh wait.
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
I hate to make a jim brown comparison like the refs did but its like when Brown used to hand the ball back to the refs and walk to the sideline.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
I actually just heard on PTI that any celebration where you go to a knee is now a penalty, such as Jared Allen’s “rope em” celebration.
So, is Hillis going to a knee and thanking God now a penalty?
StuckInPa - October 5, 2010
Hillis goes to his knees, not his knee_.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I wish we would have selected Earl Thomas with that number 1 pick. He is a ballhawk and ran a legit 4.39. Can play safety or corner.
realmccoy - October 3, 2010
I’m very satisfied with Haden and Ward, thank you very much.
Browns town - October 3, 2010
The idea is that in a deep safety draft, you can get a quality guy in the 2nd round and pick the top corner on the board in the 1st. Time will tell if it worked out, but I can’t argue with that line of thinking.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Time will tell but so far it looks like it’s worked out great so far.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
so far
9James - October 3, 2010
Thomas was the top corner on Seattle’s board, apparently.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
Thomas is free safety as far as I know
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Right, but I read they had him rated as their number one corner in this draft… can’t find the link, so I’ll drop it.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
I’d be curious to see that, I don’t doubt he has the speed and coverage ability, but strikes me as way too short to play corner.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
NFl.com has him at 5’10 though, I thought he was shorter than that.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
its one of those generous heights, like Javier arenas being 5’9’’
bross09 - October 4, 2010
this x 1000
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
And I’ve heard Ward can lay the wood.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
You don’t say?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
insert “boss ward f@#$ing people” jokes here.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
Wow, you do not show your fan favoritism at all.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Also. Ward>>>>>>>>> Thomas.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I hope you mean Earl.
BrownDawg1409 - October 3, 2010
he did. SB knows how it works.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
If he keeps progressing and playing the way he has, Ward will be challenging Polamalu as the best safety in the NFL.
Browns town - October 3, 2010
Slow down there fella.
TheDriveStillHurts - October 3, 2010
In a few years that is…
Browns town - October 4, 2010
Ward was a great pick. But he is a strong safety and Earl is a ballhawk in the Ed Reed mode. I just gotta believe if Haden was all that, he would have replaced Wright by now.
realmccoy - October 3, 2010
Your mentality to the situation is all kinds of wrong.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
haden and ward are examples of why this team is headed in the right direction. earl thomas can go get shagged.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
4 games in, shouldn’t expect him to replace our number 1 corner for the past 4 seasons.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Haden was on the field a lot today. He’s doing just fine.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
I saw him give up 2 completions to Owens in the highlights but nothing egregious, looked like he slipped on 1 of the 2.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
He also had a really nice tackle on special teams, taking down a punt returner just as he started running with nobody else around.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
I said “Haden will make that play next year” at least twice today. He’s still playing like a rookie, but he’s got talent.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I also wanted Berry along with alot of other fans here…..
Buttttttttt with Haden and Ward i’m more then happy
Cedarpoint2k3 - October 3, 2010
When Berry was gone, Earl should have been the pick.
realmccoy - October 3, 2010
and then who would we have playing corner right now?
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
5’9’’ Javier Arenas?
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Thomas.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
No, now stop it.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
maybe we should have traded away our entire draft this year and next to take mccoy-thomas-shipley at 1-2-3.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
Should’ve taken Orakpo the year before too.
/sarc.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I would much rather have Haden and Ward than Thomas and either Speivey or Arenas.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
I’d rather have Thomas and Ward.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
this is the first I’ve heard you mention this. you would rather have a project than the top corner in the draft?
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
Considering Haden’s a project too (very raw at CB), and less athletic, I might trade them straight up. But I’m no scout.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
I never heard Haden was raw at CB.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
Me neither. He played for 3 years in college. Raw?
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Really? That was all I heard in the predraft… that he was a QB but wanted to go to Florida so he switched to it in college, hadn’t played it before.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
Perhaps. I just hadn’t heard that before.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Florida moved him to CB because of Tebow. In my mind, that is even more encouraging that he is only in his 4th year playing the position, he still has a lot of room to grow.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Never heard raw either.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Haden didn’t play CB until he got to college. I believe he stepped into the starting job right away without having played the position before.
rufio - October 4, 2010
what did he play in HS?
troy145 - October 4, 2010
QB
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Im sorry if I missed it elsewhere in this thread, but are we just done with wildcat? Haden playing QB reminded me.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
I remember us trying it twice today. Far too few carries for Cribbs, IMO. We should have 2-3 plays per quarter.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I was actually wondering the same thing. With circumstances putting Wallace in as the starter for multiple games, you’d think….
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
I probably would to. However, if you pick a safety, who do you pick to play corner in the 2nd? all of the good corners were taken, which i though would happen. The difference between an arenas and a haden is greater than the difference between ward and thomas.
Thomas CAN play CB, but he is better at safety. Thomas at CB is not better than Haden at CB…So Thomas at CB and Ward at Safety is not as good as what we got IMO.
Its nice to say we should pick thomas, but we desperately needed a CB.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
My entire suggestion is based on the assumption that Thomas is a Corner… which seems to be the opinion of both Mack Brown and Pete Carroll.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
except every site on the internet has him listed at safety and refers to him as such. maybe he’s actually playing corner, and the whole internet is wrong.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
He’s playing safety now, but I that’s what I read, this week. I can’t find the link, so I’ll drop it.
kwoog - October 3, 2010
Earl Thomas is playing safety in Seattle. He played safety at Texas. Many thought he would have the versatility to be able to play CB in the NFL.
rufio - October 4, 2010
except that they were the only ones it seemed like that truly saw him as a corner (if they did see him as that) and he is not playing corner now.
When did mack brown say Thomas should be a corner vs. a safety anyways?
and in that suggestion with our situation, we still need to draft a safety. If thomas is a corner project, then we need to take someone to play CB if we are going to play Thomas at FS. If we are going to throw him in a CB, we would have to take a safety early in the draft too.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I agree with this. Apparently Seattle drafted him as a Corner, he was the number 1 on their board, and if he had gone back to college they were going to switch him to corner…
kwoog - October 3, 2010
Just saw Wallace’s pass to Moore, that was a very difficult throw.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Agree. His near TD throw to Watson was also a very good one. Too bad Watson couldn’t have held on.
Browns town - October 3, 2010
It was also Beautiful.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
It was one of the few things he did (along with the drive at the end of the half) that make me think that he could be more than a career backup.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
But his ineptitude to audible brought me back down to Earth.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
me too. Its weird with him. I was annoyed by not audibling on the drive at the end of the half, but then was happy when he finally attempted to stretch the field. he is just teasing us that he can be a starter (or more than a career backup who can start in spots)
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Is he even allowed to audible?
I’m not being sarcastic, do we even know that Wallace is allowed to change a call at the line?
Bernie19Kosar - October 3, 2010
I saw him do it once, so I’d assume so.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
The coaches said he did last week which I assume means he can.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Regardless, it needs to happen more. The vast majority of the time we ran against an 8 man front from 21 or 12 personnel, it was stuffed. Every time we ran against a 7 man front with the same personnel groupings, it worked. Coincidence?
rufio - October 4, 2010
Eli’s pink chin strap looks hideous.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
See, I don’t get this.
1. I love it for the cause. 2. I honestly like it not for the fact that it’s pink, just that it’s different.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
It works for some players. It looks absolutely terrible on Eli’s chin strap, not sure why, just extremely awkward.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Honestly, because he’s white.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Also, no way you win in fantasy.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Chicago’s has the best run defense in the league. I could easily win. Guarantee? Of course not, but I’m definitely favored at this point.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I’d like to take this moment to point out that I have the highest point total and Cutler hasn’t played yet.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Not surprising, you have the most stacked team in the league. We’ll see how it shapes up come playoff time, but I’d be surprised if you didn’t win it all.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I still hate that I had an autodraft. In the other league I’m in, most of the teams that had an autodraft are also doing pretty well. I was actually present for that draft.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
What? No you aren’t.
I have Bradshaw, Taylor, and Miami D to still go.
You have Nicks and Hernandez.
1. No way you’re favored. 2. no way you win.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
‘Nuff said, I’m favored.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
No. Nicks won’t do crap and NE never uses their TEs
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Won’t do crap is Bradshaw vs. the Bear defense. Taylor is just back up. Miami’s defense might end up in the negative.
Never really? 7 last week, 10 the week before that.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Hernandez already looks like a #1 TE. Not top 5 in the league, but definitely top 10.
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
I’d really like to see a replay of that Ward hit. I read a couple times that his shoulder didn’t even hit his head. It was all chest. Anybody?
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
It hit his head, I had seen the replay of it. Regardless, I still call it clean.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Technically, it’s still a penalty. The refs have to call that. I just don’t fault Ward for the hit.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Yes, in that moment a ref can’t do anything but throw it but it wasn’t intentional nor was it truly illegal.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
As much as you’d like to defend it, the play was a penalty.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paula-duffy/new-nfl-rule-changes-hit_b_510207.html
Like I said, I don’t fault Ward. I’d much rather have a penalty for being too aggressive than for a careless mistake. He scares the piss out of a receiver coming across the middle.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
I knew it!
It’s not just the “defenseless receiver”, it applies to any player.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I think you need to look up “illegal”
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
I’d never fault Ward for rocking a Bengal like that. I’d love to see him do that to Hines.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Very stupid play. He cheapshotted him for starters – clear shoulder to the head. But what I didn´t like was the timing. We had them stopped and they were forced to try a FG – and that play gives up a TD. Sure the idiots will say something like you have to play physical – but there is a time and a place for everything. The right play was to pull up.
realmccoy - October 3, 2010
You have to play physical.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Against the new rule? Yes. Cheapshot? No.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
It was very cheap. The ball was out of his hands when he was hit. I’ll give it to him that he built up a lot momentum by then but the position Shipley was in left only his head open. And to target his head like that was a dbag move
The Licensed Pessimist - October 3, 2010
I highly doubt Ward knew the ball wasn’t in his hands, and it’s since when is it not ok to hit a guy after he drops a catch. It happens all the time.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
This whole act happened in maybe 1 or 2 seconds. No way Ward had a chance to target his head, no way he knew the ball was gone and regardless, like I keep saying, Ward was already in position before Shipley’s head was in line with his shoulder.
Shipley’s head moved into Ward’s shoulder’s line of movement.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Like I said he definitely built up the momentum before the hit, but he didn’t reel back at all when his head was clearly the only thing that would be hit. He could have changed his position, but it was his intentions to lay the wood on him and it resulted in a cheap shot on a rookies head.
The Licensed Pessimist - October 3, 2010
No. Like I said this all happened in less than 2 seconds basically. Ward can’t do crap.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
And by that i mean when Shipley’s head came into the line, there was about half a second of Ward being able to change trajectory, if he was even watching in the first place.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Hit the nail on the head
rose_11 - October 3, 2010
Why don’t you and Shipley get a room. Christ, I’ve never seen so much aimless kvetching after a win.
golanbatrac - October 3, 2010
Shipley wouldn’t be able to say no in his current state either, TLP should go for it.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
but unfortunately I have seen such tastelessness after a win.
The Licensed Pessimist - October 3, 2010
Unfortunate? You can leave at anytime.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Tasteless? Dude, not one person in this thread has been happy about Shipley being hurt. That would be tasteless.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
There was one person who was happy he was out, but Rocland is pigeon-holing everyone with him just to be a douche.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
This.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Ha! REC!
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
and its now a penalty and such a bad thing to attempt to make a big hit? this happens all the time when the players timing is good but people don’t complaing. Ward just had bad timing and couldn’t change trajectory.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
This is ludicrous.
rufio - October 4, 2010
More like a fraction of a second. 1 or 2 seconds is a lot of time in the NFL.
I wish more players in the secondary would learn to hit. So they may get a penalty occasionally because of the horrible rules and officials who see almost every violent collision as a penalty, but the alternative is to have a whole backfield of Wrights and MacDonalds (and no I was not impressed with Wrights hit on their TE near the start of the game – he should have wrapped him up)
HenryDawg - October 3, 2010
I meant the whole incident, not his head to shoulder was 1- 2 seconds.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Also, agreed. It was flashy but Wright’s tackle was terrible.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
If you can get a tape with a timer, or use a stopwatch, you will see that it is far less than a second. It is 1/100ths of a second.
JamesPowell - October 4, 2010
Please read. I meant the whole incident from catch to Shipley on the floor.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Yeah, that was far less than a second.
Chemo - October 4, 2010
You make it sound like it was premeditated and that Ward lined up to hit his head…
I’m not sure you saw the same play, no way in hell he had any time to consider all that. He was just trying to break up a potential TD catch.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I couldn’t find any video yet, but here’s two pictures:
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
We need a play by play of this via Rufio.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Ward lit him up on a clean play that shouldn’t be a penalty but is by the NFL’s new rules. That’s all there is to be said.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I like it.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
http://www.cleveland.com/ohio-sports-blog/index.ssf/2010/10/bengals_carson_palmer_and_terr.html
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
I respect this. Also mentioned a fine won’t change his big hit playing style.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I, as well, respect this. Too much pansy football, I want a hitter.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
over the last few years, we have had way too much pansy football. on D, we were the london silly nannies who didn’t want to get dirty.
our front 7 had trouble tackling and so did our secondary (this was especially true under Romeo). Now we have a guy like roth who likes to play physical in the front 7, we have a tough nosed player in Fujita, and we have a guy playing centerfield that enjoys doling out lickings
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Good for Ward. The “Brady Rules” need to go and let these guys play football again. It wasn’t a head shot and he thought he was breaking up a play.
browndawgbacker - October 4, 2010
Palmer needs to shut up if he did not leave his WR out to dry he would not have been blown up.
Brownsfan4ever - October 3, 2010
You can see the ball right there, it’s very likely his hit would have prevented a TD, which is how this game is supposed to be played.
HenryDawg - October 3, 2010
whoa now, lets not go too far. The ball you see in the picture is bouncing up off the ground. the pass was already incomplete well before ward made contact.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
see my post above….video is there from NFL.com
Fast forward to about 1:26 in the clip
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010100301/2010/REG4/bengals@browns#tab:watch
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
There was no other body part that he could have potentially hit the way Shipley was facing him. He had no choice.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Once again, wrong way of thinking.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
earl thomas wouldn’t have done something silly like that…
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
He would’ve intercepted it like a ballhawk!
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
and then immediately intentionally fumbled it in the endzone so shipley could recover it and get double glory for texas.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
Just to throw another name into the mix – Eric Berry and “bust” are already being used in the same sentence in the national media – we coulda done worse!
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Berry has done crap.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
The exclamation on my point.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
He’s played 3 games. Isn’t it a little early to determine that he’s a bust?
woodsmeister - October 4, 2010
I said has. As in past tense.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Really? I was watching the NFL network clips on their website and there was a 7 minute or so one breaking down how well he’s played for the Chiefs thus far. Seriously, just watched it a few days ago.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
That can’t be right. He was responsible for 3 of the Chiefs first 4 TDs allowed.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
I believe it was a FOXSports article last week calling him a potential bust – if he doesn’t start to improve. Quite early for that kind of talk for any player – especially for one thrust into a starting role as a rookie. Whatever happened to “growing pains”?
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
he has been okay. up and down. he has made some plays but also has shown significant growing pains (at least I would say a bit more than ward)
bross09 - October 3, 2010
and glad someone else took him so we did not end up with another 1st round bust.Did not like Berry before the draft and still have not seen anything that makes me think he was worth that slot or even the browns slot like many on here was drooling over him
Brownsfan4ever - October 3, 2010
He’s swimming right now. We’ll see how he’s doing next year at this time.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I don’t see any way how Ward could have pulled up. We are talking literally hundredths of a second.
Bernie19Kosar - October 3, 2010
Do you know what a cheap shot is?
rufio - October 4, 2010
When you tackle a UoT player right?
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
thomas would never do that
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
By the way, a few hours ago I mentioned how I was losing 20 something to 70 something… well thanks to Arian Foster (who I drafted) and a brilliant move to bench Ravens’ D for Chargers’ D, I’m now up 132 to 99.94.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Now I lay me down to sleep……please God, let T.J. Ward accumulate 60 penalty yards for the same kind of hits against “His Flash” B. Edwards, when the Browns play The Jets, Amen.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Cutler almost died just now.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy…..
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Kinda glad DA got benched.
A) because I just don’t like the guy anymore
B) I really needed Fitz to have a bad game so I can win my fantasy matchup.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
I’m glad because we don’t have to watch our QB sulk off the field like a little kid after throwing (another) incomplete screen on third down. I’m also glad we got a beast of a running back for one of the two inept turds we had, while watching the other prove what an inept turd he really was with talent around him. Life is good.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
No, the Triple H that is the FO is good.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Amen
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
…Cutler has been sack/striped three times in like 4 minutes.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
He better get his shit together quick, or we’re gonna have words.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
So glad Browns didn’t take him.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
is that your doorbell? i think its moon, and he isn’t happy.
Dawg Nuts - October 3, 2010
Hahaha, your so greedy.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I have high standards.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Established by the cpu?
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Ha exactly.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
on the subject of fantasy, SCREW BRUCE GRADKOWSKI
bross09 - October 3, 2010
How does a Browns 3rd string castoff go from Cleveland to Oakland to back up another Browns castoff (Frye) and somehow become a starter in the NFL. Oakland is like The Twilight Zone of the NFL.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
and it has to be the week my opponent has him and I forget to sub out a player who is out. Gradkowski’s play could be the difference between a fantasy win and a fantasy loss.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Excruciatingly painful to have a guy like that determine your Fantasy future…
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
actually, I still might win. Right now I am about 30 points behind and I have Ronnie Brown, Brandon Marshall and Eli left whereas all he has left is Olson. If Eli can have a decent game and olson is somewhat contained, I may only need about 20-25 between Brown and Marshall which wouldn’t be TOO hard. I just feel I will lose by 5 or something.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
Sounds like you’ve got it wrapped up to me
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
I dunno. Now looking at it, i might have a shot.
I am down 64-30 (since then, olson caught a pass and manning has lost me points) right now. I need to get 34 points plus whatever else olson gets for the rest of the game. I think I can get 25 between Marshall and Brown, but I shouldn’t bank on it (just to be safe, 20 which is what I think they will get). I pretty much need eli to step it up and turn this game around.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
I relied on Eli a couple of times last year…..not very reliable…
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
This game is pathetic.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Yes, it is.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Seneca has played very well, I honestly can’t believe people are giving him such a hard time. He’s had us in position to win every game. He’s not Payton Manning, but this team can definitely win with him for now. It’s not his fault our wide receivers can’t get separation on anyone.
Even his INT today was off a deflection of a ball Stuckey couldn’t quite bring in. Honestly
Stuckey by the way had a nice game too. Also Stuckey is a good Browns receiver name
HenryDawg - October 3, 2010
The idea is that Delhomme can do everything Seneca has done and more, besides maybe extending the play with his feet, which we actually haven’t seen Seneca do much. He can actually pass the ball to our WRs, something we’ve been missing since Seneca started playing. Seneca has been a great back-up, nothing more.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
The Ravens game would not have been close without Seneca’s feet.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
We also couldn’t capitalize on the Ravens secondary with Seneca.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
RIght. These two QB’s are not near the same player – or type of player. The WR’s don’t get relegated to an afterthought with J.D. at QB. We lose the Wildcat and scrambling ability with Delhomme – but gain another 1/3 of the playbook. Almost two different teams depending on who’s at QB, which I hope doesn’t develop into a problem….
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
I am still surprised at the lack of wildcat, especially with Seneca under helm. Cribbs is one of the few play makers on the team. Get the man the ball.
Monsters of the Midway - October 4, 2010
I’m fine with Delhomme getting his job back when ready but I could also see Seneca being a better option any day of the week.
HenryDawg - October 3, 2010
At this point I don’t think he is the better option, but he has done an admirable job.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Except for the not-audibling.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I think with Hillis in the backfield, Delhomme will be able to really work off of the play action to help get his recievers open. That is probably my biggest complaint about Wallace, but I’ll take this kind of play from a backup any day. Every team in the league has to respect our running game now.
Mike85 - October 3, 2010
J.D. reportedly has a much better grasp of the entire playbook as well.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Wallace has done OK but I’d like to see Delhomme starting next week. I was at the game today and tried to watch the receivers to see where he’s looking to throw, and Wallace only looked at MoMass twice. One time was a short reception and the other was the 3rd down play where Hall knocked the ball away from him. I know the Bengals have a good secondary so that may have been part of his limited production, but there were plenty of times where he was open and Wallace didn’t even look at him. I know there was a long discussion on here recently on how good MoMass is, but we won’t really know until we get a QB who gives him a chance to make plays. Wallace only looked at Cribbs and the TE’s, then Stuckey if nobody else was open.
Wallace can make plays with his feet but he missed a few opportunities to make plays running the ball that were there if nobody was open. He doesn’t seem to have a good pocket presence; he often throws the ball away when he still had time to look around longer or he could step up and run for a few more yards. And he made a couple really dumb throws that were lucky not to be intercepted.
Maybe I’m too hard on him because I was at the game and saw more than I usually see on TV, but he missed a chance to makes some plays many times. I know that even great QB’s don’t see everything and always make smart decisions, but I’m interested in seeing what Delhomme can do with our offense.
Also, unrelated to this, I don’t know why Harrison didn’t get any carries at all today. Hillis was running well, but I would have liked to see him on a few drives as a change of pace back. Or put him in to throw a couple screens to. Maybe he was in Mangin’s doghouse for being upset about not getting more carries, but we can’t rely on one running back all game and expect to win very often.
Buckeye Brad - October 3, 2010
Agree with you here.
Roger Dorn - October 3, 2010
Agreed.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
I bet the game was fun, especially since we won and you hadn’t been to one in awhile.
emily522 - October 4, 2010
especially since we won. I have been to at least one game a year since ’99 because my dad has had season tickets. The last time i saw a win was 2007, and have only seen 4 total wins in person including the preseason. I am not complaining about seeing the wins, but I have been to about 20 games including the preseason in 11 years.
(and one of the 3 wins i did see in the regular season was when the browns beat a 1-15 team…and they didn’t even play particularly well).
bross09 - October 4, 2010
It was really fun. Our seats were pretty good, upper deck but around the 30 yard line, so we had a good view of the action. And I took my younger brother who’s 19 and had never been to a Browns game before, so he loved it. We walked around the stadium beforehand and visited the new Heritage Hall where we looked at all the displays about the Hall of Famers. He didn’t know very much about Browns history so I was explaining to him who the players were and some of the great Browns history that most young people don’t know about.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Awesome. I’m jealous!
emily522 - October 4, 2010
I sat in the very last row in the upper deck once, at around the 50, and I have to say it was still a good view. in the very last row, you even get a little extra leg room.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I was in the handicapped seats so I had plenty of leg room.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Where Wallace is looking depends on the reads. His read could be a simple progression (go from WR #1 to the TE to the RB) or based of of the defense (2 high, throw to TE, 1 high throw to WR) or some combination.
He’s got to know the reads, so if he wasn’t looking MoMass’ way, it was either our game plan, theirs, or a combination of both.
Which are the dumb throws you are remembering?
rufio - October 4, 2010
The late read to MoMass that almost ended in a pick 6.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
I’m not sure wide receivers are part of his progression. I say that only half joking.
Western Reserve - October 4, 2010
I can’t remember anything in particular right now but he did make a couple bad throws in to good coverage that could have easily been picked off had the DB’s made a better play.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
You could very well be correct. I remember a lot of good throws he had into coverage “throwing his guy open”, the TD pass to Moore and the incomplete TD to Watson come to mind. I am probably remembering these out of my brain’s unconscious desire to preserve its own sanity.
rufio - October 4, 2010
So the day I drop the Giants D…
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
…No way.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Not kidding. I picked up Atlanta who wasn’t too bad, but this is bullshit.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
They have 8 sacks and have them averaging under 1 yard a play…
Damn.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Yea, I know. Believe me, I know.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
How bad are Cutler’s numbers fantasy wise?
He has -13 in real life.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Yahoo! is -1.32.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Haha.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I started him and I was leading
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
No one has the Giants D in my league. Almost picked them up. But who did I pick instead… the Colts. And they got -4 points.
emily522 - October 3, 2010
In other news, I picked Holmes off the wavier wire. Awesome coincidence that he’s off his suspension…
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I need Chicago to win to guarantee some nice jack in two separate pools….
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
What is with Lovie?
Dude has the same expressionless all the time, nt to mention it looks like he’s cracking a smile.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Romeo Jr.?
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Seems like it.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ7GsKj77yg
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Good One!
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Todays gameplan: I’m thinking Arby’s.
Good stuff.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
it’s old but it’s worth it.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
The “Even Keel” of a future lifetime coordinator….
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Who had the Rams making the playoffs on the predictions thread? That team is looking good!
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Thank you Jay Cutler…
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Are they pulling him?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
Past tense.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Ouch.
emily522 - October 3, 2010
another note: reggie hodges has been doing a pretty darn good job punting.
davus - October 3, 2010
Except when a little distance control is in order – too many punts into the end zone that aren’t even close to being fielded.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Sweet win.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
This is the worst MNF game I’ve seen in years.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Well, it is the NFC.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
I guess you’d rather watch a 9-7 baseball game instead of two pitchers going for no-hitters as well?
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
3-0 is cool, but this is still a bad game.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
I hate baseball
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
That explains the low tolerance for a defensive struggle
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Not really, I’m a soccer fan. I like a good defensive game, but this is mostly offensive ineptitude.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Ya think? Looks like some pretty good D being played as well.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
And I really, really like that Corona commercial
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
The chick with the butt? My friend never shuts up about it.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
She should forever be referred to as “The Chick With The Butt”.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
The one where they throw footballs?
Love it.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
No, the one where the palm tree has christmas lights.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
Its not a ‘defensive struggle’. The Bears defense has been solid, but the giants just haven’t been on their game on offense. The giants D has been good, but the # of sacks is also exaggerated by how bad the O-Line has been and the decision making by cutler.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
what I mean is that its more of a game of offensive struggles than a true ‘defensive struggle’.
bross09 - October 3, 2010
You didn’t watch us last year?
rufio - October 4, 2010
I was thinking about that game when I wrote my post. At least Baltimore was decent.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 4, 2010
Hahaha
rufio - October 4, 2010
That is because it was on Sunday.
Nuclear Power - October 4, 2010
guess bitching works, TD Giants
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 3, 2010
Bradshaw is a bull. Nice run
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
Yeah, SB wins this week.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
My guys did good today and Aussie still whooped me.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
Hey Sinns, you watching Bradshaw?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
It’s Simms, but yes, Bears defense broke down.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I’ll call you what I want, you’re my FF B*tch.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I won 133 to 99, you can’t rain on my parade.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Just because:
http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/media-center/videos/Peyton-Hillis-Post-Game-Press-Conference/3c34e849-2d18-4f80-b4c6-ffe53050e570
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Great presser – seems like a good dude – fits the Mangini profile to a T.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
Man is he humble, and always shifting the praise to the rest of the team. I hope we can keep him around for a while.
North Coast Flea - October 3, 2010
that probably depends on what mangini’s wife looks like…
Dawg Nuts - October 4, 2010
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
A little scary but she looks like him with a wig on………
Brownsfan4ever - October 4, 2010
Mark Shapiro’s sister.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
I never knew that. Interesting.
Western Reserve - October 4, 2010
Could someone educate me on the Hillis/coach’s wife rumours? I vaguely recall at the time of the trade hearing that this had something to do with why McDaniels didn’t play him. . . .
TheDriveStillHurts - October 4, 2010
nothing’s ever been confirmed, it’s all rumor, and I’m not sure where it originated, but it’s funny.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I found a replay of the hit, unfortunately it’s not close enough to see anything.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Woo go Bears. I like you even without Jay.
Oh and what’s with hating the NFC? Do they play different football than AFC?
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
I don’t like National leagues of any sport, it’s weird.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
I hear an echo.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
That’s a good reason.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
/sarc
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Just seems to me the the AFC has more “Blue Collar” city’s than the NFC. Even the Jets seem to appeal to the blue collar side of NYC than the Giants – maybe just my perception.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
I agree. In my eyes, I see a huge difference in the NY teams just because of their conference.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
The Jets may as well break down and call themselves the New Jersey Jets.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
True.
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
They should, but both teams play in Jersey anyway.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
And, 1/2 the people working in NYC live in Jersey anyway. It’d give them some ’cred.
DaveDawg09 - October 3, 2010
By the way, Collins is proving why having a back-up like Seneca is such a good thing.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
I like the NFC teams better than AFC teams because we face AFC teams more often and they take playoff spots that I would like the Browns to have.
Bumblyjack - October 3, 2010
HAHA WOW!
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
Funny indeed. I hate when that happens in Madden, fumble at the 1.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
I’m not losing am I?
SpecialBrownie - October 3, 2010
No, you’re good bro.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
Yeah, huuuge lead, it’s been over since Bradshaw’s TD.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
okay. We won.
let’s be like a real football team and look to the next match.
Can we beat Atlanta?
discoinferno083 - October 3, 2010
Tough call. It was easier to predict a Bengal upset because we see them twice a year. I don’t know what to expect out of ATL.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
ATL looks different every week. I don’t know.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
Time to make them look bad.
rufio - October 4, 2010
They have a very good #1 WR, a decent running game, Tony Gonzalez and a pass rush. Tough team. We need to put pressure on Ryan to win.
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 4, 2010
Roddy White and Tony Gonzalez are going to have a field day.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
We will have to be predictable if we want to stop Gonzalez, because our only option is really Ward. Unless DQ is magically ok and a good player again.
I am not as concerned about their pass rush.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Aight, I’m done listening to Collonsworth. Fox’s cartoon time.
Brownie's Year - October 3, 2010
I’d kill to live on the west coast.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
Way past its prime.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
Seems to be the popular opinion, yet they all still make me laugh.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
I rarely laugh at television nowadays. Tosh.0 gets me sometimes, but generally I really on quality humor in movies for good laughs (i.e. The Hangover).
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
See Get Him to the Greek? That movie was great.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
bad example.
notthatnoise - October 3, 2010
The Hangover was hilarious.
StuckInPa - October 3, 2010
I laughed some when I watched it.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
Hangover is gold and you will treat it as such.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
the hangover was garbage. one stupid joke after another. 90% of the jokes in that movie were barely more intelligent that poop jokes.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
Oh Jesus, get off your Case Western high horse
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Dude, you’re talking to a kid who loves Bill and Ted. The difference is one of those movies knows it’s ridiculous and the other doesn’t.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
Whatever, you’re clearly in the minority. This is why I listen to Simms on movies rather than you.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
I thought ‘The Hangover’ was hilarious! I laughed through the whole thing.
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
I also think Avatar was terrible.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
Never saw it but don’t need to.
It’s just f-ing Pocahontas 2.0.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
I’m not claiming you are one, but generally pretentious movie snobs think Avatar was terrible. Yes, the primary story arch was unoriginal. But the truth is, for most watchers that can immerse themselves into a movie with great moving story telling and mind blowing revolutionary visuals, the movie was an all new, very enjoyable experience.
I liked Avatar. Yes, it is Pocahontas / Dances with Wolves version 2.0, but’s a damn entertaining version. No, it’s not Shawshank Redemption or Inception, but no one should expect it to be. It’s however the only release to date that I’ve ever thought was worth paying extra to see in 3-D.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I thought the movie was bad and don’t consider myself a pretentious movie snob. Movies are not something that can be universally agreed on.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
Fair enough. I’ll agree completely on tastes of anything, it completely depends on the person. You can however get a decent general consensus (not that means anything outside of being what it is) of how the general internet browsing public felt about the movie through IMDb.com’s rating system. 264,374 votes is a larger sample size than you can find anywhere else, and it can be broken down into demographics as well. Anyway, it averages an 8.3 out of 10, which I’d say is just about right, for me. But again, that number means nothing outside of being an average for those 264k+ people.
But yeah, some movies simply are not other peoples taste, completely understandable. I, for example, usually dislike romantic comedies or ‘chick flicks’. The only genres I won’t give a try unless their very highly touted, even then I often don’t like them.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I agree with you there. chick flicks generally aren’t particularly good. There are movies that are able to incorporate romance and comedy but still be good.
there are very few Rom-Coms nowadays that are good. The notebook, I admit was good.
the problem is these films fail to be original. There are good ones (Amelie, Eternal Sunshine, Punch Drunk Love, Lars and the real girl, etc…) but they are just drowned out by the crap
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Chick flicks are a hit or miss. Some I love, but some suck. They’re getting worse as time goes on, though.
emily522 - October 4, 2010
I agree. There are only a few true ‘chick flicks’ in the past decade that were good. there were good Rom-Coms (like 40 year old virgin, eternal sunshine) but very few fit into the ‘chick flick’ formula (Vicky Christina Barcelona did and that was good)
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Eternal Sunshine isn’t a Romantic Comedy.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
Suspense all the way.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
It’s difficult to classify, though if I had to slap a label on it, I’d say it has more in common with magical realist films than anything.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
eternal sunshine is something of a whole other crappy, pretentious variety.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
you probably won’t be surprised, but I really like that movie.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
So do I.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
it is considered by IMDB a ‘romantic movie’ and some websites consider it a Rom-Com. However, its definitely not a chick flick (which is a subgenre of rom-com) and is a highly atypical rom-com if you consider it that. I personally consider it a romantic drama with a bit of comedy splashed in.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Those websites are wrong.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
That’s where you’re wrong Roger. You’re either a pretentious movie snob or a drooling fanboy. There is no in between.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
I guess I’m a pretentious movie snob than.
North Coast Flea - October 6, 2010
I have no problem with liking movies simply because they are entertaining. I enjoy plenty of movies my more pretentious friends scoff at simply because they are entertaining. But the reaction from a large group of people was that Avatar was the greatest thing since sliced bread. It looked great, it had some cool battle scenes, but it is not and should not be considered one of the best movies ever.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
also, I think Avatar was terrible because I don’t really care about 3d or special effects, I’d rather watch a good story. Avatar’s story had me bored for the entire movie. but that’s just my preference.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
This is how I feel. I don’t care about special effects and did not find the movie entertaining.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
I do care about special effects. It’s not that I care when their not there (because I don’t), but I’m willing to admit they can add to an experience to make it more enjoyable.
Examples: Pulp Fiction, in my top 5, special effect are minimum, still has amazing dialog, acting, and storytelling. Fight Club, also top 5, some special effects, amazing dialog, acting, and storytelling, but that final scenes effect is terrible looking, still incredible. Inception, also top 5, amazing special effects make the dialog, acting, and storytelling that much more enjoyable. In fact, Nolan himself has stated in wouldn’t have been possible to do the movie with out the effects of today.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I totally agree with this point. Personally, I am somewhat indifferent to the movie. I just think it was vastly overrated, over-talked about. I just came in with ridiculous expectations.
While the first time i watched it, it somewhat lived up to the expectations, once I saw it without the 3D, i didn’t care much for it. I actually payed attention to the story then more than the graphics. And I agree with what you said below, i would rather watch a good story (like the hurt locker)
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Your own expectations are just that, your own.
If you let your own prior expectations affect how you feel about your first viewing experience of a film, you have no one but yourself to blame (for that specific affect).
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
somewhat true. However, with the way the media portrayed it, how every single person said you have to see avatar (even more so than from what I remember about inception), its hard to not get some expectations out of that and just completely ignore it all.
I think the problem for me was the fact that the first time it did live up to my expectations, but outside of 3D it didn’t.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I completely understand and accept that you are NOT one of those pretentious movie snob pricks that love to ruin fun movies just so they seem like their superior. That said, THIS is precisely the way that they want to portray Avatar fans as, when that’s complete bullsh*-. In fact, I don’t know anyone at all, whatsoever who feels like that about Avatar. In fact, I’d say I personally know much more people with the opinion that they are too good to go see Avatar, their above ‘it’ somehow, better than ‘that.’
The truth is most Avatar fans like the movie because it’s fun, entertaining, even moving at times, all the while you get to look at ground breaking visuals (Not a requirement for a good movie by any means, but it certainly doesn’t hurt.)
Lastly, all this nonsense about Avatar fans committing suicide or going into deep depression is just dumb. I’m sure every block buster in the history of this country has caused one or two already insane people to go off the edge. They reach broad audiences.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
different people have different experiences I guess. Most people I know thought it was absolutely amazing and deserved an oscar.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I don’t much care about the Oscars, but The Hurt Locker is out of Avatar’s league in terms of writing.
If there’s an award for visuals though, Avatar deserves it, that part of the movie is absolutely amazing.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
can’t argue with that.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
+10000000000
bross09 - October 4, 2010
By the way, did any one see Paranormal Activity? I loved that movie. I could never really gauge the popular opinion on that one. Some loved it, some hated it.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
It was somewhat decent. Not that great in my opinion. I watched it alone in bed at night, was slightly nerved, but not that scary.
I purposely avoid horror flicks in the theater, I cannot be scared in a theater full of people.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I saw it in the theater. Great experience IMO. It wasn’t scary, per say, but I jumped a couple times. So I’d call it suspenseful.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
This. I generally don’t “hate” a movie. I like almost any movie I see so long as it entertains me for 2 hours.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
I can agree with this, but only it’s not exactly a ‘common’ occurrence. I’m also pretty selective about the movies I pay money see, while still managing to see about 2 or so a month.
I check a few (non-spoiler) reviews, IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, that kind of thing first.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Because I enjoy most movies, I usually (usually) leave the theater happy. If I don’t think I’ll like it I of course don’t see it (ex. The Last Airbender, Funny People).
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
funny people was actually pretty brilliant for a comedy.
However, the last Airbender I would NEVER see (the show is actually decent…I just think Shamalan lost his touch a while back)
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I too usually leave the theater happy. But more so because I’ll do a fair amount of research before I see a movie. I usually stick to matinees too.
I actually sometimes leave pretty disappointed if I see a movie on impulse. Ex: A few friends convinced me to see Predators with them on a Sunday night. It was decent at best, and $7.50 instead of my usual $4 matinee. I wasn’t happy about it at all.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Anyone who thought Avatar was bad should watch
. Hell I even tell people who thought it was good to check it out, not that they’ll listen to anything that is said. The review is funny as hell though either way.North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
Well that was a stupid failure on my part. I meant to link to Redlettermedia.com
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
Spill.com is kind of like that, only it’s actually funny and their reviews are good.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
To each his own, I find the Plinkett reviews rather funny.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
I totally agree. The only way it was worthwhile is seeing it in 3D.
However, I can watch most decent movies once, but I can’t sit through 3 hours of avatar again, even if its in 3D. the plot is too boring and cheesy.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I’ve seen it three times. First in a regular theater, then in 3-D. The final time was about 1 month later, I drove with some family to see it in IMAX 3-D. When we got there we found that their IMAX theater was having issues, but we could see it in regular 3-D. Having drove 2 hours, my sister was pissed. She complained and the manager let us all see it for free, there were 6 of us. Needless to say I enjoyed it each time.
The first time was the best, but the second time (first in 3-D) was really good too. Just very entertaining throughout, never thought it had any slow parts, not at all boring at any point.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I like the old school 3D better…friday the 13th 3d, spacehunter, metalstorm, jaws 3d, treasure of the four crowns, parasite, Amityville 3d…etc.
johnnyphoenix - October 4, 2010
I never really watched any of them. (Too young at 21.)
But generally, I very much dislike 3-D. Until they have technology where I can watch a movie in 3-D without the annoying glasses, I’ll usually pass. As I mentioned above, Avatar is only movie I’ve ever thought was worth 3-D.
However, you are the first person I’ve heard say that the oldschool 3D was better. (Referring to the red/blue paper glasses right?)
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
No…Red and Blue was anaglyph. Im talking about stereoscopic…which was much costlier and difficult to do than the digitalized 3d we see today…but clearer and brighter. You used clear glasses for those.
johnnyphoenix - October 4, 2010
Today’s 3-D technology actually uses circularly polarized light to produce stereoscopic image projection. I’m not sure about the exact differences between this and the older technology, but I did see a possible slight loss in brightness mentioned, however also mentioning stronger projection lamps are used to compensate.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Michael Jackson movie at Disneyland?
rufio - October 5, 2010
I have watched other stuff in 3D with this new 3D technology. While I am not a huge fan of Avatar, it is by far the best movie that has come out in 3D. I watched toy story 3 in 3D (after seeing it in regular) and I didn’t think it enhanced the movie AT ALL.
The problem I feel with avatar is because it was shot specifically with 3D cameras, that it loses a lot in 2D.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Personally, I really liked seeing (and enjoying) it in a regular theater, then seeing it in 3-D a few weeks later. It was great to see the scenes enhanced, compared to what it was.
However, I can see the other way around being a huge disappointment.
Either way, 3-D for the most part will always suck until you no longer have to wear glasses.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I agree about the glasses part.
The disappointment is the whole thing. the first time it almost lived up to the ridiculous expectations, but once I saw it outside of 3D, it was disappointing.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I disagree. I found it had many slow parts. I saw it once in 3D the first time and it was amazing. I saw it again when my sister rented it from redbox and we watched it on our 36’’ HDTV at home. While this isn’t a movie theater, it still gives you a decent picture of what it would be like without 3D.
My sister fell asleep an hour in (partly because of the movie and partly b/c she was extremely tired) and I just turned it off and we ended up returning it because she really didn’t care to see the whole thing. Honestly, it wasn’t anything special when you just watch it at home.
I watched the hurt locker on a 13" computer and that was better than watchign Avatar on a HDTV. Just why I now think it really wasn’t one of the best pictures of the year.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
If it wasn’t a blu-ray then your wasting your 36’’ HDTV. DVD’s are not 1080p. You might already be aware of that, just saying.
I watched an HD rip of The Hurt Locker on my 56’’ HDTV from an external harddrive I have hooked up to my Xbox 360. It was a great movie, definitely better than Avatar, also a good movie.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I forgot I also watched part of it at my friends house on a 50" HDTV (somewhere in the 50s at least) and on blu ray. It was definitely better than my TV, but it was only pretty good in my opinion.
Yeah, I loved hurt locker. I usually make the comparison because best picture was considered a 2 man race last year between the two.
I don’t ‘hate’ avatar like many might, I just am not a huge fan and I guess didn’t feel like it exceeded the expectations set for it.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I honestly think it gets flack just because people have this false perception that others think it’s the greatest thing ever. Like, purposely hating it more because it’s getting what they consider undeserved praise, like they need to make up for that and out weight with their own hate perhaps.
I think some of them (no one here) have never even seen the movie, and love to call it garbage. It’s a good movie for many, it’s not the best or worst thing ever.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I agree that some people probably hate it without having actually seen it. I think they do misrepresent it a little bit.
However, I think I saw it as a lot of people though it was the best movie of the year (but not all time) but I just disagreed. Your opinions on it are pretty much what I thought many thought of it before I saw it.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I prefer VHS to DVD and Blueray.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
the difference in quality between any of them isn’t big enough to be important to me.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
VHS to Blu-Ray is a freaking world of difference. Hell, even DVD to Blu-Ray is a huge jumps. For me, it was once I hit Blu-Ray I couldn’t go back. Same with VHS to DVD.
It just looks so incredible, there’s no reason not to buy the Blu-Rays. Also, the price difference is insignificant these days.
All that said, I don’t buy a lot of movies. Pirating being the cheaper option. I usually just get my favorites every so often.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I don’t mean to say there isn’t a difference, I just don’t consider it significant.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
This. There’s obviously a difference in picture quality, but the difference isn’t enough to worry about for me. As long as it’s letterboxed, I’m good.
The price difference is huge though. You can get VHS lots on ebay for as little as a quarter a tape. I get a hell of a lot more mileage out of 100 sci-fi films or 100 french films for 50 bucks than I would 2 or 3 movies on Blue Ray.
The biggest issue I have with DVDs and Blue Ray is how fragile they are. I have VHS tapes that I bought in 1985 that still work and still look as good as when I bought them. I’ve had DVDs that didn’t work when brand new.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
I don’t buy movies, I download them. Illegal yes, but I feel no remorse.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
Nor should you. Their response should have been less hostile. The only real way to fight piracy is to lower prices. Until they start to do that, I really don’t care that these suits can’t buy another solid gold toilet seat.
Also, it’s actually the sharing (not the downloading) that they sue people for.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I know about the sharing part, which is why I don’t share. Yes, I’m one of those people.
The best part is, I can download a movie in 1080p and hook my laptop up to my TV with an HDMI cord. Pretty sweet.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
Yup, my brother does most of the downloading and with our set up, he puts them on a 1 TB external harddrive that we have hooked up to an Xbox 360, which is of course plugged into the TV via HDMI.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
look, I’ve downloaded my fair share of crap from the internet, but stealing is stealing.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
I support all the artists I’m truly devoted to in some financial way. (The distributors, wholesalers, labels, and middlemen, not so much.) That said, it’s hard for me to ethically differentiate between buying VHS tapes at the local thrift store from downloading a torrent. Either way, no one involved with the production of content makes any money.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
The difference is that they probably already made money off the tapes and nothing from the download.
North Coast Flea - October 5, 2010
But if I’m definitively not going to be the one paying that initial cost of said new product, what difference does choosing between the two make, ethically?
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
this works for you because not everyone does it. you’re right that if you buy it at a thrift store the original producer doesn’t make any money, so it’s not ethically different.
The problem is that you are relying on the fact that other people will still pay to see movies. Piracy only works as long as other people are willing to foot the bill. If everyone pirated, quality movies would cease being made, because there wouldn’t be anyone to provide money to the producer of the content.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
Good thing we’ll always have you, right?
Now go to the movie theatre and see Grown Ups so I can download it for free and eat popcorn I didn’t buy ;D
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
when did I ever say I paid for movies? I’m just not under any illusion that what I do is ethical.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
You calling someone unethical here, friend? < grin >
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
This is very true. If piracy gets to that point, there won’t be good movies to watch. However, I don’t think it is anywhere near close to that point right now and most people still see movies in theaters.
I personally see most movies by way of theater/dvd rental but see the movies I kinda want to see but don’t want to pay for (like hot tub time machine) online. This is also how the people I know who watch these movies do it.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
I believe you missed where I said:
I vote with my dollars, what I have of them. A new Cronenberg comes out, I’m either seeing it in a theater or buying it on DVD 90% of the time.
OTOH, when I download a copy of the remake of ROLLERBALL, no one benefits. No one was going to either way I obtained it, and frankly no one deserved to either.
As they used to say, home taping is killing the music industry – so keep doing it!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
If you watched their movie, they deserve to benefit from it. The excuse that people “only pay for what they like” just doesn’t make sense. If you don’t like it, why are you watching? you wanted to be entertained, and they provided that entertainment. just because it wasn’t one of your favorite movies ever doesn’t mean you shouldn’t support them.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
Did you happen to see that ROLLERBALL remake? I for one, sir, was most definitely NOT entertained.
If someone serves me a steaming pile of dog droppings disguised as a steak, I do not consider it my social obligation to smilingly pay them a handsome sum for that most putrid meal.
I routinely pay for art from people I respect, even though I could easily get it all for free. If I’m lucky, I have a means of giving them the money directly and cutting out all the hangers-on and douchebags between me and the true artist. I am alone in the world? I hope not. Bless Kickstarter and every artist who will directly sell me their material, of which I will gleefully partake and for whom I will gleefully dish out support.
Regardless, this whole conversation seems very five years ago. The cat is long out of the bag, having slipped out to breed with the Savannah next store and fostered two full generations of wild and unstoppabley creative kittens. The conventional music industry is dying, film is next, and I for one will dance on their pathetic graves. Viva la independence!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
Nobody served you Rollerball. You decided to watch it. If you think it’s going to suck — and we all knew Rollerball was going to suck — then don’t watch it. If you decide something is going to be entertaining enough to watch, which you did, then its creators deserve something.
My mom is a professional author, and her books are all over the Pirate Bay. When somebody posts her new book, that’s a lot of money right out of her pocket. Anybody that reads her book for free off that site is essentially saying that she doesn’t deserve anything for the year of her life she spent working on it and the enjoyment they got out of it.
You’re right that the cat’s out of the bag on piracy, but that doesn’t make it morally right. It’s still stealing. You can try to justify it to yourself by saying you “support the artists you really respect,” but you’re still consuming content from all those other artists and not giving them squat. If you really think they don’t deserve anything at all, then don’t consume their content. That’s why I didn’t see Rollerball.
When the film industry dies, there won’t be any movies left. Great. When the publishing industry dies, there won’t be any books left. Great. We’ll have to dance on their graves, because there won’t be anything else to do with our free time.
Chemo - October 5, 2010
I ordered a meal, sure, but what I received was completely inedible.
I can’t have a serious discussion in which we argue that anyone involved with the ROLLERBALL remake should get extra residual compensation, except perhaps extremely tangentially William Harrison, whose short story collection sits on my bookshelf.
Lame examples aside and in all seriousness, I can see you take this subject personally. Fair enough. Call me a thief if you like, I’m not here to argue my moral superiority; I sleep fine at night, and the artists whose works have made a substantial impact in my life hopefully do the same in part because of my financial support.
You do realize that the Industry and the art are not the same thing, right? You do realize that people don’t need the Industry to make films or write books, right? You do realize that the world is full of people making art because that’s just what they do, right? You do realize that depending on the Industry to help make your art support you or at least itself is only one way to approach things, right?
Eff the Industry. I hope your mom has a strong public presence, not controlled by her publisher, and that it’s easy for readers to support her directly. If I read her stuff and liked it, I’d be doing the same. How much does she make on a single copy of one of her books, anyway, and how much goes to the Industry?
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 6, 2010
Bingo.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
I totally agree with the premise. I will always go see a coen brothers movie in theater or something with Daniel Day lewis.
Let the people that like to see your average movie in theaters like a hot tub time machine or that one movie with ferrell and wahlberg where they are cops. I have standards for what I pay to see, but when there is something I really want to see, I will ALWAYS see it in theaters
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Woah, there. The Other Guys was funny as hell.
StuckInPa - October 5, 2010
I didn’t see it so I can’t judge. It looked like an average to above average comedy. those I generally watch on redbox, online, or from the library.
Maybe I will like it.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Quite funny.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
If I had a dollar for every dollar I’ve handed David Cronenberg over the years, I’d have a lot of dollars.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
Long live the New Flesh.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 6, 2010
This is fantastic!
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
Same here.
Granted, though, as NCF points out, at least with the VHS tape the content creators and rights holders got paid once. I see buying used VHS tapes as not at all different from renting a movie (and in fact, the majority of tapes I buy are rental copies; copies that video stores paid a handsome premium for).
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
It’s a good point, although it gets into a pretty nuanced set of ethical determiners based around the speculative actions of previous parties in transactions one wasn’t a party to. I’m reminded of Freegan supermarket dumpster diving; is it ethically dubious because it’s really just relying on the tainted fruits of a system they pretend to reject?
Way way OT here, but an interesting tangent.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 7, 2010
Must we bring up the horse again?
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I think it’s too late to close the barn door on this one.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
There’s a Redbox on every street corner now. New releases are a dollar. Just sayin’.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
No one uploads the movies I want. All that’s ever available is a bunch of shit you can buy in the checkout at WalMart.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
Do you know what torrents are? I suggest thepiratebay.com . I’m not sure what kind of movies you’re looking for though. You seem like you’d like uncommon movies.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
I use demonoid.com
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
When I was searching for a torrent site they weren’t accepting new registrations. Pirate Bay is amazing. I find just about any movie I need.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
This.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
I’ve looked there. Nothing of interest.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
UTorrent baby.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
RapidShare. Anything you want is available, you just got to know how to find it.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I’d rather not have to create a username to download content. That’s why I like Pirate Bay.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
My brother pays like $2 a month (really not much at all) and doesn’t have to deal with p2p nonsense. The servers are owned by RapidShare and he pays for premium download speeds. He can get a 1080p movie rip in about 11 minutes.
Best part is he can literally get anything he wants in terms of movies, television, programs, games, ect…
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
This direct through RapidShare? I do some downloading there and they are not a bad resource….
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
I use btjunkie.org.
Piratebay seems a little unsafe to me.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I’ve picked up some long out of print albums off of rapidshare. It’s been the most consistent source of the kind of stuff I’m looking for.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
You might just be looking in the wrong places. I mean, like a good game stream, you do have to look a bit, but where else save an imported DVD and a region-free player was I ever going to lay hands on the long unedited version of THE LEGEND OF 1900?
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
FYI: Most DVD players can be modified to make them region free. My player has a hidden menu for setting the region.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
There’s definitely a huge cost savings in buying ‘obsolete’ media formats. i still buy VHS for just that reason, especially for the resident youth demographic. Some of the DVD bonus features are truly value added, though.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 5, 2010
This I can agree with.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
Alternate endings and significant deleted footage from a favorite film will send me scurrying off for DVDs every time.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 6, 2010
DVD extras are hit and miss for me. Criterion does a good job of adding value through extras, but I can’t really think of any other company that you can count on for quality material.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
Then again, Blu ray you only see that difference when you are comparing Blu Ray to a normal DVD on an HDTV.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I don’t know how true this is, but I’ve read that there’s literally zero difference in picture quality between a BlueRay player and an upconvert DVD player on screens smaller than 40".
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
that may be true. however, I have only watched Blue Ray on a 50 inch TV and I definitely could tell the difference.
bross09 - October 6, 2010
Really? I thought when you weren’t on DBN we could find you at the Globe.
Western Reserve - October 4, 2010
You’re going to have to explain this one to me. Over my head, apparently.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
I assume it’s a reference to Shakespeare, but I’m not sure what it has to do with you.
Buckeye Brad - October 5, 2010
Yes. Too obscure and not especially funny. Just in regards to golan favoring VHS over Blu-ray, figured he might next expound the virtues of live theater over magical boxes that derive their images from space.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
well, live theater IS great, but thats a different story…
bross09 - October 5, 2010
But is it as good as a discussion on theoretical physics, or Betamax versus Blu-ray?
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
Hell no it isn’t.
North Coast Flea - October 5, 2010
Got it.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
I didn’t like either movie all that much. I thought Hangover was ok but not as funny as people made it out to be. I fell asleep during Avatar.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
I agree about the Hangover.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
Opinions, tastes, blah blah ect….
But falling asleep in a movie theater, during a really loud movie? I understand it’s dark, and maybe comfortable, but man, the speakers in my town’s theater are loud as hell! No way I could ever fall asleep during action movie (due to noise alone).
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Not the theater at home. It was around the part where they started flying on the bird things.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
Ok, that’s much more understandable.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I think thats where my sister fell asleep too…Coincidence?
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Hangover was good. Even better was Hot Tub Time Machine. And even better than that was Get Him to the Greek.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
I’m generally not a big fan of the “Judd Apatow crowd” films. (Didn’t find Funny People funny at all.) But I’ll give GHttG a try if I get around to it.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I actually never saw Funny People. Just didn’t seem at all interesting to me.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
while funny people wasn’t Laugh out Loud funny (it wasn’t supposed to be…unlike the hangover), it was that smart brand of comedy that I love about the apatow stuff that Judd has more of a hand in (like Knocked up and 40 year old virgin). While it doesn’t have as many laugh out loud moments, both are more smart comedies and the humor comes from the situations. Funny people, IMO, is the more sophisticated Apatow (almost apatow trying to be woody allen IMO, but no one can be woody allen)
bross09 - October 4, 2010
thank god most people don’t want to be woody allen
troy145 - October 4, 2010
I mean in person, I totally agree.
I wish there were more filmmakers that had his amazing ability to write a screenplay.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
MEH
troy145 - October 5, 2010
get him to the greek sucked
i got suckered in because Forgetting Sarah Marshall was an instant classic
troy145 - October 4, 2010
I disagree 100%. Not that thats going to change your opinion though.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
thatd be crazy if it did though lol
troy145 - October 5, 2010
Both sucked.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Hot Tub was funny, but I’m not a fan of Russel Brand or Jonah Hill so I didn’t care to see the Greek.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
I love Russel Brand which is why I saw it to begin with.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
I don’t know who any of these people are.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
English guy with big, long hair. Hosted the VMAs once. He played in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Bedtime Stories.
Youtube him.
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
I just googled them both. It’s the first I’ve ever seen or heard of Brand. Jonah Hill I do know, I just didn’t know his name.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
Hill played the security guard in Night at the Museum 2, was in Funny People, Knocked Up…
Basically any Judd Apatow film.
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
I want to see Hot Tube based on some things I’ve heard. I agree about Hill, his sense of humor, and the general "Judd Apatow crowd" humor just doesn’t do it for me.
The only movie I like somewhat was Superbad, even that was often just meh.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I haven’t seen Avatar yet. From what I’ve read about it, it doesn’t sound like the kind of movie I’d like.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
Because the majority is always right, right?
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
Wright.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
Wait…I went to Case Western too but I loved the Hangover. Does that mean my horse is low?
Nuclear Power - October 4, 2010
There’s nothing wrong with dick and fart jokes.
That being said, The Hangover wasn’t very good. The dick and fart jokes were mostly lame, the characters were uninteresting and unlikeable, and the story forgettable.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
i wasn’t trying to say there was anything inherently wrong with dick and fart jokes, but those weren’t so much jokes as people trying to say the stupidest thing they could think of.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I agree. there is only one line I like and it was ‘they gave out rings in the holocaust?’. I was never a fan of the characters and I kinda hate the idea that one character, doug, gets absolutely no development at all. I think Justin Bartha is a solid, up and coming actor, but he got no chance to do much of anything because he was on a rooftop for 90% of the movie.
the asian guy was a nice addition though IMO, but thats it.
Then again, how much more can you expect from the guy who created School for Scoundrels, Old School, and remade Planes, Trains, and Automobiles.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
The asian guy was a low point for me.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I guess I disagree with you there. Ken Jeong is really funny in general and I thought that was one of the few monents that were truly funny.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Part of the reason I loved that part is because of the actor. I watch Community (I’ve yet to get started on this season, thank you Hulu) and he is great.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
thats part of the reason I loved it too.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
It makes me sad that The Big Bang Theory has like, three times as many viewers as Community. That show is almost as underrated as Arrested Development. Well, not really, but still.
Adrock2099 - October 5, 2010
Anyone that doesn’t like The Big Bang Theory is ok in my book. That show is complete crap.
Monsters of the Midway - October 5, 2010
It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia is the only sitcom worth watching.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
funniest show since Seinfeld, hands down. probably my favorite overall show right now.
Dawg Nuts - October 5, 2010
Poop is funny.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
It is definitely high on my list. Right now, I am really into a lot of the hour long dramas. Finally am about to catch up on Dexter, Mad Men is awesome…plus, I finally started watching the sopranos which I had been meaning to watch for years.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Love it
Roger Dorn - October 5, 2010
It’s Always Sunny was great for the first three episodes I watched, and then every episode since has been the same episode over and over again. Danny Devito really hurt it.
Big Bang Theory isn’t amazing, but it’s witty and has the occasional brilliant nerd joke. A perfectly acceptable show.
Community is incredibly average. I like the actors, but the scripts are very meh. Being overly self-referential got old quick. Comparing it to Arrested Development, in my opinion, is absurd.
Chemo - October 5, 2010
I feel about the same. I wouldn’t go out of my way to see it, but I ’m somewhat diverted if I happen to catch it.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 6, 2010
I totally agree. I watch a lot of my TV online because I hate starting in the middle of a show. I watch Big Bang Theory when i want some nice comedy and have 20 minutes to kill.
bross09 - October 6, 2010
Danny DeVito makes everything better. It’s true because I say it is. No matter, there wouldn’t have been many more than three episodes had DeVito not joined the cast. His name is what got the show renewed.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
I think the big bang theory is okay. I think according to what Adrock says it probably gets too many viewers. However, I am nerdy enough to sometimes understand what they are saying.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
I understand nearly all of it and I don’t like it. It seems really forced. That plus the token “hot chick” makes me feel like they’re just pandering.
Adrock2099 - October 6, 2010
yeah. Not a huge fan of the token hot chick.
I don’t think it sounds forced…maybe because the jokes are slightly abnormal for a sitcom, it seems forced in the format. However, I actually like the geekiness of it. its the inner geek inside of me.
bross09 - October 6, 2010
I watch them both. Is that ok?
StuckInPa - October 5, 2010
No show is as underrated as Arrested Development…well, maybe Freaks and Geeks
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Arrested Development has gotten its recognition.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
I think they were talking about at the time. Its hard to compare a show thats been off the air for several years for one thats on the air currently.
To me, the comparison felt like he was saying community gets the kind of underrated recognition that AD got.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Arrested Development was a lot like Family Guy during its original run. No one watched it, then after it got canceled people finally found out about it.
Adrock2099 - October 6, 2010
but then family guy came back and sucked…thats not completely fair, they had a couple good seasons.
If they brought back AD, I doubt it would suck. The writing was purely incredible. It is one of the only shows where I have to watch it 2-3 times to get all the jokes.
bross09 - October 6, 2010
ditto.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
I think one of the biggest humps for comedy is timing. At least for myself to literally laugh out loud, the material / comedian needs to have great comedic timing. The Hangover’s comedic timing was spot one. I had the most laughs in years watching that. First time I ever saw was in a log cabin on a hunting trip. I watched it at around 2 am, everyone else was sleeping. Suffering from insomnia, I brought my laptop and days worth of movies I hadn’t seen. I put on my headphones and watched it, no alcohol involved. I actually woke up my brother from my audible laughter during this movie.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Sometimes that can be pretty close to alcohol in it’s effect on perception.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
It’s very possible that affected my perception of the movie. I do find myself laughing more often at night when I’m tired but can’t sleep.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
you are right about the timing. It does have good comedic timing, however most of the jokes aren’t that good IMO. Comedic timing can get you only so far and a movie can still not be that funny even if it has comedict timing. just like a movie that has a great script can still suck because of stiff acting, timing is only part of the process.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Has anyone seen The Social Network? By looking at the trailer I thought it would suck, but it’s getting universal acclaim. On Yahoo the lowest grade is an A- and it has a 97% on Rotten Tomatoes.
emily522 - October 4, 2010
I usually go to metacritic because of how they create an aggregate score of critics opinions. I have heard its good too. Its all about the people who created it and their interactions together.
I had a feeling it would be good because the writer, Aaron Sorkin is brilliant and has written such great dramas as Charlie Wilson’s War, A Few Good Men, and pretty much all of The West Wing.
the director is also brilliant, david fincher, and has directed movies like Fight Club, Se7en, Zodiac, and Benjamin Button (the direction and pitt were the only bright spots in that movie).
There is no way that team could completely flop…and then you add jesse eisenberg.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Haven’t yet seen it, but have been enjoying the Trent Reznor \ Atticus Ross score. I don’t think any movie Fincher has touched is really bad, so my hopes fro the film are high.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
I agree about Fincher. I wasn’t a big fan of Benjamin Button, but because of him and pitt (like i said) it wasn’t bad. i thought the concept was terrible, the story was stupid, and the writing felt just like Forrest Gump (coincidence it was the SAME WRITER??).
I can’t wait for it though. Didn’t realize Reznor did the score.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Agreed. Fincher is a fantastic director.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I saw it and really enjoyed it. I also thought the trailer was one of the best trailers I’ve ever seen, up there with the lead trailer for “Where the Wild Things Are.” Of course, WWTA sucked.
But Social Network is good.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
I’m excited to see it. I love most of David Fincher’s work. (see Fight Club, Se7en, Curious Case…Button)
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
I just got back from seeing The Social Network. It was fantastic. Fincher has done it again.
Simmsinns - October 5, 2010
I will be seeing it, just not sure how soon.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
I want to see it, but haven’t made it to the theater yet. Sounds like it might be interesting.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
You kinda need to understand facebook first…
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
If that’s true, it’s probably a pretty shitty movie.
golanbatrac - October 6, 2010
Exactly, which is why I won’t be seeing it.
Also, Timberlake stars in it. You would definitely hate it.
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
Timberlake is not only a good actor, but he can be funny as hell.
StuckInPa - October 6, 2010
I didn’t say I didn’t like him, he probably does.
Dude is a great actor though and I’m amazed he’s good in the funny business as well.
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
He was hilarious on Weekend Update a couple years ago. And before people jump on me that SNL sucks, I agree, I was at work and it was the only thing to do there.
North Coast Flea - October 6, 2010
Apparently I watch some pretty sucky shows. Whatever, they keep me entertained.
StuckInPa - October 6, 2010
SNL these days gets the Godfather part III treatment.
SNL during the 70s was amazing. With that cast from the late 80s to about 1995, they were amazing. The people before the mots recent cast (save jimmy fallon who sucks) were solid. its the expectation. Some people say Godfather III wasn’t terrible, it is just compared to 2 of the best movies of all time.
bross09 - October 7, 2010
I find a very rarely agree with anybody’s opinions on movies or TV shows around here.
And why are you talking about SNL in the 70s and 80s?
StuckInPa - October 7, 2010
I am just saying some people thinks SNL sucks by comparison. I think its a solid show.
The problem with a lot of things is when people come in and are looking to make a comparison or have heightened expectations. in those cases, they often get disappointed. SNL at face value is definitely a solid show.
bross09 - October 7, 2010
Yeah I grew up on SNL of the late 80’s/early 90’s, I’m a little spoiled by that and expect better from Lorne. Plus I can’t stand Seth Meyers or Andy Samberg.
North Coast Flea - October 7, 2010
I don’t mind either one. Samberg has this vibe about him that he is kinda full of himself.
I do like Meyers though. I thought he was hilarious at the ESPYs and he is one of the better weekend update anchors in recent memory IMO.
I was raised on the SNL of the Will Ferrell era but have watched those late 80s SNL seasons.
One guy I think is really underrated right now on the show is Sudeikis.
bross09 - October 8, 2010
I doubt that you need to have any special knowledge of Facebook to enjoy the movie.
Also: Justin Timberlake didn’t ruin Black Snake Moan, so I’m largely unconcerned.
golanbatrac - October 7, 2010
You can sit down to see this movie knowing NOTHING about Facebook and enjoy it. (Although that’s rare considering it’s the most visited website in the world now and has over 500 million registered users.) That’s beside the point though. Don’t let any feelings on Facebook decide whether or not you see this. Facebook is just the invention. It’s the story behind that invention, and the controversy surrounding it that is the subject of this film.
Simmsinns - October 7, 2010
You both are making a terrible mistake. The movie is fantastic. Intense, funny, absolutely brilliant.
David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin have done something truly great here. The acting is also great.
I’m almost torn whether or not I enjoyed it more than Inception. It’s like apples and oranges, but I’d give the movie of the year nod to Inception by a hair.
Simmsinns - October 7, 2010
Haha, Chuck Siesel (sp) flipped the refs the bird. That’s hilarious.
Simmsinns - October 3, 2010
That bird may cost him a nice six-figures. Goddell approves not at all.
DisplacedBuckeye - October 4, 2010
Yeah, it was definitely a dumb move financially, but it’s still funny, actually more funny.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
In other news… If anyone wants a good laugh, go over to Cincy Jungle and just read the Bengal’s fans’ comments in the post game thread.
It was pretty funny to me, the refs completely blew the game (according to all but maybe 4 of them). And pay special attention to all the times people are called trolls and for what reasons. I felt like someone was going to jump through my computer screen, slap me in the face, and call me a troll just for reading the posts.
Oh, and bross is posting over there, too. Prepare to be entertained.
shep615 - October 4, 2010
uhhhhh the reffy guys losted us the game!
bross09 - October 4, 2010
You should probably chill out over there, btw… Let them have their cry fest. We’d all be pissed if we lost and some Bengals fan came in here trying to start arguments.
shep615 - October 4, 2010
true, true.
I didn’t come over there specifically to start arguments, but its funny when someone has a cry fest how quickly arguments get started.
I point out one thing that tackles themselves do not tell the whole story, and they bitch and moan that I am saying all their players suck.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I thought the refs made several calls that were bad against both teams.
If they want to whine about calls, Palmer was false starting the whole game.
rufio - October 4, 2010
I found it weird that Baby jumped so violently twice.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
I know they were saying Palmer is good at the hard count. However, it is hard for me to believe that on 2 consecutive plays, a great player and veteran like Rogers would jump offsides. Maybe there isn’t anything there, but its just so puzzling that he did it twice.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Hard count ≠ simulating a snap. Palmer was simulating.
rufio - October 4, 2010
Simulating means you match the motions to a snap right? Like a center rolling his hips before a snap?
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
The head bob by a QB, a quick twitch back by the QB, any motion that is a flinch by the offense as though the snap were made.
rufio - October 4, 2010
plus, the unsportsmanlike conduct against Watson for doing something thats done on just about every TD, but no call when TO puts the ball down on the goal line, walks away, and does a little dance.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I agree, there were bad calls both directions. The flag on Watson after the TD was bogus.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Crap would’ve gone down if they’d of done that in Green Bay.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Good win Browns
I know many people were actually calling this one. Browns are better than their record, and Bengals, although have a good defense, are not as good as many think. Nice win.
worldtrip - October 4, 2010
Here is a good pic of the hit.
You can see the helmets are about to hit, but this shows that Ward wasn’t leading with his helmet. He went shoulder into the chest, just like I am sure the coaches have told him to do it.
Bernie19Kosar - October 4, 2010
Also shows he wasn’t looking and had no clue Shipley dropped the ball and that if Shipley was upright like he was, it would’ve been a cut and dry legal chest hit.
The head injury was sustained from the ground not Ward.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Thanks for this.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
This photo makes it pretty clear
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
Rocland….you see this. This is not a dirty hit my man.
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
Someone should tweet this picture to Ward.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
are we looking at the same picture? his shoulder is planted squarely under shipley’s chin, on his facemask. also, whether he led with his helmet or not, it’s still a penalty. We can complain about how the rule sucks all we want, but that hit is a penalty.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
You are looking at this the wrong way, I don’t really know how anyone can make it anymore clear to you.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
That’s a clean hit.
golanbatrac - October 4, 2010
I’m of the opinion that the flag is right there. Maybe he was aiming at the chest, I don’t know, but the ball was already out and he put his shoulder into the guy’s chin. He was just a beat too late and too high.
Ward’s a big hitter, I’m glad he’s on our team. He just needs to pull back a bit in that situation. Hope there’s no fine.
dgcambridge - October 4, 2010
Most of us agree that the call was correct the way the rule is currently stated. The debate was whether it was a cheap shot. I think this clearly shows the intent was not to hit Shipley’s head or for Ward to lead with his own head.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
Definitely wasn’t leading with his helmet. I guess the question in my mind is whether or not Ward had time to lean off a bit. I didn’t play football, so I don’t know. Ward didn’t think so, but evidently the refs and Bengals did.
dgcambridge - October 4, 2010
That will get flagged everytime it’s just football instinct to do so by the refs.
But as a person who played football and laid some good hits as a LT, I can tell you in that amount of time, you either commit or you stand there. There is literally no such thing as slowing up or aiming.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
I agree with James Walker’s take:
dgcambridge - October 4, 2010
I agree with the part of what Ward is and needs to be, but he clearly hasn’t reviewed the hit as extensively as us. Not saying it was illegal but he indirectly gave Shipley a concussion and even then, t was clearly not late.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Or maybe he did review it extensively but just has a different opinion on what happened than you do.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Doubt it. He’s Walker.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
IMO you have to lay the wood to a receiver in that position. However, with Shipley dropping the pass and then getting hit, your right in that it will get the flag just about every time.
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
Not sure what that means. I’ve never thought there was anything wrong with his writing.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Agree…there isn’t time for slowing up. You take the best angle you can and light them up. As a former free safety in high school we received head hunter stickers on our helmets for “x-ray” shots as we like to call them on receivers. You basically try to run through the receivers body as he is catching it.
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
well as a DE I can tell you we learned real fast how to lat off the QB if we were a second late. It’s possible to pull up really fast, I’ve done it plenty of times.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
But if you can get the hit and not the flag, you take it every time. It was the location of the hit and not the timing that was flagged, was it not?
rufio - October 5, 2010
right, but if he knew he was gonna hit the guy there, he had enough time to pull up. And like I said above, while that still would have been against the rules, he wouldn’t have gotten flagged.
I can’t blame wright for doing it, but to argue that it was a clean hit is ridiculous (not that you were).
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
I guess we have different definitions of clean. It was against the rules because he hit him in the head, not because of the timing or severity of the hit—although these probably factored in to him actually getting the flag.
rufio - October 5, 2010
in my opinion anything that’s against the rules isn’t clean. I don’t really like using that phrase because it means that anything against the rules was “dirty” and that word has some different connotations attached to it. In my experience, when people say a clean hit, they mean a legal one. I’m sorry if that’s not what people were trying to say and I misinterpreted them.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
This is why we have different definitions of clean.
rufio - October 5, 2010
I don’t understand why a lot of Bengals fans don’t think Browns fans can be objective about it. If it truly was a cheap shot I think most would call it so. That being said…if they are going to fine him for the helmet to helmet fine (although he lead with his shoulder—the helmet contact seemed inadvertent) , but I don’t see it as anything other than a hard hit trying to separate him from the ball that was a bit late. Nothing intentionally ‘cheap’ about it. Grossi was right in his podcast today…with big time hitters you are occasionally going to take things like this on board…which is fine for me. If it causes future receivers to think about where he’s at when trying to catch a ball over the middle it can only be of benefit to us.
johnnyphoenix - October 4, 2010
I totally agree. On that subject, I like the fact that ward pretty much said he was just playing the game and didn’t see anything wrong. I think a statement like that can add a lot psychologically. he is already starting to create this hard-hitting persona.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Most fans have trouble being objective about their own team.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
I can admit that I would’ve wanted a flag had the teams been switched.
emily522 - October 4, 2010
I’m honest enough to admit I’m not at all objective in the heat of a game my team is playing in. You’re totally right here.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
From what I’ve read the penalty should be for a hit above the shoulders on a receiver, not helmit to helmet or leading with the helmet.
March 24, 2010
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
I am not sure objective is the right word.
rufio - October 5, 2010
Hillis is a beast
Kid Kardiac - October 4, 2010
Love it.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
Thanks. While I did modify it the original image (no text, no background) it should be credited to someone else. I don’t know who. I did this photoshopped version (added skyline, shadows, border and text) for another forum.
If anyone knows who did the original Hillis/Juggernaut please post his info. Thanks.
Kid Kardiac - October 4, 2010
Just posted this on my Facebook page.
Les Fleurs Du Mal - October 4, 2010
It shall now spread like wildfire.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
Juggernaut
I am an avid reader of this blog but never post. This picture caused me to stop that. That picture is simply amazing
GroundRuleTriple - October 4, 2010
Thank you for posting. And nice username, by the way.
Buckeye Brad - October 4, 2010
Thank you sir, i think so myself
GroundRuleTriple - October 4, 2010
Very nice, KK. Very nice indeed!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
Yay! We won!
Cool art, guy.
mooncamping - October 4, 2010
He’s not a guy friend.
SpecialBrownie - October 4, 2010
He’s not your friend pal.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
Great response to someone giving a complement.
mooncamping - October 5, 2010
How would you know?
mooncamping - October 5, 2010
…Touche.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
Nice job.
Brownsyup - October 4, 2010
BossWard Clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfoPYpC4pyY
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
a harbinger of things to come in Cleveland: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc8-gJqzWws
Les Fleurs Du Mal - October 4, 2010
Holy shit!
Props to that qb for trying to be tough and jump back up but you could tell that hit was gonna leave a mark.
Monsters of the Midway - October 4, 2010
David Clowney is going to be released by the Jets to clear room for Santonio Holmes. Who wants to bet that Mangini pushes for a waiver claim on Clowney?
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
He cleared waivers already this season.
TheDriveStillHurts - October 4, 2010
We also have Sam Aiken on our roster right now.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
David Clowney>Sam Aiken
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Speaking of which, when did Aiken get a catch? I missed the first 8 minutes of the game, so it had to have been in there.
JustBob - October 4, 2010
From watching Hard Knocks Clowney doesn’t really seem like a guy that fits the Mangini-mold.
Monsters of the Midway - October 4, 2010
Events conspired to keep me from watching this game live, so I was reducing to play by play text updates over the mobile. That said, watching the last four minutes type out as a stream of “Peyton Hillis…”, “Peyton Hillis…”, “Peyton Hillis…” was one hell of a thrill!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
All we ever get down here in WV is Pittsburgh. They didn’t even show the Cincy/Cleveland game this Sunday. Very aggrevating
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
I was lucky when I lived in WV, I was just close enough that sometimes I could get Youngstown channels, and 106.3 was part of the Browns Radio Network. So I would mute the tv and turn on the radio.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
I feel for you guys. I’m still fairly local and get more coverage than most; I have zero complaints coming.
I romanticize the old days of trying to catch the Browns games with my dad, plugging in a big piece of steel and aiming it north, hoping to (just barely) get Channel 10 out of Columbus. It usually looked like the game was happening in a snowstorm regardless of actual weather conditions. Browns Radio Network always went on for the audio, Nev Chandler and Doug Dieken all the way.
Now of course we have streams, which are in most cases an improvement. Not quite the same crazy mad scientist vibe, though.
Ah, nostalgia….
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
When I was a kid, the local tv station (Louisville, KY) would hold a contest for viewers to call in and vote each week for which game they wanted to watch. I would call and vote for the Browns over and over and over… Surprisingly (maybe?) the Browns’ game was shown more often than not.
bbstirrd - October 4, 2010
I live in Louisville as well, then and now. You have to remember Bengal fans are frontrunners as are fans of the Colts and both of those teams weren’t that great back then. Browns’ fans will always watch their team.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
when I was a kid…
….there were no Browns.
I waded through my adolescent years as a Buccaneers fan before being shown the light.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
Dark days. I swore off the entire league for years in there.
Hm, what’s the negative opposite of nostalgia….?
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
As did I.
North Coast Flea - October 4, 2010
I’m fairly hog certain that isn’t the negative opposite of nostalgia.
JustBob - October 4, 2010
rec for breaking out an old classic.
Dawg Nuts - October 5, 2010
I live near Denver. People like John Elway.
rufio - October 5, 2010
Off topic from all this, but Vick got hurt early and Pierre Thomas was inactive at the last minute for this weeks game. Both were starters for me in our fantasy league this week. Needless to say, I am getting destroyed 30 something to 90 something this week. Anybody think the Patriots kicker can get me 60pts tonight? LOL
Kimble_79 - October 4, 2010
Those two but killed me too. Not to mention that for Thomas he was still listed as questionable through the second half on ESPN’s leagues. I was and am very pissed about the Thomas crap. Vick not so much, because injuries are a part of the game.
Villeslgr - October 4, 2010
From very impressie things from Browns win -
1. How the eff are we able to run the ball so effectively with virtually no threat from the WRs? If Jake can bring some vertical threat – maybe the offense could break out.
2. Getting Seneca Wallace for a 7th round pick was an absolute steal. He is a very competent backup QB, prolly never an above average starter, but the kind of back up the good teams have.
3. Matt Roth very nice waiver wire acquisition.
realmccoy - October 4, 2010
Between Roth and Evan Moore, Mangini did a fantastic job on the waiver wire last season.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
Evan Moore needs a bigger role in our offense.
rufio - October 5, 2010
I don’t know, maybe. We already throw to the TE a lot, usually Watson.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
Our offensive personnel should be those two, Massaquoi, and 2/4 of Hillis, Vickers, Cribbs and Harrison the vast majority of the time.
We could have 4 vertical threats passing the ball, we could run all of our west coast stuff, we could run the wildcat, and we could run the hell out of the ball.
It is the biggest matchup problem we can give the other team.
rufio - October 5, 2010
Okay, yeah, that makes sense.
I just assumed Watson was doing all the TE receiving duties. I’m not sure how often they are on the field together, but I didn’t really consider that possibility for some reason.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
Watson is doing well at TE, IMO. He is definitely a stronger blocker than Moore, which is why he is getting a lot of PT.
rufio - October 6, 2010
Watson>Moore>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Royal.
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
…Royal is supposed to be on the end of that line…
SpecialBrownie - October 6, 2010
Roth, Mack, Rubin, Moore, Benard et al – the development of these players to me is the most compelling argument to keep Mangini. I am really rooting for Eric to make it, because I think he can excell in player development, and Heckert can excell in the draft, and they would be the key components of having a nice team year after year.
I just don´t think the Browns can improve on their 5-11 mark from last year, and am unsure if Eric could survive another 5-11 season with the show.
realmccoy - October 5, 2010
I created a log-in on this site awhile ago and I never really comment, but I just wanted to say that reading the comments on this page is much better and way more informational than other websites. Most namely, cleveland.com.
Terbyterbs - October 4, 2010
Feel free to join in, we love having more people that appreciate good discussion on the Browns.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
and that appreciate tangents completely unrelated to the browns.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
One thing great about this group of regulars, is that generally, it’s still intelligent discussion or sharing of opinions.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
agreed. sometimes things go to far, but generally we keep it civil.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
Welcome, Terbyterbs. Jump right it, the water’s fine!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - October 4, 2010
to everyone saying he hit Shipley in the chest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfoPYpC4pyY
Shipley’s head snaps back on contact, and on the close-up shot it is obvious that Ward made contact sqaurely in his helmet.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I see what you are saying he does rock him in the helmet but till he hit him Shipley had the ball and would’ve scored. I do not like any player getting hurt but I like the big hit mentality of Ward
GroundRuleTriple - October 4, 2010
again this just isn’t true, the ball had already bounced off of the ground before ward hit him.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
I looked at it again and you are right it did hit the ground a decent time before Ward rocked him. This does change my opinion of the hit and makes me less in favor of it
GroundRuleTriple - October 4, 2010
I was initially very upset about this penalty. I thought Ward had time to pull up and avoid the penalty. I understand you need to be physical, but you have to pick your spots, and a Q4 stop in the red zone is not the time for a penalty. However, after further review, I am not sure he had the time to pull up.
realmccoy - October 5, 2010
I’d say the large majority acknowledge that he hit Shipley in the head, just that it wasn’t his intent to do so.
Roger Dorn - October 4, 2010
I’m aware, but B19K and SB both said above that he hit him in the chest.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
i think he hit him in the helmet but the overwhelming majority of the force was in his chest.
troy145 - October 4, 2010
I am with this.
rufio - October 5, 2010
I think what Troy said below is what B19K said if i remember. Something along the lines of ‘they hit helmets but the vast majority of the force was in the chest and the helmet hit was more incidental’
bross09 - October 4, 2010
I thought what he was trying to say was any contact made by Ward’s helmet was incidental, which I would agree with. I doubt Ward meant to hit him right in the head, but he did.
notthatnoise - October 4, 2010
yep.
this is what bernie said:
it pretty much sounds like he is saying it was incidental.
bross09 - October 4, 2010
Right, he was leading with his shoulder. The first thing to hit wasn’t helmet to helmet.
The helmet to helmet aspect was because of the shoulder into the chest.
Again, it was the proper call. It’s just a stupid rule.
Bernie19Kosar - October 5, 2010
100% agree. Right call, bad rule.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
ok, we must not be looking at the same play. the first thing to make contact is Shipley’s helmet, you can see it snap backward on the close up replay.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
No.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I don’t know how many times I have to post this. go to 8 seconds in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfoPYpC4pyY
Ward clearly hits him square in the chin, you can see shipley’s head is the first thing to snap backwards.
look guys, I’m not saying it was a cheap shot or anything, but to argue that this wasn’t a penalty is ridiculous. and if you’re arguing he hit him in the chest, you’re arguing that it wasn’t a penalty. rules are rules.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
I understand it was a penalty, I do however think he hit the chest first. I go back to B19k’s picture.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
Look at the photograph.
rufio - October 5, 2010
the photograph wasn’t taken right when they made contact.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
Oh, so you took the photo huh?
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
NTN is right, this video clearly shows the head getting hit first.
Chemo - October 5, 2010
I don’t think it was his initial intent to hit him in the head, but when he realized it was likely he didn’t care not to.
The Licensed Pessimist - October 4, 2010
I don’t want to see players getting hurt, but I kind of like the fact that he lit the guy up and then said if he had to do it over he wouldn’t change a thing. Bad timing for a penalty and a bad spot for a penalty on the goal line in the 4th, but I am grateful for a safety that makes WR’s think twice before coming over the middle.
Kimble_79 - October 5, 2010
The Pats defense has 32 points tonight.
I picked up the Colts defense instead.
I would’ve won.
emily522 - October 4, 2010
Damn, didn’t think the San Diego defense could be out done this week, they netted me 29.60
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Thanks Derek Anderson!
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Fantasy question for next week. I have the Falcons (vs. Browns) or Chiefs (vs. Colts). I know it seems easy, but Cleveland hasn’t scored less than 14 points and there point total has increased every week vs. the likes of the Ravens and Cinci.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
What are we talking about here? Defenses?
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Correct.
StuckInPa - October 4, 2010
Both are pretty bad choices. But I’d definitely go Falcons because the Browns’ QBs can throw picks.
Simmsinns - October 4, 2010
Yea. Who would have thought this early in the season we’d be talking about a productive Browns’ offense.
StuckInPa - October 5, 2010
Indeed. But… Hillis.
Simmsinns - October 5, 2010
Who knows, a passing game could be a possibility with a QB who targets his #1 and 2 wide receiver.
StuckInPa - October 5, 2010
Peyton Manning is to be avoided at all times.
Bernie19Kosar - October 5, 2010
Dammit! the one time I need to rely on Ronnie Brown and Brandon marshall, they lay virtually a fantasy goose egg.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
I find it funny that New England’s kicker outscored Brandon Marshall and Ronnie Brown… combined.
Simmsinns - October 5, 2010
OUCH! I had a legit chance, especially the way the New England D has been playing recently
bross09 - October 5, 2010
I had Randy Moss
BuenosAires_Dawg - October 5, 2010
I have Moss too. Did he even play?
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
Yes, but he had 0 catches. He dropped a catch in the endzone. It was a difficult catch, but one he would usually make.
StuckInPa - October 5, 2010
At least he’s not injured.
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
True.
StuckInPa - October 5, 2010
I had Brandon Tate in a league that counts kick return yardage. Most spectacular win of my fantasy career.
Chemo - October 5, 2010
OT: there is a Official “Make Peyton Hillis Your Profile Picture” Week event on facebook right now
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Already had that done for about 29 hours now.
Simmsinns - October 5, 2010
I just did it when I rsvp’d for the event. I used the awesome hillis pic from this thread.
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Where?! Friend me and send it so I can R.S.V.P…
I could just do it, but I need the RSVP to show up on my feed so it’s not weird that I just changed to Peyton Hillis…
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I wouldn’t think it was weird. I’ve seen worse ideas for profile pics.
skipkirk - October 5, 2010
I dunno if he actually is attending the event. I am though (I think I was invited by a friend at OSU and the Admins are from OSU).
bross09 - October 5, 2010
Yeah, I just meant that I’ve had a Peyton Hillis themed profile pic since halftime of the game on Sunday. I have not seen the actual event.
Simmsinns - October 5, 2010
I’ve read a lot above on the Shipley hit and I think I come down dead in the middle which is to say that the penalty was justified but I don’t really think that Ward should have changed what he did. I think he did attempt to avoid helmet-to-helmet but he definitely wanted to deliver a punishing hit which is a big part of the game.
Here is my question: How would the folks here feel about the hit if Hines Ward (voted NFL’s dirtiest player last year) had been the recipient?
An example of his play…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPbraVljIrc
Brownsyup - October 5, 2010
Oh, we know all about Ward. He destroyed one of our CBs once. We haven’t forgotten. He’s also broken the jaw of a Bengals LB.
I’m surprised the NFL doesn’t look into Hine’s play more.
SpecialBrownie - October 5, 2010
I believe he’s the reason behind the “you can’t hit anyone that’s defenseless anymore” rule.
North Coast Flea - October 5, 2010
hey, by the way, what does everyone think of the TJ Ward hit on Shipley?
Dawg Nuts - October 5, 2010
I’ve got a strong feeling if I don’t point out your obvious sarcasm, someone is going to tell you to scroll up.
Simmsinns - October 5, 2010
sadly, you’re probably right.
Dawg Nuts - October 5, 2010
I think it’s the best hit by a Browns safety since Brian Russell lit up Chad Johnson a few years ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw5TjhYQgr4
golanbatrac - October 5, 2010
Brian Russell wasn’t the greatest, but he sure could hit.
notthatnoise - October 5, 2010
I still love that hit. The post-hit interview of CJ is pure gold too.
North Coast Flea - October 5, 2010
No opinion on it here.
Western Reserve - October 5, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.