The Jaguars have played some unusual games this year. That was no different this week, as their offense turned the ball over six times. Based on that stat line, this should have been a "blowout loss" for Jacksonville.
Somehow, our offense was so inept in the second half off of a turnovers. In a game in which getting first downs should not have been an issue, Cleveland couldn't do anything with the football. Here is what happened during a painful stretch in the second half:
How much more could you ask from the defense? They forced all of those turnovers in a row, only for the offense to take no time off the clock and only get a total of three points. On the Jaguars' next drive, they finally got things together for a game-tying touchdown drive. The Browns' offense finally made a big play on their next drive thanks to Evan Moore, but still couldn't pick up enough first downs to ice the game and had to settle for a go-ahead field goal with lots of time left on the clock.
On the Jaguars' next series, the Browns' defense inexplicably gave up a 75-yard screen pass to Maurice Jones-Drew. The Browns had several defensive players with a chance to stop him before he got going, but they missed the tackle. It set up a Jaguars touchdown, and with no timeouts left, Cleveland's offense didn't have time to muster a touchdown-scoring drive.
This was the Browns' worst game of the season. The defense gave a good effort with their stretch of turnovers, but to let Jones-Drew get away at the end was vintage Browns, and not in a good way. The offense's inability to move the football in the second half had me feeling down as we entered the fourth quarter. I never felt confident with the fourth quarter lead, and sure enough, the Jaguars' two touchdowns in the final four minutes paved the way to a Jaguar win.
At 3-7, Cleveland still has a favorable schedule coming up, but this was the type of game I expected the Browns to win big. Usually, you don't like to say "the Browns should have won" after a loss, because a loss is a loss. But, when you have a 6:0 turnover ratio for most of the game, you definitely should have won. Unbelievable.
0 recs | 448 comments
Also, a few notes on the Browns’ last play of the game:
-The ball was deflected by the defended who made the interception before it reached Watson. Watson did not drop it.
-Even if Watson catches it, by the time he was on the ground there would’ve been seven seconds on the clock. No chance we would’ve been able to get another play off.
-McCoy was well-protected on that last play. If the ball isn’t thrown to the sideline for a quick play, then the ball needs to travel into the end zone. It needed to wait at least another half second; even an incompletion would’ve given us a second attempt.
Chris Pokorny - November 21, 2010
Yes, and no. I saw the guy deflect the ball before it reached watson. However, the pass still hit watson right between the numbers (or somewhere in that area) and he just couldn’t come away with the ball.
I agree though that if he catches it, we still lose so there is no point in blaming watson for the loss, which I don’t.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
I blame the refs.
TheDriveStillHurts - November 21, 2010
I blame Phil Savage.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
Go root for Buffalo.
Seriously, any team that keeps teh Bengals in the cellar below us is alright by me.
BrownDawg1409 - November 21, 2010
I blame Art Modell.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I blame ESPN.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I fear I’ve cast myself as an ESPN shill on this site…
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I blame our O-line. I just shuddered typing that but it’s true.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
Haha rec.
Chemo - November 21, 2010
I blame Gravity
bross09 - November 21, 2010
I blame Al-Quaeda.
dawgtribe - November 22, 2010
i blame El Nino
DontCallMeJoey - November 22, 2010
That is Spanish for… The Nino!
Bernie19Kosar - November 23, 2010
Not the Chilren?
SpecialBrownie - November 23, 2010
Damn, Children.
SpecialBrownie - November 23, 2010
Chilren was fine, because i imagined it being said with a spanish acccent..
“Theenk of thee chilren”
Dawg Nuts - November 23, 2010
Awesome save.
SpecialBrownie - November 23, 2010
no problem SB, I’m just here to help.
Dawg Nuts - November 23, 2010
Los niños is the children, I believe. Been a while since 10th grade though.
rufio - November 23, 2010
Right, so this would be “the boy.” Or, in King of the Hill parlance, Dammit Bobby.
JustBob - November 23, 2010
no, B19K is right and you both are wrong…
bross09 - November 23, 2010
Just like El Camino is Spanish for… The Camino.
North Coast Flea - November 24, 2010
Why...
oh why can’t the browns make adjustments to move the EFFING ball? This has been an ongoing issue ALL SEASON and is starting to drive me nuts. Try the no huddle, not necessarily the hurry up, but something! this has happened way too many times in the season already. It sucks.
Cant_buy_a_run - November 21, 2010
I’m not sure our offense struggles were the fault of the coaching staff not making adjustments. The O-line wasn’t making holes for Hillis or pass protecting, McCoy was making poor decisions, and the Jags played some good defense.
You have to remember that there are two sets of coaching staffs — the Jaguars staff makes adjustments to the Browns moves as well. It goes both ways.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
Today was an O-line problem and the receivers aren’t good enough to get open if we don’t have more time to throw. The real difference was lack of running game today though. Credit the Jags D line.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
Our O-line (right side and Mack to a lesser degree) played like crap. Their D-line played very well. Deadly combination.
TheDriveStillHurts - November 21, 2010
I thought Mack did well but Steinbach struggled. The chemistry was not there at all on the right side.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I don’t want to blame all of our problems on St. Claire, but I cringed a bit when I heard he was healthy. He probably wasn’t the only one struggling, though, so I’d be interested in anything you may have noted.
JustBob - November 22, 2010
I saw him looking unathletic a few times, and there was one time where I couldn’t tell who blew their responsibility (Lauvao or St. Claire). It is pretty ridiculous how his being in and out of the lineup correlates with our line doing worse or better respectively.
rufio - November 23, 2010
I thought we could have been riskier on first down, spread the field and put McCoy into shotgun. It seemed like that was the only place we had legitimate success on offense. After like 3 straight 3rd and long situations, we have got to abandon the predictability of running one of our three staple runs from the I on first down.
rufio - November 21, 2010
This.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
I’m a believer in Mangini, but Dabol has to go. The guy had no experience before the Browns, and I don’t want to keep on waiting for him to learn on the job. That was, what, the 5th time we had a lead late into the second half just to lose. A huge story line of this season has been our inability to move the ball on offense in the second half. You can blame the multiple QBs, the lack of WRs, or even the O-line, but what it looks like to me is our whole game plan gets shut down by our opponent. I really gives me the feeling that the opposing coach made adjustments and Dabol didn’t/doesn’t know how to and we end up getting shut down in the second half.
V3K - November 22, 2010
How I feel right now:
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Ha. I just made the connection that this a “brown dog”… just like the mascot.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I feel sick.
whereiendanubegin - November 21, 2010
I'm just going to repeat what I said in the game line thread...
I think with age I can come up with this train of thought better than throwing the china set and pissing off my girl.
There’s no use pointing fingers at this one, the Browns failed to convert when they had gift after gift given to them by the Jags. Five turn overs and you only muster 10 pts…not a good thing.
Give the Jags credit, they did their homework, stopped the Hillis Train, got Colt good, and beat us out where we were vulnerable. The defense was near flawless, but they were on the field too long due to the offense not getting it done so of course Drew Jones ran all over us.
Great game with ugly play (on both sides) with an ugly ending. We got walking wounded to tend to in the coming weeks. I can throw stuff and get upset, but at my age I need to hold on to it when it counts(the stuff I mean). We knew coming in this season this team and this season was a developing one and McCoy wasn’t suppose to be out in the field until year 2 or 3.
To see him give us a chance every time he touches the ball; to know he is still a rookie and will need to hone up on his mistakes; to see him gut it out even when he knows he’s hurt; to see him make play after play when it counts I can’t be angry at him at all. This game, despite the loss, will only solidify to everyone on this team he should be (and possibly is unofficially) the franchise face of the Cleveland Browns.
Thankfully we got Carolina next week (CAKE); Miami and Buffalo scares me as much as the Jags, but tip the hat to the Jags, they played hard and lucky. Move on to the next game. Go Browns!
I stand by this and even go on to say if this was last years team (minus the last four games) this team would have died in the last quarter. I still see a lot of growth, but a long way (and a lot of players to fill in the gap) to go.
I agree with Chris on his assessment on this one, but I’m not going to get all frustrated over this one because about a month ago or so we thought the season was loss. We’re no way near playoffs (although I was like a lot of fans hoping for it) but I like the fight we see in this. Yes I see the glass half full but no this game is in-excusable on many levels. Too many stupid penalties, not enough converting those yards when needed, and too many mental mistakes. This will have to get worked on big time.
But I’ll have my Thanksgiving losing beer early but with a sense that at least we all give a care about this team again as oppose to taking the East 9th Street stroll to drop into Cleveland harbor to end another disappointing season.
Ed Hooper - November 21, 2010
Well said
Spidey - November 21, 2010 via mobile
Good Game, you guys gave us a run for our money
Without a doubt, if Josh Cribbs had played you would of won.
TheTealDeal - November 21, 2010
I don’t know if that’s without a doubt. Cribbs is good but if you throw him in the mix the whole game could change and go any number of ways. The only thing we know for sure is you guys were the better team today. Congrats on the win and please beat the steelers and ravens whenever you see them.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Actually, Rufio, I was thinking the same thing he said. Cribbs would have gotten us a few first downs to say the least. He can catch the ball, he can run and he can make a throw if he has to. In a day when running simple plays through Hillis didn’t work, Cribbs would have at least confused their front 7.
If anything, Phil wouldn’t have had to kick those FGs from 50 yards out. I’m pretty certain we would have won with Cribbs on the field.
BuenosAires_Dawg - November 22, 2010
Right. Cribbs opens the game up in ways we like to think a #1 WR does. I’m not calling Cribbs a #1, but he forces defenses to make a lot of adjustments. The Jags knew we could have only a vanilla offense (in spite of the 160 plays McCoy has in his wrist) without Cribbs.
Spidey - November 22, 2010 via mobile
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. The game is won and lost on the lines, and our line looked like crapola. That’s where we need to upgrade the most, then WR/RB/DB. We have a smart QB and he can win us games but he can’t do it when he’s layed out on the ground.
We’ve had 5 McCoy run games now, and I can honestly say we should have, and could have won 4 of those games. The Steelers beat us, the rest we beat ourselves. Our Defense has played well, though if the oppenent has enough opportunities, eventually something will get punched through. We have a QB of the future, here & now. McCoy will be great if our line gives him the chance, we have credible play calling, and have open WR’s. Our OC needs to be changed after this season and our O line needs a right side upgrade. Lets just hope that some other team is dumb enough to trade off / cut some decent talent for depth.
J. W. - November 22, 2010
While you guys make valid points, these are all ifs. The fact is they won in the game that mattered; one in which Cribbs was not playing.
He probably helps us if he can play but if that variable is different, a million different things could have happened. Butterfly Effect.
rufio - November 22, 2010
If we had Cribbs for the game, it’d only be fair to give the Jags Aaron Kampman. Jags still win.
golanbatrac - November 22, 2010
I would like to agree with that, but I think with the way the Jax D kept cutting through our O-line it just would have been Cribbs getting caught in the backfield instead of Hillis or McCoy.
JustBob - November 22, 2010
I will say this, at least I finally won the bet. If I we hadn’t lost I’d be gloating right now, but I’ll wait till’ Tuesday to post a thread about it.
BrownDawg1409 - November 21, 2010
Bet?
emily522 - November 21, 2010
BD1409 vs. B19K about the number of catches Stuckey would have this year. Stuckey got to 30 catches on the year. B19K must change his avatar, I believe.
Browns town - November 21, 2010
Yes. My Butch Davis-like gut instinct was right on the money.
BrownDawg1409 - November 21, 2010
And I am a man of my word. I believe it was for 30 days correct? Let me know what you choose and I will make the change.
Bernie19Kosar - November 22, 2010
Aaron Hernandez with a TD. I benched him. Zach Miller had 0 points. My day keeps getting better.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
It looked to me like the offense was playing scared, mostly as a result of the O-Line sucking. Was Womack hurt? I hope so if we had St. Clair starting.
On the plus side, if this was Colt’s bad game it wasn’t that bad.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
I agree, but some of those sacks shouldn’t have been taken. It was his first not very good start in five, so I guess you can’t complain too much. He did give us a chance to win in the very end.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
WTF… well when they shut down Peyton Hillis you kill 80% of our offense you will win.Why don’t they throw to Even Moore he has unbelievable hands.Besides Cribbs(hurt),Hillis(only one guy & not every play can go to him)),& Ben Watson the guy is a sure thing.They have FEW weapons but I hope we pick up more next year.They have done so much with little talent.We do have a lot to look forward to finally.GO BROWNS
ronbo714 - November 21, 2010
you forgot MoMass. Massaquoi has really stepped up since his injury. in the last 3 games, he has 10 catches, a TD, and almost 120 yards. That is better than either Watson or Moore and he is our 2nd leading WR during this time behind Hillis
bross09 - November 21, 2010
And I would say this is part of the problem..
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Shouldn’t a WR be the leading receiver for the team, not Hillis – though I do love to see him run when he’s got the stean going…
J. W. - November 22, 2010
I agree. It was the same last year. MoMass was tied with Jerome Harrison for receptions last year
bross09 - November 22, 2010
I’m not sure if it’s more amusing or pathetic that Massaquoi having almost 120 receiving yards in 3 games means that he’s “really stepped up.”
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
A combination of both.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
yup. I think I’ll vomit now.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Its a bit sad…
bross09 - November 21, 2010
our wr’s suck … have i mentioned that?
DontCallMeJoey - November 23, 2010
Yeah, 3 times total.
Simmsinns - November 23, 2010
lmao. Yea, him taking 3 games to achieve what many #1 WR’s do in one is really boosting everyone’s confidence
The Licensed Pessimist - November 21, 2010
He’s absolutely smoked Randy Moss over those three games.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
well…I was just pointing out how the guy didn’t mention MoMass as an offensive weapon.
But its more proof that MoMass should not be a #1 and probably isn’t a good #2 yet when playing next to a good #1.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
This guy is just a troll now.
Simmsinns - November 21, 2010
No, you said that he’s “really stepped up” these last three games and your evidence of this was that he averaged almost 40 receiving yards a game. That comment deserved to be laughed at. How is that really stepping up?
Buckeye Brad - November 22, 2010
…compared to sucking its stepping up. considering the way our WRs have been playing all season it is “stepping up”. It is not that good but it is stepping up in a relative sense.
bross09 - November 22, 2010
Jesus Christ, you will argue anything.
You were wrong. Let it die.
Bernie19Kosar - November 23, 2010
Well it would be stepping up for Robiskie.
North Coast Flea - November 24, 2010
I miss last-year’s Mangini.
certain players need to be spoken to, if not taken to the woodshed regarding fundamentals.
discoinferno083 - November 21, 2010
Our whole O-line comes to mind.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
Man this was a crazy game
To be honest- as a Jags fan I must say; the Jaguars didn’t deserve 1005 the win today. Clevelalnd is avery good team. Colt McCoy is a stud.
It seems we are extremly lucky this season.
I wish Cleveland will be that lucks from the next game. Good luck against Carolina and the rest of the season. YOu have a fantastic; young promising team on the rise!!!!
Zoltan from Budapest - November 21, 2010
Thank you. Credit to your defense for not allowing us to capitalize on those turnovers.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Thanks Zoltan but your defense really set them up for the win. The only way we were able to stop your offense was with turnovers, otherwise you guys looked like a million bucks.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
well, turnovers are part of stopping an offense.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Getting turnovers is a major goal of our defense.
rufio - November 21, 2010
And our Defense delivered. Our D has gotten steadily better over the past two seasons. I credit that to being very well coached and our players having the intelligence to open there eyes and make plays. I’m kind of unhappy that Minnesota has fired Chilly today, due to the fact of Rob’s going to offered a HC job somewhere soon. Unfortunently for us, he would be great in Minnesota.
J. W. - November 22, 2010
I think that is going to be Lezlie Frazier’s job for awhile.
Bernie19Kosar - November 22, 2010
Zoltan,
Ditto! You guys did luck it out, but you did capitalize and got it in the end. Appreciate the tip of the hat and a tip back to you for your Jags. Seems Canton (PFHOF) wants the ball and the jersey of the guy who caught that lucky catch last week against the Texans. According to the announcers, this will be the Jags first time EVER to have any items in the HOF. Congrats and good luck on your run to the playoffs.
Ed Hooper - November 21, 2010
To me, you looked like the better team all throughout. You could run the ball, you shut us down and you took chances when it mattered. Hope you get to the playoffs, I’ll be rooting for ya.
BuenosAires_Dawg - November 22, 2010
I am still optimistic. Colt still came up relatively big on the drive for the FG to put us up in the final moments. TJ and Haden had 3 picks – the basis for a nice young secondary. We all know we need an explosive weapon in the receiving corps, when we get it we will be ok – until then – we are playing some exciting games.
realmccoy - November 21, 2010
Nice outlook, realmccoy. Like I said, it’s a shame this loss overshadows the defense’s performance.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Ward and Haden were both excellent.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
I was impressed with Haden today.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Don’t forget Sheldon Brown. Without him, Ward’s two INTs wouldn’t have happened. He made excellent plays.
BuenosAires_Dawg - November 22, 2010
He also led the drive at the end nicely. (not trying to make haden a goat, he did what defenders are taught to do but) If haden lets MJD get the TD, I think we might win or at least tie the game.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
No.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I disagree. that gives us an extra 35-40 seconds and the way McCoy was going, there is a very good chance we get a score…but I just realized we couldn’t tie…
bross09 - November 21, 2010
It just hurts my soul to allow the opponent to score TDs.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Same here but I can see where Bross is coming from.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
No I agree with bross, and people in the game thread were talking about this. From the 1, they’ll score. 30 more seconds could’ve been added to that last drive.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
But we almost had them for a 3 yard loss on first down from the 4. If we hold them to a FG we don’t have to score in regulation to win.
It would just be really hard for me as a player or coach to allow the other guy to score. Maybe it is the right decision, but I don’t think I could do anything but tell my guys to play their )*(&&^ off.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I agree with you. I am not saying we should have let them score, but just to point out that Colt had a nice drive going (which was what the comment I was replying to was talking about)
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Agree completely. I’d never want my team to allow the opponent to score. You have to believe you can hold them to a FG or force a turnover there. Telling the defense to lay down sends them a very shitty message. Just one man’s opinion.
Dawg Nuts - November 22, 2010
It does too. however it hurts just as much to see us finally have a good drive going and then just fall short.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Yes, let’s criticize Haden for not giving up on the play and getting a pretty amazing stop at the last minute.
TheDriveStillHurts - November 21, 2010
Did you even read what I said or just skim? I pointed out I don’t want to make haden a goat because he did what he has been taught to do and its not a dumb play.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
I don’t think that was Bross’s intentions, but didn’t Haden get criticize for his INT last week?
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
and I think its stupid to criticize him for the INT. It is not every player’s job to think like a coach and think “well, if I don’t catch it, we can get better field position with a punt”. in the heat of a game, the guy is just trying to make a play. I will never criticize a guy for making a play. and that was definitely not my intent here (which is why I say “not trying to make haden the goat”).
I like the fact that haden is an aggressive player who never gives up on a play. However, on both of these plays, he can be second guessed in hindsight. I do not criticize, because even if you tell him that you should let the guy score, you are psychologically making the guy hesitant and second guessing plays based on field position. that second guessing can lead to slowing reactions and I want Haden to react and make plays.
bross09 - November 23, 2010
I agree with above post from Hooper in general and appreciate the positive energy.
But if my eyes were not deceiving me, the Browns offensive line simply collapsed today.
I guess the last six weeks of war with the NFL’s best (Steelers, Saints, Patriots, Jets) + loss of Cribbs took its toll.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
Hey burnt,
I agree with you about the O-line. They should get a chewing out by Mangini, the fans, etc. They left their QB open and vulnerable too many times. Give credit to the Jags for finding a way to get McCoy’s jersey dirty, but you are right that’s not acceptable especially with an all star line like ours.
Ed Hooper - November 21, 2010
fixed
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Tru Dat!
Ed Hooper - November 21, 2010
I am as disappointed as anyone here. This one hurts more than the Jets loss, mostly because of the futility after turnovers. But, and this but is as big as J Lo’s, I am putting it down to the growing pains of the Holmgren Era. This is what you get with a rookie quarterback on a team with no Pro Bowlers at the skill positions on offense. Watch the winning teams. They have better players.
JamesPowell - November 21, 2010
Very disappointing…
athensdawg - November 21, 2010 via mobile
this is definitely the worst loss of the season to me. a few points:
1. despite what some have said, this doesn’t change my opinion on mangini or his job security; we were due for a stinker, and this was it, but it was bad play, not bad coaching by mangini.
2. colt had a rookie game today.
3. daboll’s playcalling could be questioned much more than anything mangini did. run-run-pass was getting really tiresome.
4. we’re blaming a lot of people, but phil dawson missed 2 FGs that would have won the game for us in hindsight. they weren’t chip shots, but he should have made them.
5. my kingdom for a #1 WR.
I may get drunk over this one. sickening.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
On my way there, thank you Great Lakes brewing company…
athensdawg - November 21, 2010 via mobile
Agree on Dawson, I would make him my goat of the game. 51 yarders in warm weather should be made.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
The announcers said the wind was gusting against him. Not sure how much that affected him, but 51 yard FG’s are tough even without wind.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
Maybe. Dawson apparently was nailing 58 yarders in warmups and the wing flag on the field goal posts wasn’t moving at all really.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
That may be true, but the wind can change dramatically in two hours.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
wind can change easily in a couple hours (like BB said). Plus, he always nails them in practice. not that he isn’t clutch, its just harder to do in a game situation. I am disappointed he didn’t get one, but I would not have been disappointed at all if he was 1-2 from 50+
bross09 - November 21, 2010
that’s fair, but its wrong to hold him blameless. he can make 51 yarders even in the wind.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I didn’t say he was blameless. Of course he can make 51 yard FG’s against the win but they’re certainly not easy.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
the wind was blowing against him, but distance wasn’t the issue.
notthatnoise - November 21, 2010
I thought about bringing up Dawson too, but decided not to.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Those kicks he made were complicated by the wind too, but again this one is a 50/50 for me to get a goat to PD.
Ed Hooper - November 21, 2010
I can’t believe there were people on this site arguing that we’re fine at WR (evidently we just don’t throw to them very much because we choose not to). Our lack of playmakers on WR really hurt us today. Teams are going to continue to stack against the run to force us to make plays throwing the ball
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
absolutely. i know this is obvious to most, but having a #1 WR isn’t merely about throwing to him, its about what he does to the defense on every play. not having that hurt us today.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
good point, I’m sure they don’t feel like they need to double up on any of them
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
agreed. we don’t have the guy that can command the double team.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
How can you tell? Unless you’re at the game or watch the game film you can’t tell if the WRs are getting open and Colt is holding the ball too long or if they just aren’t getting open.
I saw a Colt today that lacked confidence (partly because our O-Line play sucked).
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
Well, I have seen two games in person this year (Cincy and Jets) so I have seen them not getting open in those games. And I also know that opposing defenses doesn’t have to worry about defending the pass very much so they load up against the run. When defenses are loaded up against the run and blitzing like they were in the second half today then good WR’s should have the chance to get open. Also, our WR’s are dropping passes that great WR’s will catch.
It’s obvious that our offense lacks playmakers at WR and it’s been that way for two years. I don’t know how anyone can argue otherwise.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I agree with you. Great WRs are hard to find though.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
I would settle for a couple good WR’s.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I think we have one.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
Evan Moore?
I think Stuckey is a good #3 or #4.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I think MoMass can be a good WR with a #1 guy opposite him that the defense has to worry about. And I think Moore can be a great pass-catching TE.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
all of this.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Done’t agree at all. Defenses are not focusing on Mass, so if he get’s a playmaker across from him, they’ll play him exactly like they play him now. There is literally no reason to believe he’ll produce if there is someone better across from him.
The Licensed Pessimist - November 21, 2010
Really? Care to break this down for all of us? I’d love to see your evidence of this.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I’d love to see the evidence that if we get someone who doesn’t suck, Mass will suddenly stop sucking. He’s not being played like a good receiver, so what benefit will he receive?
Will he stop getting a safety over the top? Oh wait, he doesn’t.
Will he stop getting a LB to check his inside route? He doesn’t get that either!
Will he stop going against the top CB? He usually goes against the second CB just as much, especially when cribbs was in.
Saying somehow his game will go from horrible to adequate with a better receiver is baseless conjecture in order to justify the absolute lack of skill for our WR’s. And people on this board act as if a #1 receiver is a totally different position, or a different skill set which is asinine. A #1 WR is a GOOD WR, and the fact that Mass can’t step his game up and contribute when we need him shows him for the player he is. Mediocre.
The Licensed Pessimist - November 21, 2010
It’s not baseless. Think of last year against the Bengals when Braylon was still on the team. MoMass was where he belonged as a #2 WR and he put up 148 yards on them. Now, one game does not mean a whole lot, but you said baseless and I think that the Bengals game could be largely where the argument comes from.
Browns town - November 21, 2010
How is he horrible? He was an adequate WR last year and has had a few non-existent games, but is still adequate this year. What kind of numbers do you expect from a #2?
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
That would depend on what your definition of adequate is. When it boils down to it he will never be anything more than a below average WR. If you notice the coaches scheme week in and week out without him being a large part of the offense. They’d rather focus on passing the ball to the TE’s and the RB coming out of the backfield than on either one of the receivers they took in the second round, who at least one they projected to be effective.
That doesn’t mean he’s not going to have his moments. Every dog has his day every once in a while.
The Licensed Pessimist - November 22, 2010
We keep waiting for you to have yours.
golanbatrac - November 22, 2010
This is exactly the kind of thing that I am asking you to prove. I see this happening all the time, but you claim it never happens. How has this sort of thing ended for you previously?
I flat out can’t prove Massaquoi will start putting up numbers if we got a true #1. I can make an educated guess that his job will become much easier.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I think that’s the troll’s pleasure. He knows there’s no way anyone can prove it until we finally get a #1. So he troll’s away making statements that no one can really attack because they can’t be conclusively disputed until they actually occur. There’s no evidence anyone can find that’s not going to be speculation or anecdotal. And don’t think he’ll ever try proving anything he says, he’ll just disappear under his bridge until it’s time to feed again.
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
He could potentially prove that Massaquoi is not ever seeing safeties over the top or robbers underneath to help his CB.
Only it is happening, so he couldn’t actually prove that it isn’t happening.
rufio - November 23, 2010
Yeah, the other teams are even leaving him uncovered because they know he sucks sooooooo much.
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
Braylon’s last game?
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
It didn’t seem like we even tried to get Housh, Boldin or Holmes, who were all available, any would be a good addition. But even if we can’t get those guys, anyone with some experience would be good – all our guys are really green.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
Hopefully that’s part of our plan for next year.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
http://www.footballsfuture.com/2011/fa/wr.html
There are a lot of good ones.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I hope we go after Fitzgerald hard
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
Makes no sense for the Browns to trade for a guy that is serving a 4 game suspension and then becomes a free agent at the end of the year at this point in the team’s development. You could make a decent cause for Boldin out of those 3 guys, but again we’d have to outbid the Ravens, and I don’t think we should be giving up high draft picks just yet.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
Right. I don’t want a 1-year rental at WR. I want a guy that will be here for a few years as McCoy keeps improving.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I just think we need an experienced receiver, I don’t think we’ll get a game changer in the draft this year as we probably won’t be drafting high enough.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
We are 3-7, the best we can finish is 9-7 which is quite unlikely. We should be picking in the top half still.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
Housh people questioned if he would be a weapon again (and benefits from being a #3 in an offense with a lot of weapons), boldin was injury prone, and Holmes wasn’t a FA, had character issues, and trades in the division rarely happen.
Not saying we shouldn’t have tried, just why we didn’t
bross09 - November 21, 2010
No thanks, he was going to the ravens since two years ago, and no thanks.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I think you’re throwing out a straw man. find me one person who said we didn’t need more talent at WR.
notthatnoise - November 21, 2010
no straw man, I also remember people making the argument that our WR corps was fine.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Who and where?
I have argued extensively that we would greatly benefit from a legit #1 and that our WRs don’t “suck” we are just trying to fit square pegs in to round holes right now due to our lack of talent out there.
I’ll still take BVA, but true #1 WR ranks pretty high on my list of positions according to value.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I don’t remember where, I just remember reading a discussion like that. none of which really matters, because i personally agree with everything you just said. I was just pointing out that I didn’t think Brad was creating an argument that wasn’t there.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
then what was the point of that diatribe that the WRs aren’t doing well b/c they aren’t thrown to and b/c of the system. if the argument wasn’t that we have good WRs, then it was a moot argument in general…especially since the other side wasn’t arguing that we have no legitimate WRs but that we need a #1
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Who was doing that? Wow. I think MoMass could be a #2… he’s probably more of a #3. Stuckey would be a #3 of #4. Robiskie sucks. But we need a true #1 threat and probably a #2 as well.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I’ve been a strong believer that MoMass is a solid #2 and Stuckey is a very good #3. Robo could be a #2 if he has that #1 threat to open things up for him.
BrownDawg1409 - November 21, 2010
You’re right. Robo could probably be a #3 if we did have that threat.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
robiskie will be out of the nfl in 2 years.
DontCallMeJoey - November 23, 2010
I wouldn’t be surprised (if you are talking about 2 years from now, not 2 years into his career). I was just reading a list on deadspin of some of the worst NFL players in history. I think a guy who manages less than 20 receptions in 2 years and no impact plays could very well make that list.
bross09 - November 23, 2010
Probably.
emily522 - November 23, 2010
I think if he doesn’t take that 3rd year WR leap next year, we cut him early.
rufio - November 23, 2010
I think somewhere I said I will predict a cut after 3 seasons. I am willing to make a DBN bet on this…then again, who would take the other side??
bross09 - November 23, 2010
Nobody said we were great at WR but a few people were arguing that we had enough talent there but we just weren’t throwing the ball to them because our offense wasn’t designed that way or other arguments. “Fine” is just how I described it.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I think we have enough talent at WR to be a playoff team.
notthatnoise - November 21, 2010
Sure, if we have a dominant running game and a dominant defense along with a good, veteran QB. But we don’t have any of that.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I’m curious to see what we’re going to with our RBs. Hardesty is still a question mark. We don’t know what he can do. I wonder if we’ll draft a RB in the 3rd round or something.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
If that guy could stay on the field it would be huge. He looked awesome in his four pre-season plays
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
We certainly need to add a RB this offseason. It would be great to get something from Hardesty but we can’t count on anything.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
aside from the veteran QB, I think we’re close to having those things.
notthatnoise - November 22, 2010
Maybe we’re close but we certainly don’t right now. And to have a dominant running game you need more than just one back to carry the load. You also need to be able to run when the other team knows you’re going to run, and we couldn’t do that yesterday.
Buckeye Brad - November 22, 2010
but we did it the previous three weeks, against (arguably) better run defenses. Even if you have all the pieces, you still come up short some times. the colts lose a couple games every year.
notthatnoise - November 22, 2010
Haha, we’re not the Colts. Not even close.
I don’t understand what you’re trying to argue. We’re 3-7. We’re not even close to being a great team. A few good games doesn’t mean you can ignore the rest of the season.
Buckeye Brad - November 22, 2010
you’re the one ignoring the rest of the season. we have played one, maybe two bad games all season. until recently we were doing it with an injured QB or a career backup (not that QB play has been that much better). Peyton Hillis barely played the first couple games.
I know we’re not even close to the colts. that was my point. even a team that is set up about as well as you can be has a stinker a few times a season.
you used one data point to say that we can’t run when the other team knows we’re going to. I have many more that say we can.
I also never said we were close to being a great team, I said we were close to making the playoffs.
notthatnoise - November 23, 2010
Most dominant rushing attacks rely on either a superior offensive line or one superstar back. I would say the committee way is more effective, but not the most likely way to have a dominant attack.
Roger Dorn - November 22, 2010
But dominant running games with superstar backs still have capable backups — not great, of course, but able to take a few carries and still keep the defense honest. Our backup RB’s are worthless right now. It’s Hillis or nothing. And Hillis is playing well and I’m excited about him, but he’s not Peterson or Chris Johnson.
Buckeye Brad - November 22, 2010
I think there’s always exceptions to that rule, though. During the years when Jerome Bettis was cracking off 1,000+ seasons left and right, there was Kordell Stewart who rushed for around 400 yards each year, and as best as I can tell the backup for Jerome Bettis during most of those years only rushed for around 200 yards each year (I assume he’s the backup- Although I couldn’t tell if he might have been a FB, the places I looked listed him as “running back”). That’s between 10 and 20 YPG (I’m lazy right now and don’t want to do the math :p)… I dunno if that would be the capable back that you’re talking about or not, though.
shep615 - November 23, 2010
The way the NFL is headed, teams need to have multiple backs.
It’s going to be even more important with the 18 game season. I am hoping that Hardesty is going to fill part of that role, but we could still use 1-2 more good RB’s.
San Diego is on their 3rd or 4th RB. Same for New Orleans and New England. I love Hillis, but the way he runs, I don’t think he is going to be around for very long. Look at what has happened to Marion Barber.
Bernie19Kosar - November 23, 2010
I’m not saying you’re wrong by asking this, I honestly just don’t know: But what’s the difference between when Jerome Bettis was carrying the rock and today? I get what you’re saying about the 18 game season, but is it possible the players have changed and that’s why teams need multiple backs?
I know the community backfield idea is a good one, and personally I hope that Hardesty does work out and we can pick up another good RB or two. I’m just saying that I think it’s still possible there are those Jerome Bettis types out there that can carry the ball as much as he did and take the hits and give the hits he did on nearly every play.
Unless there is something different between then and now, which I guess is what I’m asking.
shep615 - November 23, 2010
Good question. Over the past 10 seasons I think defensive players are getting bigger and faster. I think offenses are getting much more specific with their personal.
I’m just tossing out ideas here. But I think there are a very few players that can withstand a full load of carries year in and year out.
Bernie19Kosar - November 23, 2010
yeah, i’m not sure i can explain why specifically, but it’s clear that there are fewer and fewer single back offenses in the nfl today as opposed to a 5-10 years ago.
DontCallMeJoey - November 23, 2010
There also might be fewer elite backs today for whatever reason. Think about all the ridiculously talented backs in the 90s. It seems like we have maybe 2-3 right now?
rufio - November 23, 2010
I don’t think it’s so much that the talent of the backs has gone down but the talents of the defenses has improved and, probably more importantly, the schemes have improved and gotten more complex. Teams are also passing more on offense so the running back’s role has not only been reduced but it’s changed — he needs to be a good pass blocker and receiver to play all 3 downs. Look at how much the Vikings took out Peterson for Chester Taylor on 3rd down last year. I don’t think teams did that as much 20 or 30 years ago.
Buckeye Brad - November 23, 2010
which is why I said we were close, I never said we had a dominant rushing attack.
notthatnoise - November 23, 2010
and our offensive line was playing very well and could be considered “superior” in the run game the past 3+ games before Jacksonville.
bross09 - November 22, 2010
No we don’t. We clearly don’t.
BuenosAires_Dawg - November 22, 2010
I disagree. this team is a few bad breaks and a decent schedule away from being a playoff team. we beat two of the best teams in the league and took another to the last minute of overtime. we have yet to get blown out and have even had a fourth quarter lead in almost every game.
notthatnoise - November 22, 2010
It’s a nice story line and all, but we still have disasters like yesterday and seven losses for the year. It really can only be sugar coated so much.
Western Reserve - November 22, 2010
but only so much of that has to do with the receivers.
notthatnoise - November 22, 2010
Insofar as there are other areas that are also problematic, sure.
Western Reserve - November 22, 2010
Every team is a few bad breaks away from being a better team. You can only use that excuse for so many games. In the end, you are what your record says you are. A fourth quarter lead means absolutely nothing if you can’t keep that lead.
Buckeye Brad - November 22, 2010
not the Bengals
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
my only point was that you can’t pin that blame on the receivers. I never said the browns were great or anything. I only ever said that I think the surrounding talent is good enough to make the playoffs.
notthatnoise - November 23, 2010
i couldn’t possibly disagree more
DontCallMeJoey - November 23, 2010
I don’t think that was anyone here, though I do remember someone quoting almost those exact words from Holmgren.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
We aren’t throwing them the ball a whole lot, which describes why their statistics would be poor even for players at their ideal roles (#2 and on WR).
I honestly don’t remember anyone saying they wouldn’t welcome AJ Green.
rufio - November 21, 2010
right, but i think the question is whether the poor statistics are a result of us merely choosing “not throwing them the ball a whole lot” or if we don’t throw them the ball b/c they’re not open b/c they stink. i believe i’ve made my position clear on this.
and aj green would be a clear upgrade.
DontCallMeJoey - November 23, 2010
Ahman Green would be an upgrade at WR.
Bernie19Kosar - November 23, 2010
I wouldn’t doubt it. he was quite a good pass catcher.
bross09 - November 23, 2010
The wideouts are being asked to either flat-out outrun the CB (which none of them have the talent to do) or to have extremely good chemistry with one of three QBs that will be playing in any given week who may or may not have had a lot of practice reps with that QB before they had to play with two other QBs. There are times like Sunday, when McCoy threw deep to MoMass on a sight adjustment, but Mass was busy getting open on the comeback.
The statistics are explainable. This doesn’t mean our WRs are good. We clearly need more talent there. I still think one stud WR and a year with the same QB would go a long way.
rufio - November 23, 2010
Tom Green would be an upgrade at WR.
Dawg Nuts - November 23, 2010
There actually have been quite a few saying our wr’s will be fine for another cpl years lol
browns8 - November 21, 2010
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh – no.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
i didnt say i thought they would be fine. If you read old fan posts, you will see ppl saying that.
browns8 - November 21, 2010
I think you’re referring to people saying it takes a few years for WRs to develop in the NFL, which is true.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Not what i was talking about lol but true.
browns8 - November 21, 2010
i know, I was saying that to people who thought that, not you. its all good.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Were they arguing that we’re fine at WR, or were they arguing against the notion that we have no talent at Receiver? I SHIFT-A’d a lot this week and must have missed the conversation.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
I think it was a combo of both, if I remember correctly.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
That seems more likely. Personally, I think we have a three wood and a couple of five woods but we’re missing a driver.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
I like it. but I’d say more like a three wood, a hybrid, and a bent 2 iron.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
That’s more like it.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
So you’re saying we need this guy?
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
Ha. Not sure I want him moving forward, but he would have been a good fit this year.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
Exactly. And adding that one club makes all the others fill their roles better.
rufio - November 21, 2010
It’s hard to blame Dawson when we couldn’t get him any closer than 51 yds. after all the turnovers
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
they weren’t easy kicks, but they’re kicks he can make, and has made in the past. I think he deserves some of the blame. if the offense sputters, that’s what we have him for and he failed today.
I’m not blaming the loss on dawson; I’m just saying he deserves some of the blame. its something that should be mentioned.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
If we want to win games like this, our kicker needs to make 50 yard field goals. Bottom line
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
I think the real bottom line is that if we want to win games like this, we have to score off turnovers.
JamesPowell - November 21, 2010
Scoring includes making field goals.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
You know, I think you’re right. Not so much because I want to crucify Dawson, but because our margin of error is so low if we want to win, those missed kicks are huge. It doesn’t let the offense off the hook for their complete ineptitude, but, yeah, those misses were meaningful.
Western Reserve - November 21, 2010
those kicks are challenging for him even when the weather is good. he often does well, but the wind didn’t help. Still, HenryDawg has a valid point. the offense was clearly the problem (especially up front) and its a bit unfair to blame a kicker who is consistently during a game, having to take long kicks.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
that’s all fine. but again, he’s on this team to step up when the offense gets stopped. if he isn’t capable of making those kicks, why did mangini send him out there? he gets some blame.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I think 50+ yard field goals are about a 50/50 proposition. It sucks that we missed two of them, but it’s hard to blame the kicker for missing on a couple of coin flips.
Chemo - November 21, 2010
yep. Phil dawson hits 58% of them for his career and hasn’t hit a 50+ yarder since 2008 (granted, he has only tried 4 in the last 1+ seasons).
bross09 - November 21, 2010
his job is to kick FGs. Mangini obviously thought he could make the kicks or he wouldn’t have sent him out there. he missed the kicks. how can you say he deserves no blame? i don’t care about your statistics on this one, Dawson cannot be held blameless.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Agree.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
well he clearly deserves some blame. anyone who makes a play that negatively impacts production deserves some amount of share of the loss. however, his share is so minimal, its not worth even talking about the blame on him.
Obviously he shouldn’t be completely blameless, but you are arguing about it a ridiculous amount for his blame to be minimal. I can probably name a dozen (or more) people involved with this loss that deserve more blame.
Obviously to throw around an exaggerated point like he shouldn’t be “completely blameless” is going to get people to agree with you that he deserves “some blame”
bross09 - November 21, 2010
1. I’m not trying to get people to agree with me, I’m just stating my opinion.
2. I never at any point said he deserves the most blame for the loss.
3. you agree with the guy that didn’t want to blame him at all, now you’re agreeing with me that he does deserve some blame. not sure what you really think here.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
he never said he doesn’t deserve any blame. if he said he should be completely blameless, I would disagree.
I also never said you said he deserves the most blame. However, my opinion is that his blame would be so minimal, mentioning it would be a waste of time. JMO.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
And arguing about it isn’t?
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
HA!
Bernie19Kosar - November 22, 2010
ya got me.
bross09 - November 23, 2010
Dawson pretty cost us the KC game this year too. He’s not having a good season.
BuenosAires_Dawg - November 22, 2010
No, our anemic Offense cost us the game in KC. yeah, you can TRY to blame him for missing a 40+ yarder which isn’t a gimme, but its stupid.
Our offense made it into the red zone 3 times and scored on NONE of those posessions. an offense goes 0/3 in the RZ in scoring and you want to blame the kicker for not making a FG that is a longer FG? yes, he usually makes them, but its ridiculous to blame a loss on him the one time he doesn’t hit it.
I don’t see how he is having a “not good season” He is perfect on Extra Points and short FGs (inside 40 yards). He is just hurt because offense has sputtered a few too many times and left him to take a lot of long FGs. He is already tied for the 2nd most tries for 50+ yards in his career.
In years where he takes a lot more longer FGs, his FG% goes down. this should make sense logically. his worst years are when he has to try a good deal of longer FGs.
bross09 - November 22, 2010
Perfect on the easy kicks! wow!
Seriously though, he has missed field goals in games we barely lost. He takes some blame.
Roger Dorn - November 22, 2010
he has missed long field goals in games where he was a tiny bit of the problem. you can say he takes some blame, which I am not going to disagree with. however saying:
is utterly moronic IMO. to blame the game on Dawson for missing a FG.
If we had an offense that could move the ball in the 2nd half against KC or Jacksonville, it wouldn’t at ALL be a problem. the offense has been the problem.
the difference between our loss against Jacksonville and the Jets win against us (when nick folk sucked)? they moved the ball well in the 2nd half.
bross09 - November 22, 2010
yeah, and had we beat the jets, much of the blame would have belonged to folk. kickers have a job to do, and if they don’t do it, they get blame in losses.
Dawg Nuts - November 22, 2010
missing my point, the reason WHY they won IMO, and we lost a couple close games was that they had an offense that didn’t sputter in the 2nd half. we could have survived a bad game by a kicker like they did if only we could put together good offensive drives in said games.
bross09 - November 23, 2010
The offense doesn’t look as bad if Dawson makes the kicks. Instead it looks like we came away with 0 pts.
Roger Dorn - November 23, 2010
6 points on 6 turnovers still looks bad, especially when you see that the offense was only able to get close enough to kick 2 51 yard field goals and a ~48 yard field goal.
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
I completely disagree. the field goals are irrelevant to how the offense looked overall in my opinion. I don’t see how it is at all a factor. to me, they are 2 separate entities.
bross09 - November 23, 2010
I have to go with Bross on this one.
North Coast Flea - November 24, 2010
Put any other rookie in that game today with the non-existent offensive line and you would have had a REAL disaster.
17/28 for 241 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT off a tipped ball, taking them downfield late in the game twice with a hurt ankle putting them in a position to win = “a rookie game”?
The offensive line put in an absolute stinker today.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
I agree it was mainly the offensive line, but Colt does take some of the blame which I’m sure you realize as well.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Yes, I agree everyone on the offensive side (including the coaching staff) receives some of the blame. But to make the “had a rookie game” blanket statement I thought was a bit overboard.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
He’s a fucking rookie, get over it.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
exactly my point.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
How is that your point? He’s a rookie and he played a game where he made too many rookie mistakes. So what is wrong with saying that he played like a rookie today?
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
Ok.
1. Of course he had a rookie game today. He IS A ROOKIE!
2. Put any other rookie in there with the non-existent Browns o-line today – and you would have had a REALLY ugly result.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
But he hasn’t played like a rookie in his previous starts, which is the point. You don’t need to tell us that he’s a rookie — we all know that.
And let’s not pretend that McCoy is better than every other rookie QB. Bradford is playing pretty well this year, too, and there have been plenty of other examples of rookie QB’s in recent years playing well. McCoy isn’t the gold standard for rookie QB’s yet.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I never said McCoy is the gold standard for rookies.
But I stand by my statement about putting any other rookie in his place today with that o-line. Bradford would have probably been taken out with an injury much sooner – he has no where near the mobility Colt does and I believe he is more fragile.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
With Bradford’s arm, the Jags would have had to honor the deep ball. When teams stack the box to stop Steven Jackson, Bradford makes them pay (with arguably worse receivers than we have).
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
Deep ball? With what receivers?
TheAnalyst - November 21, 2010
You beat me to it.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
I guess the ones he has been throwing deep balls to so far this season.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Bradford has 19 passes of 20+ yds, McCoy has 12
That’s after 8 games vs 4 games.
TheAnalyst - November 21, 2010
irrelevant. you asked who he was going to throw to, I told you.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Uh, how is that irrelevant?
How are gauging Bradford’s deep ball vs. McCoy’s if not by amount of long passes?
TheAnalyst - November 21, 2010
you said bradford had no one to throw to deep, I say he does. the only number relevant to that is that he has actually completed some deep throws. that was my only part in this discussion, not whether or not he threw deep better than mccoy. I wasn’t the one who made this a comparison.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I believe TheAnalyst was asking who Bradford would have thrown the deep ball to if he were on the Browns.
Also, the Bradford vs. McCoy numbers are relevant because Golan posited that Bradford would have made defenses fear the deep ball.
Chemo - November 21, 2010
How about QB Rating?
21-30 yards: Bradford 54.8; McCoy 44.7
31-40 yards: Bradford 87.5; McCoy 62.5
Clearly, Bradford has done a better job making teams pay with the longball.
Or how about Yards/ Attempt?
21-30 yards: Bradford 6.6; McCoy 11.1
31-40 yards: Bradford 15.4; McCoy 8.5
This is where it really shows. McCoy hits the 21-30 yarders, while Bradford goes over the top. That’s arm strength. Bradford has above average arm strength (good, not great). McCoy has enough to get by (adequate, not good).
Source: sportsillustrated.cnn.com
(Anyway, I don’t care to get into a long drawn out statistical argument. It’s tedious at best and downright infuriating at worst, and frankly, no one outside of the two people arguing care to read any of it. This is my last post on the subject. Feel free to counter if you must. I’m sure bross will pick up the argument and annoy the hell out of us all.)
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
actually, I don’t really care about this argument that much…except to say that QB rating isn’t the most objective stat (I believe 2 of Colt’s INTs that bounced out of the receivers hands were 20+ yards)
the Yards per attempt does show it. McCoy can throw it deep, but bradford is better at the bombs.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Time for the team steroid man to make a trip to the McCoy house. “Yeah uh colt, we need to improve your downfield efficiency.”
jaws. - November 21, 2010
fine, bradford doesn’t have the mobility of colt, but he has a quicker release, so much of that scrambling may not have been necessary for bradford.
no one is saying colt sucks. he had a sub-par game today.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
"Bradford has a quicker release"
Completely disagree. No way does Bradford have a quicker release than McCoy.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
Hard to say how much he is to blame for the sacks without a look at game film. Seemed like the O line wasn’t doing a great job, and when you are constantly in 2nd and 3rd and long, it becomes very challenging.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
yeah, I’m not sure I’ve said it yet, but I agree with all of the criticism of the OL. not good today.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
and with all that said, Colt did make plays with the game on the line and got us another field goal that put us up 3 late. He damn near gave us another miracle chance on the last drive. The defense was great all game, but 2 plays that were disappointing…the Lewis TD and the Jones Drew 70 yard play.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
right, that’s the other thing that may be getting lost here, is that I think Colt is great and am looking forward to him being our QB. a sub-par performance overall, but he put us in a position to have a chance to win at the end. that in itself says a lot about him as a player.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
+1
emily522 - November 21, 2010
He also had that duck out of a sack and pitch to Hillis…that’s an NFL play.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Yea, that play pumped me up.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
Same.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I am excited that Game Rewind now includes ~5-10 plays each game with multiple film angles where you can see all the receivers.
rufio - November 21, 2010
I think you’re being overly sensitive – when I said he had a rookie game today, I meant it sort of like a compliment – he has not played like a rookie so far. Today he looked a little bit more like a rook (and I did say the OLine sucking contributed to it). I also said that he would probably have some rough days and that if this was one of them, then it’s not so bad.
Also on the plus side is that he is AWESOME in the 2 minute drill and we should remember that even Payton Manning was 3-13 his first year despite setting all sorts of rookie records. Colt is a little like Payton in that they both got knocked for arm strength, but they are both really hard workers, very smart and are winners.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
McCoy having a “rookie game” means he made some of those rookie mistakes. He didn’t make some throws he probably could have and he took some sacks he shouldn’t have taken. Part of that blame does go to the offensive line, though. Not all of it, but definitely some.
He still led us down the field with a chance to win at the end with some nice throws. He’s started 5 games, and he’s looked the worst in today’s. It wasn’t even a terrible game by him, just not a good one.
I’m sure he’ll learn from this and be fine. We gotta give this guy some actual weapons though.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
(This wasn’t really a reply to you, HenryDawg, but basically to this entire conversation)
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I agree with everything you said
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
Well you’re probably right, and I’ve admitted before on the board I’m probably way too biased as Longhorns fan to be completely credible on Colt (should probably just recuse myself from comment, just can’t help myself I guess ;)
At any rate – it sounds like we’re pretty much on the same page I think.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
Your Texas has been showing through this thread so far, haha.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
As soon as Jax saw him limping, they really poured it on. I would not have minded seeing Wallace come in at that point….maybe it was just me.
Red-Right-88 - November 22, 2010
No thanks, let the kid prove himself. It wasn’t like he couldn’t complete any passes after that, he led us down the field and had to force something that wasn’t there because time was running out.
rufio - November 22, 2010
Yeah, he’s a third round pick. If he breaks, we grab another next year.
golanbatrac - November 22, 2010
I am not sure I agree. If we are to believe Gannon, Colt has the ability to change the protection. Colt has the ability to throw the ball away instead of tucking and taking unnecessary sacks. Colt can audible out of plays. Colt can use the hard count better than he did. Colt can make some better reads and get the ball where it needs to go faster.
I am not trying to blame this loss on Colt or say he’s not doing a good job, but these are all areas where it would be great to have a QB who can make the people around him look better. The kid works his tail off and he’s pretty damn smart, so I think this bodes well for his future and ours.
rufio - November 21, 2010
i didn’t get to watch a lot of the second half, but from what I saw colt needs to take some blame for the sacks. first, he needs to get the ball out. he would finish his drop and the ball wouldn’t be out. second, he needs to step up into the pocket rather than moving side to side. I saw him at least twice try to roll out rather than step up into a hole.
notthatnoise - November 21, 2010
I did see him step into the pocket a few times, but I agree he needs to do it more. I saw 1-2 sacks though when he stepped into the pocket too and got sacked. not saying he shouldn’t have, but pointing out how much was going against him with the O-Line.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
right, I’m not pinning every sack on him or anything, but after he got hit a few times he seemed eager to get out of the pocket.
notthatnoise - November 22, 2010
There was one play in which Alualu worked Steinbach. There were a few plays there #94 just came unblocked because the protection wasn’t right, I don’t know whether to blame that on Colt, Mack, or someone else. There was one play I remember where Lauvao and St.Clair had a miscommunication.
But yes, there were definitely times where Colt hit his back foot, hitched, hitched, and then tried to tuck and run.
rufio - November 22, 2010
I agree, I was just mentioning that we shouldn’t be just looking at the line as the cause of every sack. They sure didn’t help, but the QB gets a little blame for those too.
notthatnoise - November 22, 2010
Of course. They’re both to blame. The o-line certainly gets blame for not creating any holes for Hillis.
emily522 - November 22, 2010
I think there were also a few times where he stepped up into a pocket that collapsed like a black hole.
JustBob - November 22, 2010
I won’t argue with any of that; but he made a few questionable decisions today that he hadn’t really made up until this game. I’ll also say I’m not really worried because i suspect he’ll learn from it and be that much better next week.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Yes, he played like a rookie today. He missed too many throws and made some poor decisions to take sacks when he should have thrown the ball away. Only the biggest McCoy apologist wouldn’t admit that he played poorly today.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
Yeah. Hopefully he learned a lot from it today. At least he did put us in a position to win at the end, though. Shame he didn’t throw it into the end zone, but was there anyone even open in there at the final throw?
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Saying he played poorly is different from saying “he had a rookie game today”, which has a different implication.
And regardless, Of COURSE he had a rookie game today! He is one!
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
I don’t understand the difference, but it seems like you’re just arguing semantics now.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
I think its the fact that you are associating ‘playing like a rookie’ and him ’playing poorly and some (including me) see a significant difference in the meanings.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
I apologize for not deliberating over every single word I used when discussing Colt McCoy (made sure I capitalized and spelled it correctly).
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Please explain what you mean by ‘discussing’.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
You guys should probably just ignore me on the Colt McCoy discussions. I am way too biased as a Longhorns fan (who watched him get picked in the 3rd round after Clausen and Tebow no less- you really have no idea how incredulous I was seeing that play out on draft day… :-/ )
But hey, if you’re a glutton for punishment like I am, lets keep it going!
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
he also held onto the ball too long in a few instances, but I agree. I think it was definitely a rookie game, but the fact that he was still average means there is definitely promise.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Totally agree. The fact that this may have been his worst game so far but he still played better than any QB since Couch. In his 5th game? Incredible. The best part of him though is that he has what all the great QBs have – the ability to lead a drive when it is needed the most. Just in his short tenure he has 2 wins, a game tying drive, a go ahead drive and almost a game winning drive – just came up a bit short today. He will get so much better. Right now, his biggest concern should be his health. If he stays healthy, the wins will come.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
yep. just a bit short. If he maybe had another 40 seconds, i think we at least tie and go into overtime.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Really, I don’t think colt had that bad of a game. Yeah he wasn’t peyton manning and didn’t buoy us to a win by himself but he did what we needed him to do for the most part and didn’t turn the ball over (until late in the game when we had already lost it). I think our offensive line and offensive coaching staff blew this game by going to the peyton hillis well one two many times on first and second down.
The jags bottled up our running game and we didn’t have an answer. The play action doesn’t work when the running game is ground to a halt and you are in a lot of third and longs where the defense knows the pass is coming and can pin their ears back.
We especially didn’t execute well in pass pro, colt looked like he was back in the big 12 title game with Ndamukong Suh tossing around Texas’ offensive lineman like rag-dolls.
jaws. - November 21, 2010
2 51 yard field goals?
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
As I said, they weren’t chip shots, but they’re kicks he can make; however, he didn’t make them. He isn’t entirely to blame for the loss, but he has to get some blame. if he hits them both, we win. he didn’t hit either of them. we lost.
Dawson has a job to do and he didn’t do it sunday.
Dawg Nuts - November 23, 2010
I’m just thinking after forcing/getting 6 turnovers i’m not thinking about our kicker missing two 51 yard field goals when I reflect back on the game. Maybe next week or the week after i’ll look at it, but after the game and right now to be lamenting two missed 51 yard field goals after that defensive performance is low on my list of worries.
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
I agree with the logic. however, it is questionable that not making at least 1 of 2 51 yarders in a lot of wind isn’t “doing his job”
bross09 - November 23, 2010
I really don’t understand why we aren’t using more Evan Moore.
Also Hillis needs to get better in pass blocking. And where is Floyd Womack???
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
I was frustrated about not throwing to Moore as well. He’s made some great catches these past few games but it seems like we hardly throw to him until the end of the game.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
Evan Moore really should be heavily involved in the offense. Anyone looking for a legitimate reason to question Daboll, I think this is where you plant your flag. There’s no excuse, given the way he comes up with big plays every time the ball is thrown his way, for not targeting him a half dozen times a game.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
Agree with both you and Brad. That Colt to Moore for 38 yards was a thing of beauty- both the throw and catch.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
21 Y/R.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I agree…does anyone else really give us any more of a chance to make a play?
johnnyphoenix - November 21, 2010
I also don’t think we are using Moore’s versatility enough. We have Moore and Hillis and Watson, all of whom can be very good in the passing game and are at least decent in the run game. Get Moore favorable matchups and exploit them.
rufio - November 21, 2010
What’s the knock on Moore as a WR — that’s what he played in college. Is it that he is too slow?
TheDriveStillHurts - November 21, 2010
Not the best blocker and injury prone.
SpecialBrownie - November 21, 2010
No, I mean as opposed to TE.
TheDriveStillHurts - November 21, 2010
The only thing I would say is that he is a little slow. Obviously his injury history is cause for concern, but his size presents a matchup problem. I think he can overpower DBs in the running game, so who do you cover him with?
I have been on the Moore bandwagon for a while, I don’t know why they don’t play him more. Daboll definitely has a reason, but he has access to a lot of things we don’t and he could just be outsmarting himself.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Injured. Difference between him and St. Clair is really something.
TheDriveStillHurts - November 21, 2010
Oh boy isn’t it?
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
St. Clair needs to go. Get a young RT to learn behind Porkchop, please.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Just saw the re-play of the 75 yard Jones Drew screen play at the end – first of all, how do you let this even happen? Plus he looked to score on that play, which would have left us more time. Finally our lack of time outs at the end of a close game is really problematic.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
I also thought he was in on that run.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
We really screwed up the clock at the end. If we didn’t let him score on that long pass then we should have certainly let him score on first down. That would have saved us at least 30 seconds and maybe changed the outcome.
Also, wasting the time outs earlier in the half was bad. More rookie mistakes by McCoy (not that it was all his fault), but hopefully he’ll learn from them.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
At least one timeout was a defensive timeout, maybe 2?
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
Maybe. I remember one what the play clock was running down but I’m not sure about the others.
Buckeye Brad - November 21, 2010
That one was after the run where he screwed up his ankle, I believe.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
Or did we draw a delay of Game on that play? I can’t remember at the moment.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
and another where we had 12 men on the field and had to call a timeout.
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Ugh yeah that was one of them.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
2 on the same defensive drive
BuenosAires_Dawg - November 22, 2010
I saw Sorenson on the field during that final Jags drive, so I’m assuming we had extra DBs in. Looked like we were giving them the underneath stuff and got killed.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
Anybody want to give credit to Jones-Drew for being good?
JamesPowell - November 21, 2010
Absolutely. We’re not taking away anything from the Jags. They outplayed us.
golanbatrac - November 21, 2010
absolutely, but we’re talking about our team, not theirs. not being a prick, but i’m more concerned with what we should have done to stop him from being good today than I am with him actually being good.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
He was dragging our defenders the wrong way (right way for you) all game. He made plays. I’d take him on my team any day. Helluva player, helluva person from what I’ve seen.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Good call on the timeouts. Who knows what the outcome would have been with maybe 2 timeouts on the final drive.
Grockcubs - November 21, 2010
fixed
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
Yes, that’s what I meant.
Chris Pokorny - November 21, 2010
The entire 2nd half of the 4th quarter I was praying for a kardiac kids type win.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
Update:
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I guess that’s good.
apparently ankle injuries are the new staph infections in Cleveland
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
fantastic.
johnnyphoenix - November 21, 2010
I know. I hope we don’t have to start Wallace next week. His main target was Cribbs and he’s out. Or wait, is Cribbs coming back next week?
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Good article by Pluto to sum up the game.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Whoa Danny Woodhead just beasted for a TD run.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Whoa. Horrible throw by Peyton Manning.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Not to incite SpecialBrownie, but Collie>>>>Garcon and you can tell the difference in the Colts offense when Collie got hurt.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
Doug Farrar agrees.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
So after this really depressing loss I got into a huge fight with someone over the phone. What a great day. At least I have Walking Dead to look forward to.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
Not to shine sun on everyone’s crappy mood, but Ward had 2 picks and a forced fumble that we recovered. Haden had an INT and looked brilliant in coverage. Even Abram Elam has been playing well of late. I really think we have narrowed down our major needs: WR, right side O line, pass rusher, and maybe one D lineman. Could potentially use another secondary player.
These losses are disappointing, but if we can keep drafting like we just did this year, we can be very good soon.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
amen, brother. I’m starting to feel a little better at this point. despite this turd game, we’re still on our way.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
This. This team is on the right trajectory, but to expect to win any game right now sets us up for disappointment. Colt’s first “bad” game didn’t include pick-6’s, or anything like that. We need pieces and we knew that. We played four really good teams really well, but that doesn’t mean we won’t lose to Buffalo. As a fan, I am very pleased with this season so far.
kennesawmountainwahoo - November 21, 2010
Yes.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Totally agree, I think we need more depth all around so our guys aren’t so tired, particularly at RB and on the defensive side, but really at this point, our guys just need more experience.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
Also, I love not seeing “QB” at the top of that list.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
We could also use someone to spell Hillis.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
don’t worry, you did it correctly.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I knew someone was going to do that, haha.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
I think we can be pretty damn good next year with a good draft, hardesty healthy, and some FA help…no reason to think we can’t make a legit run at the playoffs.
johnnyphoenix - November 21, 2010
Agree with Dorn
I was trashing our o-line earlier in the thread(s), but also made the point that they just came off of a six week war with the NFL’s best, standing their ground like warriors. Understandable that they could be fatigued, burnt out, etc. not to mention we were missing a couple of our best workhorses in Cribbs and Fujita.
Someone (I think Spidey) posted a ‘FanShot’ a while back titled “Should We Worry About Letdown?”.
That was before the Jets game.
I think that post and its title were apropos. It just came a week early.
To make matters worse, we had that damn Jets game won, and I think that loss made it even more difficult, with everything else piled on, for the Brownies to come back strong on the road.
Never say die. I sincerely believe next year we are a playoff team.
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
You did the opposite with this kind of post. We still look promising, potentially.
Simmsinns - November 21, 2010
We could use a few DL.
rufio - November 21, 2010
This Colts-Pats game is going to have a good ending.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I might add that Peyton is my starting QB in the ODBN Fantasy League.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I hate this excuse normally, but our schedule couldn’t be any harder – it seems like every week we are playing a division leader. Except for Cinci I think we have.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
People hate blaming the schedule but it’s a very real factor in the NFL. We are on a tough cycle this year.
Roger Dorn - November 21, 2010
What divisions do we have next year?
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Depends if the NFL decides to make a big mistake and go to 18 game season — then everything is in the air. In the normal rotation, we would have NFC West and AFC South I think.
TheDriveStillHurts - November 21, 2010
Dammit! I wanted NE to lose.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Dammit! I wanted Peyton to not cost me points.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
I am down 47 points. I have Mario Manningham, Brandon Lloyd, DeSean Jackson, and David Akers left.
Is it possible? We’ll see…
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Lloyd is a points machine this year. He could get you halfway there by himself Even in the tough matchups he seems to always make a big play. .
johnnyphoenix - November 21, 2010
Ueeehhhh… this crow… it’s so bitter.
Simmsinns - November 21, 2010
Back to our regularly scheduled 5-11/6-10 programming.
cheech99 - November 21, 2010
just now saw richard seymour level roethlisberger. awesome.
Dawg Nuts - November 21, 2010
Can someone with the know how please post this clip in a loop so I can watch it for the next hour or so? I giggle every time Ben gets leveled.
DaveDawg09 - November 21, 2010
Seymour should have hit him harder
Bernie19Kosar - November 22, 2010
Will be interesting on how the rest of the season plays out. I sure hope McCoy is fine and can continue to learn and grow with this team. Nothing against Wallace, it just feels like McCoy’s team.
I have to agree with the article by Pluto, the lack of elite players on both sides of the ball hurt this team. The defense was very good today, however giving up that 75 yard pass/run is inexcusable. And the glaring need of a Pro Bowl type wideout was never more evident than today.
I do like this team, frustrated that I may be.
Grockcubs - November 21, 2010
I think Pluto was more correct when he said the team lacks depth. I don’t think they necessarily need a star, I think they need to be fresher at the end of games, meaning they need more rotation on defense and they just need to build more chemistry with the QB and receivers. I think they could use taller, more physical WRs, but I don’t think they need a superstar, just more guys like Evan Moore who will go and get the ball.
HenryDawg - November 21, 2010
Fair point. I still would love to see and elite pass rusher and a stud wideout.
Grockcubs - November 21, 2010
Same here.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Running the ball Late
Was the Key, and they could not Spring Hillis. Only having one real back is hurting this team too. I think patience is the key. They should have won today. Things are getting better slowly. The three glaring problems in order are : Below average Receivers, No Pressure Pass Rush, A second good running back. I did not like Daboll play calls late either. THE MUST was the BROWNS needed to make a first down on their second to last drive instead of handing to Hillis twice. A first down there wins the game. It was obvious they knew the BROWNS were running and since they could not get Hillis a hole to run through maybe three passes to pick up one more first down would have won the game.
champion64 - November 21, 2010
Colt's injury
So this could be interesting. Probably premature to speculate – but interesting to consider…
Hypothetical:
Wallace plays next week (due to Colt’s injury). Browns win with in a blowout and Wallace has a big game. Puts up say… 280 yards passing / 2 TDs / no interceptions. Certainly not a stretch, with Cribbs back(?) – playing at home against a joke of a Panthers team, etc.
McCoy heals and is able to practice the following week.
Whats next? Predictions anyone?
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
Whatever the outcome, I hope McCoy has earned the starting position for the rest of the year.
Grockcubs - November 21, 2010
This game needs to turn into a passing shootout right now.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Looks like Mike Trivosonno was absolutely right about this game. He called for a big fat letdown and that’s exactly what we got. Unfortunate. I think Brian Daboll should get some of the blame because I felt our playcalling got very predictable in the third quarter, especially coming off those turnovers.
It seemed like everyone knew when we were going to hillis and the jags just shut the door. I’m sure he has his reasons but I think Daboll did a very poor job calling plays, especially on a short field after a turnover — where you ought to be a little more aggressive on first down.
Perhaps it is because the browns have all but given up on Robiskie and Masaquoi (Are they really that bad? We can’t seem to get anyone open downfield, even against the jags porous secondary) Perhaps they didn’t want colt running around on a gimpy ankle. Whatever it was, it had me yelling at the TV.
The other thing I really didn’t like was our pass protection. Our normally solid pass pro seemed to break down under a (up until this point) pretty weak Jacksonville pass rush.
Our team is playing hard but I think we are at that point where we need to learn how to finish games. The last two weeks our offense seemed to be at its best when we were forced to go hurry-up and just sling the ball all over the field — so we can at least sometimes be productive passing the ball.
I think the browns are at the point where they need to start looking at using the short pass to set up the run more rather than trying to run and set up playaction as much as we do. I say that because we don’t have much in terms of over-the-top threats at WR and our QB isn’t a strong-armed playaction passer.
jaws. - November 21, 2010
I agree.
After the fumble return TD on the first turnover, here are the Browns offensive sequences after the remaining four turnovers:
- handoff to Peyton Hillis for three yards, handoff to Hillis for one yard, McCoy sack, punt.
- handoff to Hillis for no yards, handoff to Hillis for minus-1, McCoy incompletion, Dawson field goal
- McCoy sacked, McCoy incompletion, Hillis run for six yards.
- handoff to Hillis for no yards, handoff to Hillis for two, McCoy incompletion (Dawson missed a 51-yard field goal try)
Predictable indeed.
We may not currently have a deep threat, but we have seen what Colt can do when they open up the passing play book for him or kick into the hurry up offense, which Colt has been very successful at.
Why did we keep running Hillis into a brick wall?
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
(meant to be a reply to jaws above)
burntorangeandbrown - November 21, 2010
they did try to mix it up once, but the protection broke down. however, after that one failed attempt, it seems like they went back to run run pass
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Some of the more obvious poor play calling on offense this week IMHO. I think the Browns were too conservative against this team. The O-line seemed to have transformed into the Bronco’s or Bears O-line. I was hoping we wouldn’t take a step back or play to the opponent’s level. True, the Jags are better than we thought they would be at the first of the year but I didn’t think they would neutralize the Browns offense to this extent. A very discouraging game. Now it is time to start talking about next year as any playoff hopes are shattered with this loss.
Brownsyup - November 21, 2010
Manningham: 1 point, Jackson: 5
Down 22. Darn.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Down 18. It’s up to you, Brandon Lloyd.
Oh and I should’ve started Miles Austin. You were right, Simms.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
I can’t do math. I’m down 28.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
Ward finally broke his INT cherry, even though they were compliments of Brown. Haden looked awesome. Good last draft.
SpecialBrownie - November 21, 2010
yep. I wondered during the jets game where James Walker rates our Rookies in the scope of the AFC North. I know after the steelers game, we had the #1 Rookie (Ward), #3 (Colt) and tied for 5(Haden…or could be colt, I mightve gotten them switched). The question is: who has been our best rookie…and this is a toughie IMO>
bross09 - November 21, 2010
Yeah, Eli. Throw a TD to everyone except Manningham.
emily522 - November 21, 2010
As disappointed as I am about today, we were 1-9 and in the drivers seat for the number one pick at this point last season. It may not feel like it right now, but we are light years ahead of where we were last season.
1. Joe Haden’s pass break up on the deep pass to Mike Thomas was a thing of beauty. For him to make up so much ground (thank you David Garrard for massively underthrowing that) and not get a PI call on an underthrown bomb was awesome. I really think he may be the best CB on this team right now.
2. We faced the 29th ranked pass defense and our starting WR’s combined for 4 catches and 51 yards. Yuck.
3. I can’t believe I am going to say this, but we missed Billy Yates. We miss Pashos and Womack as well. I have no idea how John St. Clair continues to get time. He is a turnstile. I will give Luavao a pass since he is a youngster, but good Lord I can’t believe how badly our offensive line played. Mack struggled with Knighton in the middle. Golan is on the money with that.
4. I’m being dead serious when I say Evan Moore should be a starting WR for us. Sometimes you just need to get your best play makers on the field.
5. He didn’t play great, but I still thought Colt McCoy had a chance to win the game with a 1:30 to go in the fourth. Something I haven’t felt since Kosar.
Bernie19Kosar - November 22, 2010
I agree.. St. Clair is even on the team. He was completely over matched.
champion64 - November 22, 2010
St. Clair, was a problem and the jags knew where we were going to run. I would have like to see some passes at the end to pick up that first down before we kicked the go ahead field goal. A first down with 3 minutes to go would have allowed the Browns to run the clock down and win the game with a field goal. One question because I did not get to see it completely , where was WARD on the 75 yard screen pass to Drew?
champion64 - November 22, 2010
He definitely had a chance to win the game. And I actually thought to myself, “He’s going to put the ball in the end zone.”
I hope his ankle injury isn’t too serious. It would really suck for him to have to miss the rest of the season. I guess Wallace would start if McCoy does have that high ankle sprain. And correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that o-line lineup the same one that was playing in the Falcons game when Wallace got hurt too?
emily522 - November 22, 2010
I don’t believe it was Luvao in that game, but I could be wrong.
Bernie19Kosar - November 22, 2010
St. Clair can only get time because we have like 3 RTs hurt ahead of him. He was pretty bad yesterday. I thought Womack was actually doing quite well there earlier in the year.
rufio - November 22, 2010
Womack’s play at RT was a big surprise for me. I think I might have unfairly lumped him in with St. Clair since they were both came on board at the same time.
Monsters of the Midway - November 23, 2010
That is an insult to turnstiles sir, turnstiles only let one man through at a time.
North Coast Flea - November 24, 2010
I found some numbers that might help explain why our team seems to look better this year yet their record is still only 3-7.
The Browns schedule so far this year has been BY FAR the most difficult in the NFL. Their opponents are a combined 32 games over .500 with a winning % of .660 (!!!) The team with the next toughest schedule (to date) is Buffalo, whose opponents are ‘merely’ 16 games over .500 with a winning % of .580.
To put this further in perspective, the teams with the easiest schedule so far this year are KC, TB, and CHI, each of whose opponents are 18 games under .500 with a winning % of .390.
Not that this makes our 3-7 record feel any better, but at least it helps explain why we seem better despite our w-l record.
bbstirrd - November 22, 2010
Your post needed to be said. I think it helps with the perspective
champion64 - November 22, 2010
whats pittsburgh’s? I know they had a tough one comparable to ours for a while.
bross09 - November 22, 2010
PIT, CAR, and MIN are in a 3-way tie for 3rd toughest schedule to date. Their opponents are 14 games over .500.
bbstirrd - November 23, 2010
ahh. I knew pittsburgh was up there with us, but they had an easier schedule going forward. At least our schedule in the next 6 games is bottom 10 in SoS…
bross09 - November 23, 2010
They must be punished. Start benching people.
mooncamping - November 22, 2010
Stinker
Man all those turnovers and to only score 20 points. We need some receivers besides Stucky to step up…Mo & Ro ???? No anwser for MJD attack. He was a punisher yesterday. At least it wasn’t a blowout, but that last run to set up the final TD was the killer.
Thumpin96 - November 22, 2010
Still bummed about this game. I know, there’s still plenty of reasons to be optimistic, but this sure seemed like a step back. There was a hint from those last 4 games that we might be in the top half of the league, but now I don’t think so. The schedule has been tough (9 games against teams above .500, 1 against the Bengals), sure, but come on.
Maybe I’ll pretend it’s hockey from here on out, and only watch 3 periods (hey, we’re 6-4!).
To me, it all started with the offensive line getting beat badly. Sure the QB could bail them out, but Colt didn’t. Same with Hillis. Same with Daboll, who turtled like he often did last season.
A couple of other questions/thoughts:
1) What happened in the first half? I didn’t get to see much of the first half, but the numbers suggested we should’ve scored more than once, no?
2) Did I miss a bunch of trickery/misdirection in the first half? Or is the idea that we’re good enough now to not bother with such things?
3) Was the ball to Robiskie tipped away, or should he have caught it? I’m a Buckeye fan and a Browns fan, and it makes me very sad to admit that he’s my least favorite Brown.
4) If we want to win more this season (not sure if that’s a goal now), this seems like a big week for our FO. Let’s see if they can dig around the scrap heaps for a backup RB and someone to replace St. Clair. It’s patchwork time, and the trade deadline is long past.
5) More Moore
6) I think the D should work on some laterals this week. (i kid)
dgcambridge - November 22, 2010
It took a brave soul to recap this game. My favorite line of the game is when Gannon commented before Dawson attempted a 48 yd FG, “This is not a gimme.” Really? A 48 yd FG try isn’t a gimme? Give this man a raise.
elsandito - November 22, 2010
I liked Mangini’s post game conference. He seemed like he was pissed and showing at least some emotion. I mean, he seemed pissed compared to most weeks.
It’s unforgivable to force 6 turnovers and not win the game. Completely uncalled for. And while the offensive gameplan may have seemed to be terrible, I pin a lot of this on the O-Line. Giving up 6 sacks is never ever EVER OK. And you have to be playing like a high school O-Line to make it possible for Hillis to only get 48 yards.
In the end, I hope Mangini’s frustration carries over into the practice week and wakes the guys up. This is the first time during the entire season I’ve been ashamed of the way the Browns played.
shep615 - November 22, 2010
He seemed more nervous to me, like knowing he might be back on the hot seat.
Roger Dorn - November 22, 2010
I thought he looked like he could not believe it. I still think they are on the right track. He is nervous. Holmgren is a coach and that does not easily leave your system. Look at Parcells. Do you think Mangini is in trouble?
A side note did anyone notice Sheldon Brown try to punch the ball out of Drew’s arms instead of tackling him on that devasting 75 yard screen pass. HE COULD HAVE TACKLED HIM!
champion64 - November 22, 2010
There seemed to be a lot of strip-first-tackle la-oops-too-late.
JustBob - November 22, 2010
That has happened a lot this season. I think it was Eric Wright on a Hines Ward TD earlier this season as well. Today’s NFL has become a strip-tackle league. I don’t fault a player trying to make a strip, but you damn sure better make the tackle first. That is exactly what happened on the MJD catch.
Bernie19Kosar - November 22, 2010
Yes, I noticed. And he completely whiffed. It’s a shame, too, because he had a pretty good game otherwise.
Western Reserve - November 22, 2010
Fantastic game otherwise. Remarkable considering he probably shouldn’t have played given the prior week’s injury. Sheldon is a warrior.
Roger Dorn - November 23, 2010
I personally don’t think Mangini needs to worry about Holmgren taking the coaching job. The most I think he needs to worry about is Holmgren bringing someone else in to take over.
Didn’t the Seahawks kinda flop when Holmgren was trying to do both the GM stuff and the coaching? I think Holmgren is going to respect the position he’s been trusted with and understand that he can’t do a good job at both coaching and his presidential duties. I honestly don’t think that Holmgren playing the coach/president role gives the team the best chance of winning consistently as keeping Mangini where he is (or bringing someone else in to take Mangini’s place) and Holmgren staying where he is.
But in the end, I have a feeling Mangini will still be the head coach next year.
shep615 - November 23, 2010
Pretty sure the year they just set him as coach, they made it to the SB.
SpecialBrownie - November 23, 2010
Yeah. I’m not disputing that… I’m talking about the other years when he pulled double duty.
If he were to come down and just coach, then who knows? Maybe he takes us to the playoffs or Super Bowl or something? But then again, who takes the President of Football Operations position?
Holmgren tried to do the GM/Coach thing and it wasn’t super successful. I can’t see him thinking it’s a good idea to do the PresidentOFO/Coach thing. So unless he’s going to replace himself with someone who can do a comparable job (which I don’t know if he can do that), I think he stays put as the Prez instead of moving to coaching.
shep615 - November 23, 2010
It is obvious, as long as Holmgren occupies one position only on a team, he does a bang ass job. The minute he multitasks, things start to slide. I hope he’s noticed this.
SpecialBrownie - November 23, 2010
He built a Superbowl caliber team in his time as both.
golanbatrac - November 24, 2010
I wonder if he should actually be nervous though? Do you think he gets judged mostly on wins and losses at the end of the season?
If I’m evaluating his work, then I see the complete 180 culture shift in the locker room, the competitiveness of the team week in and week out despite injuries and lack of talent at key positions as really positive. Basically, I think he’s done a great job with what he has to work with. Especially considering our schedule being as tough as it is.
Ultimately, I’d keep him around. Maybe if there’s someone out there that gives us a better chance to win than Daboll does, I’d let Daboll go. But I’d keep Mangini.
shep615 - November 23, 2010
At this point, I don’t think the people judging him merely on wins and losses are the ones running the organization. I believe Holmgren sees the growth and change, and will allow mangini time to build upon the foundation he’s set. the ones judging him merely on wins and losses are a certain segment of the fanbase (the ones who question his job security after 1 bad loss).
Dawg Nuts - November 23, 2010
Dawg pound Mike.
SpecialBrownie - November 23, 2010
maybe he’s angling for a pow-wow with Holmgren.
Dawg Nuts - November 23, 2010
This is my line of thinking. If Holmgren can’t see that Mangini has turned this team from camp powderpuff to a team that has a chance to win every game they play than maybe he shouldn’t be our Prez.
North Coast Flea - November 24, 2010
Can i say our 3-7 feels so much better than Cincy’s 2-8? Heck they’ve lost 7 games in a row. Is this the end of the line for Lewis? And to think TO is having a good year.
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
Lewis saved his job last year, I’ve got to think he loses it this year.
notthatnoise - November 23, 2010
I was listening to R & R. they had James Walker as a guest and he was saying Marvin Lewis’ contract is up. this makes it much more likely because then you don’t have to go though all the complicated stuff of buying out a coach for the years remaining, you can just choose not to resign him.
Also, OchoCinco’s contract has a team option at the end of the season. He is no longer worth the money he is being payed. this his average season (16 game season) since 2007: 71 receptions and 890 yards. while this is still good, but that is 11 less catches and 350 less yards than he averaged in his career up until that point. He has lost something and I am feeling (as James walker thinks should happen) that they are just gonna clean house this offseason)
bross09 - November 23, 2010
I don’t know how much he has lost, but hell Carson Palmer is overrated.
Villeslgr - November 23, 2010
I totally agree. he hasn’t been the same since his injury in 2008 (and even before that, he seemed to be falling off a bit). He is maybe an above average starter, but definitely not worth what he is getting paid. He is making (on average) in base salary, 2 million dollars a year more than Phillip freakin Rivers. the guy is a middle of the road QB but is top 3-4 in base salary.
But all of this, is also why i think he is gone at the end of the year too.
I do think though that Chad OchoCinco has lost something. He is not at all as explosive as he used to be. Not only is he not making the big plays as much or the TDs, but he isn’t going downfield as effectively. his yards per catch has plummeted and he is just not an elite threat anymore. hell, you can argue he isn’t a top 2 option right now on the team (shipley is putting up arguably as good of #s as him)
bross09 - November 23, 2010
…also forgot to include that I looked up his DVOA and DYAR (football outsiders stats if you don’t know what they are…DVOA is defense adjusted value per snap and DYAR is defense adjusted yards over replacement). He is 54th among all WRs in DYAR and 62nd in DVOA. He is producing as much as a good #3 should or a very poor #2. the lower DVOA proves what i was thinking that he gets a lot of yards just because he is a starter and gets a lot of snaps…kinda like how Brandon Marshall is doing or a Nate Burleson or Lee Evans.
bross09 - November 23, 2010
It’s way better because they are old and need to rebuild. We have already finished the tear down (of what exactly?) process.
Roger Dorn - November 23, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.