The Cleveland Browns lost their home opener to the Kansas City Chiefs by a final score of 16-14, dropping their record to 0-2 on the year. The script of the game was pretty much the same as last week's loss to the Buccaneers. How so?
- The Browns had a decent first half offensively, putting 14 points on the board.
- The game was made a lot closer when Seneca Wallace threw one of the worst interceptions possible in the first half -- a pass to the sideline that was an easy pick six for cornerback Brandon Flowers.
- The Browns did run the ball a little more this week, but often without fullback Lawrence Vickers.
- The defense played very well again, picking off Matt Cassel twice. They didn't yield a single touchdown, and only had one case where the Chiefs really had a good drive on them.
- Cleveland's offense shut down in the second half, with no points and minimal yardage.
There were new nuisances this week, such as Phil Dawson's missed field goal and a lot of the calls by the officiating crew. I'll discuss those more in depth when I do my full recap of the game. Until then, this is your spot to react to what is now looking like a gloomy season.
God the coming weeks will be pure hell for us.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
My only satisfaction comes from imagining the sh*tstorm that is going to rain down from Holmgren onto the responsible parties. I like to visualize that.
johnnyphoenix - September 19, 2010
This.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
looking at the schedule ahead, i expect maybe 1-3 wins. i hope that they will get a new OC, daboll is not good.
davus - September 19, 2010
..if we’re lucky we get 1 win.
johnnyphoenix - September 19, 2010
and that is if the moon.stars,mars and saturn all line up just right
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
… right when they play the bills
davus - September 19, 2010
Thankfully last year we didn’t need an OC to beat Buffalo. Hopefully this year will be the same.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
My only observations for the game:
1.) Officiating screwed us.
2.) Daboll must be fired before the season is over. He is absolutely terrible.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
This cannot be recced enough. Truer words have never been spoken.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
1) Definitely
2) if this keeps up, for sure
bross09 - September 19, 2010
It has kept up long enough. The time is now.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Concur, and rec the original post.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
sorry but this sounds a little rash and reactionary.
Daboll actually showed some promise in the last 4-5 games. have we forgotten that? do we have such short term memory that after 2 bad games, we are ready to clean house of an organization?
this sort of emotional response and reactionary decision making is why we haven’t been able to stick with a head coach for a long period of time here. its also partly why we can never stick with a QB (look how we turned on couch when holcomb had one good game). Its why we have so much instability in this organization. I hope everyone thinks about all of this and then by wednesday, sees how they feel. I think there are at least 1/4 of the people spouting this opinion that WILL change.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I don’t think we did much different in the last four weeks of last season except completely give up on Brady Quinn. I don’t know if “abandoning the pass” qualifies as progressing as a coordinator.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
Right, I don’t know what people saw in Daboll at the end of last year. The team realized that they didn’t have a credible QB, so they ran a lot.
Rash and reactionary, bross? Maybe. But I have been consistent in this call for the last 10 months. It is time.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
…also look at our game against detroit and against san diego. Its not just those 4 wins. thats why I said 4-5 games (I was including SD but forgot about Detroit). we lost those games, but not for a lack of offense. our offensive playcalling (especially passing the ball) looked very good in those games.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
You are really reaching. Like really.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
nope. the playcalling was solid from the lions game on. it might have not been great, but not enough to fire someoene over. This playcalling over just two games is also not enough IMO to fire someone over. Not even combined do I feel it deserves a firing. definitely a talking to by mangini or holmgren or someone. However, I just think it would be rash to make a decision like this after 2 games. maybe you have felt this way about daboll, but most are just going off of these last 2 games.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Right. The Lions game. One game in the middle of last season was not enough to fire someone over. It was great. Just ok. Against an awful defense. Just terrible.
And that is the only thing that you could point to?
You are really, really reaching.
I’m making my opinion based on 18 games. You are pointing to one game. The burden is on Daboll- why should he be kept? Continuity? Yikes.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
The biggest issue I have with Daboll is the lack of adjustments at halftime. There have been too many games, going back to last year too, where we were ahead at the half and then could do nothing in the second half. Other teams (coaches) adjusted to us.
Crazy Ray - September 19, 2010
Adjustments are the key! It totally seems like we never adjust to anything for the second half. They adjust to us, and we go, huh? what? Are we playing a game? It’s football? Football? Really? I’ve never seen a team look so clueless in the second halves of these first 2 games!!
cboldt12 - September 20, 2010
LMAO! You are exactly right! It doesn’t see as if we do any offensive adjustments during the game. Defense, as said in here somewhere, has looked pretty good.
/points finger nonchalantly at Brian Daboll
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
Over an opinion of 18 games, I am not fond, but need a couple more games like this to say he is truly the problem.
(playing devils advocate here) When he came to cleveland too, he was expecting to have both Braylon Edwards and kellen Winslow. Then we get rid of kellen winslow and braylon edwards. maybe he felt that he could get something out of BE if the FO gave him the chance, but they didn’t.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
your devil-advocating is reaching.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
fine. every point I make is a reach because daboll is the worst OC in history and giving him any credit for anything is a reach…ya happy?
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Sure.
I’m all for an intelligent defense of Daboll. But pointing to one game against the worst team in the league 9 months ago, an island in the middle of a year of suckiness, and then backing it up with the thought that he deserves some kind of pass because he lost Edwards and Winslow… well, reach is the most appropriate word.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Don’t soil the word reach Bross.
You’ll ruin Halo for me forever.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
I wasn’t pointing to one game though. you keep saying that but I pointed to every game from the detroit game onward…except against Cincy where our playcalling regressed some (but the problem there was more execution from what i remember)
I don’t think he deserves to get a pass b/c of BE and Winslow. That i can say is a reach (and I know I commented after you pointed this out, i was just getting tired of reading the word reach). I was just trying to play devils advocate, which sometimes you have to reach to do…especially here where its hard to truly advocate for daboll being a good coordinator.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Once again, I feel like I’ve given my time for nothing. I guess you don’t think Daboll is good. I really have no idea what you think at this point on the topic. That he isn’t good, but shouldn’t be fired?
Anyway, I don’t think his playcalling was all that impressive from the Lions game on. He caught some lightening in the bottle with Harrison and some wild cat after his quarterbacks totally tanked. I just don’t give him a lot of credit for that. I didn’t then and I won’t now.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
something like that. I think he isn’t particularly good, but am not in favor of firing him 2 games into the season.
I guess we can just agree to disagree on the games after the lions game. I thought he showed some improvement.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
The desire to eliminate Daboll is not based on two games. We have all of last season as a database, lest we forget. As much as circumstances at the end of last year played into how those last four games went down, I was willing at the time to give him a little credit for some sort of progress there.
The last two games here make me think he was just forced into something by circumstance that happened to work out. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
I was totally baffled and dumbfounded that he wasn’t canned by Holmgren, Heckert, or Mangini before the start of the season. It was the biggest shock of the offseason, and I couldn’t rationalize it no matter how I tried. These two games are just piling on at this point.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
If you haven’t seen enough Brown’s football to know that Brian Daboll is in way over his hea as a NFL playcaller, then your measure of offensive sucktitude is unreal.
I can’t imagine how anyone can defend a dumbass who thinks having Delhomme/Wallace combine to throw 68 times is a good idea.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
REC!
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
I felt the gameplanning today was a bit better than last week…but that isn’t saying much.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
How was it better?
I’m not saying that Daboll is the sole problem, far from it, but don’t whiz on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
I only say its better because we ran the ball more and didn’t rely solely on the pass. In that sense we were better but that makes it marginally better…I am trying to just be positive and point out one thing they did right, but they still have a ton of things to work on.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
1st quarter
7 runs
13 passes
2nd quarter
11 runs
5 passes until final draft (3 passes)
3rd quarter
6 runs
5 passes
4th quarter
1 run
7 passes
This is for today’s game.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
Draft should be drive. All this draft talk has my mind scrambled.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
First half 53 yards on 18 carries 1 td and 1 fumble.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
Agreed.
Look, throwing is usually the more effective way to gain yards and score points. But Daboll has totally ignored the team’s strengths and weaknesses. And that is about as bad an indictment as you can have on a coach in my opinion. It shows a football mind that isn’t flexible enough or creative enough to be a NFL coordinator.
These games were low scoring, we were winning most of the time, and we have a talented group of runners. The number of carries for Hillis, Harrison, CRIBBS, Wallace and Davis are all lower than I would like to have seen. It is amazingly bad.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Yeah, it seems Daboll has forgotten how great Vickers was over the last half of the season. I don’t understand why he is barely being used. And why they didn’t use a similar game plan as the one they had in the win against the Chiefs last year doesn’t make sense. The Chiefs’ D didn’t have an answer to the play of the OL and Vickers’ blocking last year. How do you ignore that?
dawgtribe - September 20, 2010
That is easy his name is Daboll …..
Brownsfan4ever - September 20, 2010
The number of carries i agree was low, but the numbers are scewed. Take away harrisons 39 yard run and he was averaging under 2 yards per carry. Now Hillis was a different story, the dude is a beast, but…….my question is where is james davis, did we give up on him? I love the run game but I really thing that our major concern right now is not the run game but the play calling and not because Daboll is aweful, he just hasn’t realized that the right side of our line cannot block any of our grandparents let alone a defensive end. Three step drops and throw the damn ball, thats the key. Manning has done it for 10 years why can’t we. (before anyone says it, I’m not comparing delhomme to manning, just saying he should have the ball no more than 4-5 seconds.)
JBrownFan - September 20, 2010
on a good note how bout the sure tackling fiend that is named ward
JBrownFan - September 20, 2010
We’ve all of a sudden got a lot of good tacklers. Progress.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
Exactly.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
I didn’t even read the whole thing. Daboll is a job-keeping douche.
i don’t give a da*m what the “big picture” strategy is. If you’re losing games to get there, it is NOT effective.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
I strongly disagree with this.
rufio - September 20, 2010
On its face, I too disagree with that statement. But besides draft picks paying dividends, what have the last two games done for the “big picture”? And I ask that earnestly.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
Our defense has looked better than anything I remember seeing in the past from the New Browns.
We’ve lost 2 games by a combined 5 points. We are actually competing in games and losing them because we mess up, not because the other team is ridiculously better than us.
I don’t think it’s fair to say “besides draft picks paying dividends” because that’s exactly what we need to be seeing in the big picture; improvement, and young talent. I still don’t think we have enough of it (particularly in our DL/LBs) but we are getting there.
rufio - September 20, 2010
I wasn’t trying to unfairly exclude the positives of our draft picks, I merely meant to exempt it because it was the most obvious example of “big picture” progress to me. I think your other examples of progress are fair, though it points to this season being a long slog — especially when we are routinely too incompetent to win the ‘easy’ ones.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
This.
KC and tampa bay are exceeding the expectations people had for them going into the season. personally, I thought tampa would be lucky to win 5 games and I took them for granted. they look much improved, especially on D.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
To be fair, 50% of the reason they’re exceeding expectations is because they’ve beaten the Browns.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
Yea, this early in the season it can be attributed at least in part to that, but we will see how things play out.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
true…because its that early. However, I think the other games they won were more of the exceeding expectations. the browns, Bucs, and Chiefs all finished with similar records last year, so the games were expected to be closer. however, I don’t know how many people had KC over SD or the Bucs over the Panthers. Personally, I didn’t
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I agree with this although, looking at it now, the Panthers might challenge us for the number 1 pick. It’s Claussen time!!
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
thats possible. They haven’t looked too good.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
A thousand times this.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
You know what this Browns team needs? A Quarterback and a true #1 Wideout.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
I’m on the Jamarcus Russell bandwagon with Bernie. Add a little VJax and see what happens.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
I’d rather resign Ratliff.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
Sure, but with a great LT, good RBs, passable QB, and a few interesting WRs, they HAVE to score more than 0 points in two second halves combined.
And if the defense is going to be this solid, we might not need much more than that.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
QB play is definitely the main issue. We ran all of those go routes because the Chiefs D was daring Wallace to throw deep. It worked once with Cribbs, but worked out for the Chiefs every other time. Until we get a QB, we are going to keep losing.
Defense was awesome again.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
This can’t be said enough.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
Wallace kept throwing the ball somewhere outside of the field of play, but our recs never seemed to be open anyway.
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
I hate that the majority of our deep routes are fades/gos.
We really aren’t finding much success with those, I’d like to see more options that are deep-ish but not just running in a straight line.
rufio - September 20, 2010
a post or a flag or a combination thereof would be appreciated.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
I am not sure if I have ever seen us run something like double Smash or smash with another vertical-ish route.
I would love to see us do anything else and go away from the fade/comeback stuff because we just aren’t good at it.
rufio - September 20, 2010
I’m thinking we need to draft a QB in the first round, unless the FO truly believes Colt can get it done.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Scratch that. We need to either draft a QB, RB, or WR.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
I personally like Ryan Mallet a lot, and before people jump on here about character concerns, I’m waiting to hear something that isn’t unsubstantiated rumor.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Ryan Mallet has been playing amazingly so far. Jumping on this bandwagon.
StuckInPa - September 19, 2010
Idk. What I read about Mallet on scouting reports so far… he seems a bit overrated.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
And his completion percentage last year was 55%. Not very accurate.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Luck’s was 56%, Locker’s was even lower I think.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
in a system that QBs tend to do well in, but can’t repeat that success (Chris Redman, Brian Brohm, Dave Ragone). he has much more physical skills than these guys, but can’t even put up as good of numbers in petrino’s offense which has shown to be fairly QB friendly.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I know we all mock walterfootball, but his scouting report seems to pretty accurate from what I’ve seen.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
I have to agree. mostly walterfootball seemed like a tool because of how he salivated over jimmy fratboy clausen. I occasionally like some of the other stuff he says, especially about Mallett. he did say malletts draft stock is rising, as it should be, but even he still had some somewhat major miscues and WTF plays in the last couple weeks that against a better team, would have turned out differently.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Petrino was Redman’s OC for one year and he didn’t coach Ragone, John L. Smith did.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
petrino learned his offensive system from John L. Smith. Petrino coached in multiple stints under smith as an OC. technically Petrino didn’t coach Ragone but when I refer to the ‘petrino system’ it is really an extension of John L. Smith too.
Overall, guys from this system have never lived up to the expectations in the NFL (even if you include Jake Plummer who was probably the most talented guy coached by either of them, but still was a disapointment of sorts in the NFL)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
they need speed. its sad that the fastest weapon on the team is the KR specialist who’s being pressed into a role he’s not ideally suited for. I am NOT knocking Cribbs just the slothful look of the team
sleepy042 - September 19, 2010
the Lions actually signing talent….although getting screwed by refs…are starting to look like geniuses.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
the lions drafted the high end talent on their team. Their QB, #1 WR, and RB were all first round picks I believe.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Not blaming officials, but they were awful today. The Harrison fumble, the 4th down play (which was unquestionably a turnover on downs) and the roughing the passer.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
Apparently defensive players can no longer dive to sack the quarterback. They must grasp him gently by the waist and escort him to the ground.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
Ray Lewis had a bogus tripping call called on him today as well. But I didn’t care, because it’s Ray Lewis and he plays for the Ravens.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
fixed…sorry I just really hate the Ravens
Kimble_79 - September 19, 2010
rec
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
Yes to all of this. The roughing the passer made me want to stop watching football forever (see my post from last month). The other two were so blatantly missed on the field, but the replays weren’t conclusive enough. Everone loves instant replay, but it doesn’t make up for terrible officiating.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
It was unneccessary roughness for leading with the helmet, not roughing the passer. They’re two completely different penalties.
And even if the fourth down conversion is overturned it still leaves a good chunk of yards before a field goal after the offense showed nothing for the final two quarters.
JComp11 - September 19, 2010
The fact remains. One cannot make a diving tackle without his helmet leading his body.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
they called it on the field both. they definitely said ‘roughing the passer’
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Yeah, I didn’t hear what the ref said, but he definitely motioned the signal for roughing the passer.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
The ref explained that it was unneccesary roughness for leading with the helmet. I’m not sure how much clearer he could’ve been.
JComp11 - September 19, 2010
It doesn’t make it any better of a call/rule. It is an embarrassment.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Awful call. Might as well not hit the QB.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Doesn’t change the fact that it is a stupid rule. I’d be embarrassed to defend that call if my team won because of it.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Excuses.
Overlooking the fact the Browns couldn’t move the ball in the second half because our defense was fresh…because (shockingly) the KC offense dominated the half. We milked the clock and made key plays, even though we went without a TD. This game wasn’t won nor lost because of officiating. The Browns didn’t make key plays when they had to. That’s all.
SupremeChief - September 20, 2010
nobody is claiming the chiefs don’t deserve that win. The officials didn’t make our offense inept. What we are saying is bad calls and their effect on a game shouldn’t be overlooked.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
I'm not disagreeing with horrible officiating.
I was disagreeing with Rufio’s comment. “I’d be embarrassed to defend that call if my team won because of it.” The Chiefs didn’t win due to that call. Furthermore, the officials called it fairly. Kendrick Lewis was flagged for leading with the helmet also.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
no, Lewis was called for helmet to helmet contact, and deservedly so. he went out of his way to hit the receiver in the head. Our linemen got called for leading with the helmet, which is a completely different penalty. No helmet to helmet contact was ever made on the QB hit.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
I strongly disagree with that assessment.
The replay clearly showed Kendrick attempting to lower his helmet so as to avoid contact. The problem is, he led with his helmet and didn’t react fast enough. That, and momentum probably worked against him. Either way, that penalty was deserved as was the penalty called against the Browns.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
how about someone post a link to this aformentioned replay. I wanted to see it but couldn’t find it.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
I tried YouTube with no luck.
I’ll see if someone at AP can create a GIF image of it.
SupremeChief - September 22, 2010
but the rule against helmet-to-helmet hits is a good one. the rule against touching QBs is not.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Ah, and that's where we disagree.
Though they are different penalties, they can go hand-in-hand. Tackling leading with the helmet could lead to incidental helmet-to-helmet contact (which is what Lewis did). I think both rules are fair.
This isn’t one of those questionable roughing the passer calls either. The refs stated the call was made because the Browns player led with his helmet.
SupremeChief - September 22, 2010
sounds like he was saying IF the chiefs won because of that call, he wouldn’t defend if he was a chiefs fan.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
I was embarrassed to have that call go our way. Its football, people are going to hit each other.
rufio - September 21, 2010
You were embarrassed with the penalty on Lewis?
That was a good call by the refs. Lewis incidentally made contact with your player’s helmet. Could have been dangerous. That’s why I defend the leading with helmet penalty. It prevents incidents like this.
SupremeChief - September 22, 2010
It’s the right call under the current rules, but the rules shouldn’t be that way.
rufio - September 22, 2010
Obviously, it doesn’t prevent incidents like this. It is arbitrary because football players continue to play football, despite the rules changing around them.
Ryan Kelsey - September 22, 2010
It doesn’t prevent 100% of incidents, but how can you say it is arbitrary and hasn’t prevented blows to the head?
Western Reserve - September 23, 2010
I never said they did.
rufio - September 21, 2010
You aren’t looking at this fairly. We aren’t saying it’s the officiating’s fault, just that they were terrible.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Oh, I'm being more than fair.
The ONLY bad call in the game was the Harrison fumble. Everything else was pretty consistent. You don’t see me griping about the holds against Tamba which went undiscovered. Why? I know there is holding on every play, and there is little you can do to stop it.
It’s easier to blame officiating when your team loses. I get that. It was an ugly win for us and a dogfight until the end. I guess my point is, officiating rarely decide games. Situations like the Bears/Lions game is an example of the refs deciding a game.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
I don’t know how to say this more clearly, so I’m going to try all caps:
NO ONE IS SAYING WE LOST BECAUSE OF BAD OFFICIATING.
we lost because we deserved to. that doesn’t mean the officials weren’t terrible.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
You're griping over a penalty which was a clear infraction of the rules.
Why not gripe about the Harrison fumble? That was the worst call of the game.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
I have been griping about the Harrison fumble! multiple times.
Go back and read your post that I replied to. where in there does it mention a specific penalty? You are trying to turn this into a discussion about one borderline call when the original discussion was about multiple awful calls.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
My point is the "borderline" call was a fair penalty.
It’s a clear infraction of the NFL rules. A player cannot lead with the helmet. The Browns defender tackled Cassel helmet first. That warrants a flag and is the right call. How does making the right call constitute awful officiating? I’m not saying the officiating wasn’t terrible at times. They were, especially on the Harrison fumble. I’m just saying you can’t lump that late flag into the bad call or “borderline call” category.
We can discuss the Harrison fumble to our heart’s desire because that was blatantly bad officiating. I was even saying it would be overturned because his elbow hit the ground before the ball came loose. I think the problem lied in not having conclusive evidence to overturn it. Harrison’s arm shielded the ball, so it was hard to determine exactly when he lost possession of it (he could have began bobbling it before his elbow hit the ground). I still think it was a bad call.
SupremeChief - September 22, 2010
See my post below. We lost because we lost, not because of any call—and I never said otherwise so stop putting words in my mouth. But that call was borderline shameful. I hope you feel good about it.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Then using your logic, our safety Lewis shouldn't have been flagged for leading with his helmet.
You can’t have it one way.
And I didn’t put words into your mouth. You implied the Chiefs won because of a call I thought was more than fair. Seriously, read what you said. It may not have been intentional and was probably just venting. But what you said, how you worded it, was particularly incriminating.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
again, helmet-to-helmet =/= leading with the head.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
I realize they are two different penalties, but the rules clearly state a player cannot lead with the helmet. Lewis WAS leading with his helmet, was he not? I have a feeling even if it hadn’t been helmet-to-helmet contact, he would (or should) have been flagged for that kind of tackle irregardless.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
I don’t see what this has to do with the argument. yes, Lewis led with his head (which should have been a second personal foul call). I don’t see how you can look at the roughing the passer penalty as a comparison for what Lewis did.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Because both players led with the helmet.
It wasn’t your typical roughing the passer penalty. Sorry, I thought you knew why the penalty had been called. This discussion or debate has been a misunderstanding.
SupremeChief - September 22, 2010
He shouldn’t have been. Both of those rules are awful. Incriminate that.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Not to interject between you and the KC fan who seems to like to puts words in people’s mouths, but are you really dead set against the League’s attempts to mitigate concussion and brain injury? I don’t care for the extent they’ve gone to protect QBs, and when I watched the hit on Moore live, I wasn’t particularly fond of receiving that call. But really, how else does the NFL address these issues if not by assessing penalties and making it a point of emphasis that the officials disallow clear shots to the head? The NFL is under quite a bit of pressure to find solutions to make a very violent game at least a little bit safer.
Western Reserve - September 21, 2010
Get rid of the helmets?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574527881984299454.html
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
Right, we’ve talked about that here before. That’s an interesting article.
Western Reserve - September 21, 2010
Before we had helmets, people died all the time. This is not the way to go.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
I don’t think that’s true. At all.
Western Reserve - September 21, 2010
If that’s the case, we could always go the other way…
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
After all, players these days do move at ludicrous speed.
Western Reserve - September 21, 2010
They’ve gone plaid!
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
Then I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.
I feel the rules are more than fair, especially since they’re enforced to help ensure the safety of football players.
SupremeChief - September 22, 2010
read most comments here. they blame the loss on the inability to move the ball, NOT on penalties.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Your offense didn’t dominate at any point in the game. Sorry
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I cite 0 offensive TDs as my proof. How many first downs did KC have?
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
16 to our 13. however, they were 0-3 inside the red zone (and when they calculate that, a FG counts so they just flat out stunk in the red zone). we just made misakes that cost us the win. plain and simple.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
There was no offensive domination by either team.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
yep. neither team exceeded 320 yards of total offense. (and the average offense in 2009 had almost 340 yards of total offense). both teams were terrible on 3rd down and terribly inefficient. (both teams under 7.5 yards per passing attempt, both under 4 yards per carry
bross09 - September 20, 2010
It certainly made for a long, mostly boring second half.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
yep. the worst part is, that was the only half I was able to watch consistently. I was mostly listening to the first half on radio while occasionally glancing at the TV
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Since when do FGs not count?
Our offense protected the ball, controlled the clock, and scored points because of the sustained drives. The announcers made it clear which team was dominant in the second half. At one point, the Chiefs had almost 100 second half yards to the Browns’ measly 30 yards. You can’t tell me that isn’t dominating the half.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
that does not prove you had a ‘Dominant’ offense in the 2nd half. he was saying that your offense didn’t dominate. just because our offense sucked, doesn’t mean your offense dominated. you know, an offense plays a defense, right? if an offense dominates, it is dominating a D not the other team’s offense. whether or not the browns offense was lacking is completely irrelevant to whether the chiefs ever dominated our D.
FGs do count. However, most competent offenses usually score at least one offensive touchdown in a game and the Chiefs had none. Its a sign of the browns improved D and the fact that your offense is still a work of progress.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
Just because the Browns did nothing on offense and the Chiefs did better does mean dominant. They had a couple nice drives, but there was absolutely no domination. A few of your drives were sustained by penalties and offensive first downs.
Roger Dorn - September 21, 2010
Your first FG was a result of a blown call.
HenryDawg - September 21, 2010 via mobile
I'm assuming you're referring to the leading with the helmet penalty.
It was a fair call. They were being consistent. A similar penalty was called on Lewis for leading with his helmet even though he lowered his head in an attempt to avoid helmet-to-helmet contact.
SupremeChief - September 21, 2010
whoah, there is a ton wrong here. The first field goal was after the most terrible fumble call I have ever seen in my life. seriously, the guy that watched that replay and thought it was a fumble needs to be fired. yesterday.
Lewis was called for helmet-to-helmet contact, and he most certainly did not lower his head to avoid anything. if you watch the play again, he actually jumped in order to make contact with the receiver’s head.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Exactly, I was referring to the fumble
HenryDawg - September 24, 2010 via mobile
This team is just bad.No #1 RB , No true #1 WR got alot of #3 WR’s and no one to take over the game when we need it.
Then the Staff on this team is bad why leave one of your best run blockers out when you are trying to run the football?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Maybe Kolb will get pissed and Heckert can grab him if he loses the starting job, he might be an improvement, right?
johnnyphoenix - September 19, 2010
I don’t know that a new QB would do much.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
!?
rufio - September 20, 2010
I think this team is an above average QB and a new OC away from at least pushing for the playoffs.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
agreed. except i would at at least a passable #1 WR. if we had a passible #1 WR, an above average QB, and better playcalling, we would definitely challenge for the playoffs. the D looks great.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Why this ob with Kolb he did not look any better then the QB’s here in the first week and that is with a better team then the Browns
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Im not Ob with Kolb, it’s just that delomme isn’t going to be here after this year, and I highly doubt McCoy is going to be any kind of answer next year.
johnnyphoenix - September 19, 2010
Kolb will not see the field again this year.Vick will be the QB there and the Kolb trial should be over the man is not going to be good and I do not want to see us pinning the hope of this team on another back up QB
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
The best RB on the field today was Peyton Hillis— for either team. The problem isn’t the RB personnel.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Uh – what? True we may have the best red neck good ole boy RB in the NFL, but both Thomas Jones and Jamal Charles are superior to Peyton. Our RBs are below average as well.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
I feel like if Hillis could get some consistent PT, he would be far better than what we’ve seen. He gets jacked after a good run, and instead of feeding off that energy, we pull him and watch Harrison miss a hole and gain 1.5 yards.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
There is absolutely no way to tell that Harrison “missed a hole” based on the TV camera angle. Unless you are getting awesome replays from the end zone of every play that was a boring 2 yard gain by Harrison or you were at the game, you cannot possibly know this.
rufio - September 20, 2010
< Insert my usual rant about lousy television game coverage and how much I’d like industrial grade footage of every game from every angle and the ability to legally craft ‘fan edits’ for distribution from same >
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
Gotta give a shout out to kwoog here as well.
rufio - September 20, 2010
H/T to those who came before me, certainly. It’s one of those things that just annoys me personally more and more profoundly the deeper I get into the Xs and Os….
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
I still wonder why they don’t offer this in some manner. I think last night I saw some kind of replay where they darkened everything on the screen, switched to an endzone camera and sort of shined a light on the players. The technology is obviously there and I have no doubt people would pay for even if came with some kind of copyright protection software embedded in it. My only guess is . . . well i don’t really have a guess, I was going to say something about competition, but I would imagine teams have tapes and shots of those angles anyway.
I know #@#$all about specific play terminology but I would love to get that added element of being able to see more than a side view of the line of scrimmage, even if it’s watching a video after the game has concluded.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
I think marketing has something to do with this. Football fans might freak if we didn’t get any tight shots of individual players’ expressions.
rufio - September 21, 2010
On MNF, they seriously took all the camera angles they had and completely spliced together a brand new view solely from different camera angles and it was perfect.
I mean they do that axis crap where they spin the field on an axis and the camera plays out perfect.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
I don’t know which was more amazing: that they spliced together that incredible shot, or that they didn’t just have a camera pointed down the goal line to begin with.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
They did, from the other side.
They were just showing off their fancy technology.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Haha, they actually did, the actual camera from the other side was a lot better, but like Ruf said, they wanted to show off the tech.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
I can understand why they use the standard angles for mainstream casual broadcast, although I don’t see why some added angles would hurt that. Why they don’t charge to make more footage available to the hardcore fans, even after the game, is a little puzzling.
Maybe it’s like the music industry and their resistance to mashups \ remixes \ sampling \ electronic distribution. The ossified industry doesn’t want to rock the boat and jeopardize its moneymaking apparatus as long as things are going well. It’s only when they realize that they’re taking on a lot of water and there aren’t enough lifeboats that they embrace change.
Unlike the music industry, it’s hard to see what external force will motivate change here, though. Ultraportable HD camcorders and wireless fast enough for direct high speed streaming to the Internet?
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 21, 2010
not to start a whole different argument, but the music industry would have no problem with any of that stuff if people payed for it, like you suggest for football.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Well, somewhat. Not to start a whole different discussion, but sample clearance is an incredibly difficult and expensive endeavor, so something like ‘Mutated Christmas’ could never appear in a truly “legal” form. (Bizarre and recommended, BTW.) Also, the industry fought open electronic distribution as hard as it could until it became obvious that it was an unwinnable war. They could easily have licensed Napster instead.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 21, 2010
they did license napster, as well as about a dozen other services. people still steal music.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Technically true, but waaaay after it had lost all relevance and the genie was out of the bottle. Me, I steal plenty of music, but a whole lot less since unDRMed Amazon MP3s became common currency.
And with that, we should let this one go, lest we incur a CGV.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 21, 2010
Have you never noticed me and RDC talk about torrenting?
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
Seriously, we need the vertical view on television broadcasts. It’s 2010!
kwoog - September 20, 2010
MNF does an ok job of showing replays like this. I feel like last night once people realized how well Freeney and Mathis were playing, they showed some replays like this too.
I would easily choose to view games from that angle and/or split my screen with that angle.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Hillis played better today than any other RB on the field. that doesn’t make him better than the other two forever, but it makes him better today.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
arguably…I would put his performance ahead of Charles, but marginally…I see what he is saying and I can see the argument that charles performed better.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
what notthatnoise said. Charles was the most talented RB in the game. Jones was the most accomplished. But Hillis had the best game.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
I never agree with anything you ever say.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
I would go with Jamaal Charles. I was impressed by his blocking, there was one play he picked up one of our DE’s (Schaffering).
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
This one hurt. We handed them 10 points, and once again only scored 14. Do the opposing teams channel David Copperfield at Halftime? They seem to make our offense disappear.
da36chamberz - September 19, 2010
I look at this and say: we’re two plays away from beating the number one team in the AFC West. We can definitely turn this ship around. All is not lost.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
I think putting it that way is making it sound beter than it is. Two plays away from beating a team that won what, 4 games last season.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
If we get our ST firing, start to alleviate the play calling issues, and catch afew lucky breaks, we can walk into the bye week 2-5. I think we can definitely win at least one of our divisional games. We’re THIS close to being a slightly below average team, and slightly below average teams win at least 4 or 5 games.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
Could the ST play be from people trying to bottle up Cribbs and not as much as Cribbs not playing hard?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
I don’t know what it is. But somethings not working. And that needs to be resolved.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
How is it, two teams we expected to beat before the tuff part of schedule hits, are 4-0!?!?
Ahhhhhhhhh!!
(Locker looked horrible Sat vs. Nebraska…where is the hope?)
Red-Right-88 - September 20, 2010
The cleveland.com answer to that is that they each got to play us.
woodsmeister - September 20, 2010
I don’t know that it’s entirely an incorrect answer. We certainly helped.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
It is more that people are terrified of Cribbs and that we don’t take advantage of our field position. If you were the opposing team, would you let Josh or Seneca beat you if you had to choose one? I’d choose Seneca.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Yeah but look at the schedule coming up.
johnnyphoenix - September 19, 2010
I just died.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
rufio - September 20, 2010
Another observation: Harrison is useless. He did well last season, but has done nothing through preseason or these 2 games to warrant playing time.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
He’s always a step late to holes, and cannot shed tacklers.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
Agreed. Harrison seems to lack explosiveness so far this year. James Davis anybody?
Les Fleurs Du Mal - September 19, 2010
i am all for Davis getting a shot.
Red-Right-88 - September 20, 2010
he looked good in the first game at times, but didn’t look good today. He is the kind of guy that lives and dies by the long run (similar to a jamaal charles or a CJ but even more so reliant on big runs)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I just have to stay away from all things Browns for a while, it’s just depressing.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
Thats what you get when you sign up for the Brownies. I mean, I’ve only been old enough to be a fan since the rebirth… I cant remember a time that wasn’t depressing. I look back on Kelly Holcomb and smile when I want to think about the “good” times… how sad is that?
troy145 - September 19, 2010
Who signs up for this? Weren’t we all drafted?
dgcambridge - September 19, 2010
Well, maybe it’s just me. I was a Bucs fan and made the switch when the Browns were brought back. I feel like Charlie Sheen in Platoon. “You volunteered?”
troy145 - September 19, 2010
I signed up for it. Storied franchise with real fans. We deserve better.
BuenosAires_Dawg - September 19, 2010
It’s 100% Art Modell’s fault.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
true dat
portland, oregon - September 19, 2010
As is this freakin’ recession. AND the floods in Pakistan.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
You seriously do not understand what he did in 95 and what it lead to do you?
Dude, read some history please. You probably only know what everyone else does. Oh, he just moved a team!
No, he didn’t. He systematically almost ruined the Browns and Cleveland.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
Hm, when I read troy’s post, I thought he was piling on Modell. But I guess he could have been mocking Dorn. Not sure.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
I think he was just making a joke.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
This is true either way.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
That is what my Dad says every weekend lol
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Browns have been rebuilding since 1995.
BuenosAires_Dawg - September 19, 2010
This should be green!
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Unfortunately, I’ll be back next week, excited as ever to watch the Browns play…and 3 hours later I will be bummed again.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
Unless you win the SB its always going to end badly
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010 via mobile
Actually last year ended pretty well. It’s just that the start and middle were terrible.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
browns
FIRE DABOLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
brownie76 - September 19, 2010
as I did on another thread, try this:
http://www.cleveland.com/
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Ahem, I think you would like this website more Bross
www.cleveland.com
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
Has nothing to do with Daboll. Many of the components of the Browns suck. Especially the WRs
The Licensed Pessimist - September 19, 2010
you can’t honestly say it has NOTHING to do with Daboll. Even if you go over to AP theyre scratching their heads about our playcalling.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
It made me cringe to watch the attempts to hit Robiskie on go routes. You could see the NFL speed he lacks on display on those plays.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
He had beat the corner on a couple of those plays and the ball sailed out of bounds. he shouldn’t be running go routes in the first place, because he isn’t a burner, but he has enough speed to play in the NFL.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
He had the corner beat because the corners were playing such that they wanted the passes to be completed deep if at all.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
But the throws were out of bounds. Randy Moss in his prime wouldn’t have made most of those catches.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
This. I know two of his targets sailed out of bounds.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Two of them were inbounds. It was moot because they were 5-7 yards ahead of Robo.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
which isn’t necessarily an indication of speed as much as lack of accuracy/chemistry.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Both are possibilities, but I have yet to see something from Robiskie that indicates to me that he is fast.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
I’m not calling him fast, just fast enough. he’s definitely not going to just blow by people, but I’d bet he’s somewhere in the middle of the pack as far as wide receivers go.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
He looks like Brian Brennan to me.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Brian Brennan was white.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
Brian Brennan is one of my favorite players of all time. I can’t handle anyone comparing Robiskie to him.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
I went to elementary school with his daughter.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Exactly! You don’t see Brian Robiskie ’s kids in elementary school!
Chemo - September 19, 2010
I meant Brennan :P
emily522 - September 19, 2010
I know, I was joking that the difference between Robiskie and Brennan was whether they had kids in school with you.
Ah, nevermind.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
hahaha
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
That was good.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
Talking skill set I know they two are different in color….
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
is Brandon Marshall fast? was Jerry rice fast? is Reggie Wayne fast?
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Wow you did not just try to slip in Robiskie with those All-Pro WR did you?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
I did just put him in the same sentence. He is nowhere near as good or as polished as these guys. however, none of these guys had elite speed, however they compensated. Marshall however is pretty big (though robi is 6-3 210), Rice and reggie wayne found ways to make plays and produce without elite speed (namely route running and great hands). you can say the same about raymond berry. throughout history there have been receivers who are slower but compensate (like how someone who is blind adapts to have great hearing)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
If any of our players are to develop super sensitive hearing, I’d expect it to be Joe Haden. Dude has elephant ears.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
THIS
Kimble_79 - September 19, 2010
he has obama ears
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Mitch Albom ears?
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
This is the first Browns related thing to make me laugh since half-time today.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
Keebler Elf ears
North Coast Flea - September 20, 2010
Robo is on pace for a 16 reception 108 yard season. That is still a marked improvement over last year. That just aint right for a top pick in the 2nd round. Chansi Stuckey is better, Josh Cribbs is better, and MoMass is better.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
To even compair anything Robiskie offers this team to those guys and what they have done is a slap in the face to them.Yes they did/do not have burner speed but they had the skill set to get off the line,run the route and catch the ball.Robiskie offers none of this.He is the WR you line up as a 3rd down WR and run him in behind the LB’s to try and catch them sleeping and get the first down.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Robi is in his second year in the league. WRs generally take AT LEAST 2 seasons and usually 3 before they really “get it.” Robi has also never had an average QB throwing him the ball, or a competent OC. It’s way too early to be giving up on the guy.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
THIS
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Not giving up on the guy just feel he is or will be better suited for that 3rd WR slot that gets open vs the otehr teams LB or nickle backs
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
this is probably true. Ideally we have a legit number one, momass is our two, and robi is a slot guy.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Alot of sucky receivers in their 2nd year suck in their 3rd year as well or even get cut.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
and a lot of great receivers suck their second year.
I’m not saying Robi will get better, I’m saying it isn’t fair to assume he won’t.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
It is not a direct comparison. you really aren’t reading. I NEVER say robiskie will and can be as good as these guys. In fact, I don’t think he can. However, they are players who have survived with a skills set that isn’t elite.
and robiskie can do none of these? This is pretty much robiskie’s game, though it is nowhere near as good as these guys. when robiskie has made plays, its because he gets open with route running and getting off the line quickly.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Made plays? I must have missed that last year and the first two games this year…
Robiskie has not been able to get off the line and that is one of his big issues right now.Once and maybe once the light clicks he could be a 50 catch type of guy but right now not going to happen.I hope it happens think he could really do good for us.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
when he makes plays, which isn’t that often, its because he is able to get off the line quickly.
I never said he was making tons of plays. What I WAS saying was that when he did (last season, this preseason, this season) he was getting off the line quickly…he is just not doing that consistently enough.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
What plays has he made? I keep hearing of these plays but I have yet to see them… 7 catchs in a season does not mean he makes plays.Hell Royal had more then that last year and we all know that he does not make plays
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
you keep talking about ‘these plays’ that robiskie made and forget that I am somewhat agreeing with you. He needs that burst off the line and the few times I have seen him make a catch, it is because of that burst. he doesn’t get a good burst with any consistency to be effective however.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Still think he is best as a 3rd slot type of guy.That way he works off the other sides 3rd or 4th best DB.He will never be good at getting off the line vs a elite DB or even the teams 2nd DB.
Robo will never be great at any one think that is why I said he will be like a Brennan type of WR
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
I agree. Never will be elite, but an excellent slot guy or maybe a solid #2.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Name these plays. It’s Robo, it shouldn’t take you long.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
the catches he has made…so I can count them on both hands…
bross09 - September 19, 2010
How about the fact that he’s open going deep? Seneca just couldn’t hit him.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Our WR’s are pitiful. Their relative lack of athleticism allows opposing defenses to blitz with more abandon as our guys can easily be covered in man coverage. Who’s the best college wideout this year (who we should be targeting with the #3 pick in 2011)?
Les Fleurs Du Mal - September 19, 2010
QB #1.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
Are we going to start the Jake Locker vs. Andrew Luck vs. Ryan Mallet debate now?
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Why not what else do we have to look forward to?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
How about Andrew Luck vs. all inferior competitors.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Jeez. If I run a Browns blog someday, I’d instantly ban anyone talking about the draft in September.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
I was being sarcastic. I don’t want to talk about the draft now. It was more of a, “wow are we really going to talk about drafting now?”
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Yeah, I suppose my comment should have gone under one of bross’ diatribes on the draft. I think there is a half dozen in this thread already.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
All I ask is that we pick the best player regardless of position. We suck virtually everywhere, do not feel pressured into selecting a position.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
Luck, hands down. At this point.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Locker looks to be regressing.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I feel like he’ll be a bust.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
I have only been able to watch him a few times. When I have seen him, he just looks like a fast dude with solid size with a rocket arm. He doesn’t look like a franchise QB yet.
Scouts drool over that kind of guy.
rufio - September 20, 2010
See Jamarcus Russel. Good size and arm strength. Not much else.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
I have heard him compared a couple times to jake plummer. i think that is what he will be. mobile QB with a strong arm but only an average starting QB, unless in the right system (he flourished under shanahan and thats about it)
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I think Plummer just didn’t like the game that much. I don’t know about Locker in that regard, but he could have had a baseball career if he wanted, right? That might say something.
rufio - September 21, 2010
good point about plummer and its possible the same could be said about locker.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
I believe Major Wright is a football player. I think Chad Jones was considering playing baseball.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Major Harris anybody? Hell of a QB back in WVU old school days
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
I faintly remember that bastard throwing a td from his backside on us. But I don’t think that it really happened because i figure he would be down. Maybe the play was blown dead and he completed the pass anyway. Didn’t he rap too?
Villeslgr - September 21, 2010
Ha! That was a different Major Harris that rapped. The one I’m referring to went on to play one year with the Raiders then a few years in the CFL and Minor Leagues. Never really panned out professionally for him.
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
I remember your Major Harris as well, I just couldn’t remember if they were the same guy.
Villeslgr - September 21, 2010
yeah. I meant baseball. thanks, it was chad jones.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
WR early will not matter if you do not have a QB to get him the ball.QB should be are top pick
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Depends on if the QB’s are worth it. This year’s WR class is going to be good.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
It also depends on who is drafting in front of us and will we get a chance to draft the QB we want.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
I’m beginning to think we may actually pick before Detroit this year. I really don’t relish that.
JustBob - September 20, 2010
yeah, and at this point, there is only one QB I would take in the first round. There are many WRs I would gladly take with the same pick
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I do agree that our WRs are lacking. I don’t know if it is our biggest problem or even close to our biggest need… but I do feel pretty good about my desire for Dez Bryant last year.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
The problem is that Robi lacks the speed to do what he is asked to do, and that he’s asked to do things that are out of his skill set.
He should be asked to be Joe Jurevicious-mini, not Mike Wallace.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Minivicious. I like it, now only if we can do it!
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I have no idea why Daboll thinks he is coaching for Al Davis.
rufio - September 20, 2010
No, he’s not even coaching for Davis.
Davis just wants to win, baby.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Bingo. It is a utter ignorance of what we have in personnel. It is a stubbornness to a system— compounded by the fact that it isn’t clear what that system even is. (Pluto called it a stew of New England’s spread, Holmgren’s west coast, and the Wildcat- though it is insulting to each of these systems to associate them with Daboll).
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
I thought we did an OK job with the Wildcat last year, but we just didn’t run it enough.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Well Daboll just adds to the issues
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
This. He seems confused about how to use what we have. Our 4 wins last year seemed to be because he was confused with so many guys suddenly out. He was forced to run the football with Harrison… which is what we should have been doing the whole time. Daboll has got to go. no game plan, no idea how to play with a lead, no clue how to utilize our talent. We need someone who has a good game plan because we don’t have amazing talent.
and for the love of god can we put vickers in more
the_fox_and_the_browns - September 19, 2010
You are crazy. Nothing to do with Daboll? Wow.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
At this point in the season, where do you guys rank WR in our “needs” list? We need help at a lot of places, but anywhere more than at WR?
troy145 - September 19, 2010
QB is 1 no doubt in my mind.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
How do you think we resolve that? Trade? FA? Draft? I think that this years QB draft class is shaping up to be very, very solid. I wouldn’t mind seeing us take a QB/RB combo in the first two rounds.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
Draft will be your best bet. Going to take a few years unfortunately.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Mallet is looking awfully good.
bbstirrd - September 19, 2010
His intangibles are terrible, so I’ve heard. He also throws a lot of WTF passes right after a pass most NFL QBs cant make. But I’d take him for sure. I also like Ponder, though he hasn’t looked as hot this season.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
I haven’t seen him play a lot – just this weekend’s game. He definitely has an ‘NFL arm’. Not sure about the rest of his game.
bbstirrd - September 19, 2010
I watched him play a few games last year and I felt like he had too many holes in his game to be worthy of the praise he got. Haven’t seen anymore than yesterday’s game though from this year. He’s definitely got all the tools needed to be very successful in the bigs.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
yep. Sounds like DA a bit. that is who I have heard him sometimes compared to. There are just so many things I don’t like about Mallett, I would have serious reservations against taking him high.
I like ponder too, but he is nothing more than a healthy tony pick with a slightly stronger arm. they are very similar and neither one will be a star QB.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Luck from Stanford.
Grockcubs - September 19, 2010
Good call. That kid looked incredible last night.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
He’s good.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
That is the only guy at this point I would take in the first. good enough arm, reads the field great, just flat out performs and doesn’t make huge mistakes.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Still mad we did not get a better one in this past draft
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Bradford was gone. Tebow and Clausen were the only QBs taken before McCoy. No thank you on both.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
Still thin LeFlour (sp) would have been a better project then McCoy but that is just my opion
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
LeFevour was already cut by the Bears. I liked Skelton more than McCoy, but really, who knows…
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
A lot of the project guys I liked have been cut. LaFevour and Levi Brown both caught the axe. I’m surprised Rusty Smith stuck around in Carolina… they must have zero QB depth cus that kid was no where near worth the hype he got.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
No thanks. Bradford or nobody in this past draft.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Can we get a Kyle Orton or a Jon Kitna (from a few years ago) type- Average QB, later in career. I guess something like Dellhomme, but a bit earlier in their decline.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
McNabb?
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
I would take him in a heart beat. I feel he is one of the most underrated quarterbacks of this generation.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
I don’t agree with this years QB class. Outside of luck, I don’t see this as being any better than last year.
There is no one last year who has the athleticism of locker or Pryor and no one who has the arm strength or height of mallett. However, none of these guys are nearly as polished of passers as a Bradford or a Clausen. both of those guys have the ability to be at least decent right away. If a team drafts a Locker and decides to start him from day 1, you will see QB play like you did from josh freeman last year (But maybe even worse).
There are just as many WRs IMO with star potential.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
OC is #1 for me.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
WR to me is just a tad bit behind QB
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
QB is #1, WR is #2, DL/Pass Rusher is #3.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
z
Wow, I bet that Lions Eagles game was fun to watch. McCoy and Best both went off.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
I was watching it at a bar along with all of the games. It was hard to keep track, but Best looks awesome.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
He looked stellar in preseason too. Whats Kevin Smith’s contract look like?
troy145 - September 19, 2010
injured
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
I like how most of the preview articles this week pointed out that Wallace would bring another dimension with his mobility. He had a couple of nice escapes, but not exactly a major weapon.
dgcambridge - September 19, 2010
I feel like Wallace is less of a viability as well. Outside of one stupid pass which was HUGE, I dont feel like he’s going to have as many multiple-INT games as Delhomme. Lower ceiling, higher floor.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
liability*
troy145 - September 19, 2010
really? I think Wallace was terrible today.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Aside from the INT, he played as I expected him to play. Made some nice plays, missed a couple more. Like I said, he’s less likely to win a game with his arm than Delhomme, but he’s also much less likely to lose it.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
That pick-6 was one of the main reasons we lost.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
true, but I dont think he throws that pass 9 times out of 10.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
If you throw that pass 1 out of 10 times, you shouldn’t be an NFL quarterback.
bbstirrd - September 19, 2010
Well we are 2 for 2 in throwing a bonehead game-losing interception.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
This is the problem, though, and a problem with our offense in general:
You can get by while still making stupid mistakes like that if they are one play out of 40 and you are making sweet plays like the one to Cribbs several other times throughout the day.
In the first half we looked like a team that was going to take some risks and be OK when a few things went horribly wrong because we’d make enough plays to overcome those mistakes. But as soon as we do something stupid, we get really tight, overly cautious, and we look scared of making mistakes instead of excited about making plays—this is both from a playcalling and an on-field decision-making perspective.
So in effect, we are getting the risk of “high risk high reward” but the reward of “low risk, low reward”. It would be like quitting a poker game after you took a big hit instead of giving yourself a chance to make that money back.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Interesting take, rufio. I like the perspective of risk management, and it does seem to explain aspects of our groundhog – sees – its – shadow game plans.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
Thats exactly it actually. My alma mater does the same thing.
troy145 - September 20, 2010
Chansi Stuckey was just pathetic on that pass. Almost every other pro receiver, who is not a doormat, would have been able to adjust to the pass, break it up, or at least tackle the interceptor in his tracks.
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
Don’t blame Stuckey at all, just a duck.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
wrong. that was a bad decision by Wallace and a great play by flowers. Stuckey was in position to make the catch but flowers made a great play and got it.
Also think about it in the form of physics. Stuckey is backing up slowly to get in position to make the catch. His momentum is taking him towards the sideline and a bit upfield (from the line of scrimmage). Flowers comes in and makes the interception in stride. Flowers is already almost at top speed and running towards the end zone. At this point, stuckey has to adjust his momentum and then catch up to flowers. by the time stuckey stops, flowers is ten yards downfield.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Wallace double clutched like he was waiting for stuckey to do something, like the pass was to go up the field to his right, Stuckey looked like the pass was supposed to be on his left side. I doubt either of us know where the pass was actually supposed to go, I just know that from what I saw, a better receiver would have had a better chance to break up the pass or try to make a play on it.
I’m just reporting what I saw based on the camera angle and 30 years of watching (and some playing) football
HenryDawg - September 20, 2010
Maybe a more talented receiver, like a vincent jackson, has a better opportunity to play the ball. however, the way the ball was thrown added with the way flowers, the CB played the ball, it would be hard for even some of the most talented receivers to stop the TD.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Of course we’ll never get a guy like Vincent Jackson so the point is moot for now.
HenryDawg - September 20, 2010
we’d all better take cover, apparently the sky is falling.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
so why are you arguing that a more talented guy would make the play if the point is moot? doesn’t that make everything you are saying moot?
granted, your point is also moot b/c its just wrong…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
what?
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
As was true throughout the game, Seneca was terribly slow in making his reads. The ball needed to be thrown a full second earlier if he was going to the flat.
rufio - September 20, 2010
He had some horrible throws. Besides throwing a wtf interception, he missed receivers long, he had passes hit the ground and he took a step back one too many times.
BuenosAires_Dawg - September 19, 2010
Don’t know who was it that said Browns have played not to lose since Martyball. I became a fan in 2001 and I’d be thrilled if the Browns managed to get the organizational culture and talent the team had through the 80s. There’d be fewer Sundays like today, I’m sure.
BuenosAires_Dawg - September 19, 2010
I really wanted them to bring Marty back after they fired Crennel. He was available.
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010 via mobile
And uninterested. He was retired then and remains retired today.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
I would have liked him to come back.But he said on his radio show he had no intrest in a HC job now and not sure if he ever will.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
meh…there is a reason he keeps getting fired after building playoff teams…
bross09 - September 19, 2010
At least he has the nack of building teams…
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
how much do his teams do?
and also, in this day in age, a lot more of the ‘team building’ is done by the GM unless its team building as in teamwork exercises. Coaches in the NFL now have a lot less control over player management and I don’t think holmgren/heckert want a Coach/GM (and I don’t think lerner does either).
bross09 - September 19, 2010
So how much has teams done here after he was gone? SD- Still can not win the big one, Was- Still cant make the playoffs, Browns- well we see that 1st hand.
I still feel we have the curse of Marty from the fall out with him and Modell.
Proof is there yes he never won the big game.But he has always built good teams and has the nack to get the best out of the players he has.The point you made is still there yes he can build winners but nothing else and that was what I commented on.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
you can’t include the browns in the “what have teams done since marty left” argument. not an accurate comparison.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Why not what did the teams of the 90’s do when he left?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Rebuild.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
SD hired Norv Turner. If they hired anyone else, they would have made at least one super bowl with that team. Norv turner is an even worse version of shottenheimer. can put together solid regular seasons but implodes in the playoffs.
If they hired Tomlin, Phillips, or Wisenhunt, i am convinced they may have won a SB (or all 3 would have at least made one).
Washington? really? he was there one freakin’ year.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I’ll give you Tomlin and Wisenhunt, but Phillips? really?
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Definitely a better coach IMO than norv turner. Maybe he wouldn’t win a SB with that team, but that team was close a couple times and I feel phillips could have gotten them possibly at least to the game (though i wouldn’t bet on him winning)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
he couldn’t get dallas there, who was/is just as good imo.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
I disagree that Dallas was as good as San Diego…but then again, all we can do is agree to disagree here.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
3 is a reach see how they had to get past NE in that teams prime.I would give you 1 if that.Forgot he was in KC as well.No matter the man won 200 games and 8 div chapionships in 21 season. With KC and Cleveland he had his best W/L after taking over when these teams needed to be rebuilt and he did the job just could not win the big game
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
well…2 of them have made Super bowls since 2007 and IMO, those San Diego teams had more talent by a considerable margin than the Cardinals (and similarly as talented as pittsburgh)
so he is the interim head coach to coach when a team is rebuilding but you have to get rid of when a team becomes competative? I don’t see the use in that really.
Like I said, how much of rebuilding these days is really in the hands of coaches and how much is the GM?
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I like Marty just because of what I seen in him.I not for the Drive or the fumble he might have won 2 super bowls as well.
Sometimes you have to find the guy to get you there and then the guy to finish it off.Tampa comes to mind on this fact.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
…but tampa bay may have still won a SB with Dungy…they just decided to get rid of him and the system was already in place and they went out and got an already established coach who was excellent. That situation is not the norm of what would happen in this theoretical scenario.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
But the point is the same.Tampa had to get another HC to ge the job done.But the teams Marty has left are no were near as good with out him.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
the point isn’t. name me another situation where the same thing that happened in tampa bay happened (or at least the new coach having at least as much if not more success than the previous one). Tampa bay is a statistical anomaly you keep touting about. How about I go get terminal cancer…people survive that and I am willing to count on that statistical anomaly (your logic put into another scenario)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
you keep saying tha Marty was not good because he did not win the big one.But he was good at using the talent he had around him.Keep trying but a win % of 61 in the NFL just shows that he was good at winning.Just sometime luck is needed in games and in the playoffs he had no luck.
As for you anomaly I can name off 3 teams off the top of my head that the HC changed and they went to or won the super bowl. Oak went to the super bowl after changing there HC, Tampa and Ind by the way got Dungy who said he could not win the big one.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
ok. there was something weird about 2002. I can’t recall that ever happening before but that time it happened with both teams.
Good point about indy. Forgot about them and caldwell. That season isn’t an anomaly, but Manning is. the guy just is an anomaly in general (though your point is still valid about indy).
However, 3 instead of 1 makes it statistically more significant, but still not significant (should I want to get terminal cancer if the chances of living are raised from 5% to 7?)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
how bout pitt?
that’s 4 in the last 10 years or so for teams that made the super bowl with a new coach. Not sure what the original point was, but I think you are off on this part.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
i dunno…somehow whenever this guy responds, its completely irrelevant to the basic point and I forget it.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Exactly. This “Marty can’t win in the playoffs” thing is ridiculous. Marty didn’t make Byner fumble, and he didn’t let Elway march down the field.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
but its not just in cleveland…
bross09 - September 19, 2010
But he still won.The games that got them knock out of the play off’s had alot of the “What if’s” you like to use
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
there are no what ifs in life but results. you can say however many ‘what ifs’ about marty you want and they may all lead to him going to a SB but the simple fact is he didn’t have success in the playoffs. you probably know the cliche, overused (but accurate) expression about excuses, right?
bross09 - September 19, 2010
But hold on you used what if with SD would win 3 super bowls if Marty or Nov was not the HC so your whole argument is moot?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
bad joke alert
It might not be moot, but since we’re on the Internet it’s definitely mute.
I’ll be here all week. Weak even.
2010 it’s a new Brown!
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
Hiyo!!
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
However, I am not trying to prove that SD would win a SB with a different coach. I was more arguing that having norv turner and his suckitude directly held them back and they were coming pretty close to a SB at times.
You used hypotheticals to directly prove a point, whereas I didn’t. I didn’t have to include it to make my point because its pretty clear there were probably better options to get a coach that year.
i named 3 coaches with arguably more success than Norv in similar or worse situations (only arguably because Phillips is arguable, the rest really aren’t) and them and norv became head coaches in the same offseason. this is a less an argument of hypotheticals of if they would win a SB (which i basically just used to enhance my point instead of make it for me) but the fact that they have had more success.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
“If they hired Tomlin, Phillips, or Wisenhunt, i am convinced they may have won a SB (or all 3 would have at least made one).”
So that is not Hypothetical?
Sounds the same to me as “If the drive did not happen the Browns would have won 1 Super Bowl”
Brownsfan4ever - September 20, 2010
wow…you just don’t read. I admit i used a hypothetical situation. However I didn’t use it as key evidence to point out my opinion.
I used it as complementary evidence to enhance my argument. take away my hypothetical and I still have a legitimate argument that Tomlin and Wisenhunt have had success in similarly as good of situations. Take away your hypothetical, and you have no argument.
the point isn’t an out of context hypothetical, but how it is used in context and in context, I was less reliant on hypotheticals, whatever you want to say about it…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Bross, this may be your quintessential paragraph here.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
Amazing.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
But would they have won in SD?
No one knows so that is still a what if and you did base your whole argument off the “If” SD had hired so and so they would have won.
No matter Mart was a Good HC that just could not get the moon and stars to line up.
Brownsfan4ever - September 20, 2010
in hindsight, norv turner sucks. end of story.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
That’s not the point. We’re discussing whether Marty is a good head coach, and would be a good head coach for the Cleveland Browns. No, he has not had success in the postseason, but since we are debating his merits as a coach, the reason for those failures is of paramount importance. I don’t think some innate character flaw made Marty get beat by John Elway, Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.
He’s a great coach that has run into greater players. Most teams would be lucky to have him.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
and he didn’t make Marlon McCree try and return an interception when simply falling on it would have won the game and sent them to the Super Bowl.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Well, someone decided to only rush three on that drive.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
He was essentially 2 plays from taking the Browns to the SB twice. Seems better then what we’ve had.
I know he said he isn’t interested in coaching, but seriously, do you believe everything pro sports people say on the radio?
There’s some tressel in all of them.
HenryDawg - September 20, 2010
I tend to believe that a guy who says that he’s retired, and then retires, is, in fact, retired.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
yeah, but that’s only due to his retirement.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
Unlike, say, Brett Favre.
woodsmeister - September 20, 2010
Does anyone here have enough common sense to see that the play calling is not the issue. The problem is that these guys cannot play loose with a fuck like mangini as a leader. Does anyone here understand the importance of a strong leader? Does anyone here recognize that mangini is not a leader in any sense?
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010 via mobile
I don’t think anyone is saying its the only issue. But Good god its so so bad. And I think its tough to play loose with play calling that is confused and frightened. Add that to a lack of some talent that can’t make the most out of those plays.
the_fox_and_the_browns - September 19, 2010
You can’t be serious. Look at how we play in the first half. Then look at the second. The reason we lost IS playcalling. Daboll takes his foot off the gas, and prays the defense will hold our 3 point leads. It is honestly embarrassing to watch him. His playcalling is bland and incredibly predictable.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
I thought the plays called were a good mix of pass and run. The problem was execution.
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
I normally wouldn’t resort to name calling, but you sir, are an idiot.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
I know its difficult for Burger King’s EOM to understand concepts of management but please try to understand that when people don’t play to their ability, we have to look to the management for that underachievement.
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
I think this is the key. Ability. Some of our players might be playing to their ability and that would have little to do with Mangini and a lot to do with the plays they are being asked to execute.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
Just thought of something, tell me if it makes sense.
The reason we looked so good in the preseason is because everybody is running basic stuff and game planning and adjustments are at a minimum. Because of this, the fact that we have about equal talent to other teams shows through. Once the chess match of regular season games begins daboll is exposed as the bad play caller that he is.
The success of the preseason tells me that talent is not necessarily a problem, but the utilization of that talent is.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
I think it makes some sense, but I think one thing that might be missing is that, teams often don’t fully utilize their top level talent in the preseason.
I think that would mean that we have similar basic talent as most teams (maybe a lack of depth in certain areas) but we don’t have the top level talent in certain positions to separate us into the ranks of better teams.
In other words we have the talent to compete for parts of games. However,our lack of professional playcalling combined with our lack of top level talent in certain areas creates situations where mistakes turn into losses against lower level teams and blow outs against top teams. Basically to make up for these deficiencies we need all world performances see the end of last season.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
Also, in preseason our starters only played a quarter or two (or less). We’ve looked pretty good in the first half of both games.
HenryDawg - September 20, 2010
Makes perfect sense to me. Daboll seems to have a hard time adjusting, which is key in the NFL.
I also think people are overreacting to these losses right now because these are supposed to be “bad” teams that we are losing to. If anyone could correctly predict 75% of NFL results, they’d be filthy rich and probably famous.
We don’t have a lot of an idea of how good Tampa or KC are, and we’ve lost 2 games by a combined 5 points. I am glad we at least look competitive.
rufio - September 20, 2010
you’re last sentence is where I stand at the moment.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
He seems to have not just trouble adjusting, but trouble understanding the need to adjust. It’s as if he says, “It worked in the first half, so it should work in the second half,” totally ignoring the likelihood that the opposing D is going to make adjustments based on what they’ve seen so far.
It’s as if he is banking on making his final strategic move in the elusive third half.
JustBob - September 20, 2010
I honestly haven’t reviewed either of the games yet, so I can’t tell for sure, but this would make sense if it was true when considering our results.
rufio - September 21, 2010
our guys failed to execute plays, and the plays they were called upon to execute were horrible in the first place. that is the fault of daboll setting them up to fail and the players failing. it has nothing to do with mangini’s coaching style or attitude. not to mention, you have no idea what mangini is like in the locker room or what the players think of him.
i will only question mangini, and holmgren for that matter, if things are allowed to continue on this way week after week. our OC is a weak link and must be discarded. mangini and holmgren are the ones who must do that.
Dawg Nuts - September 19, 2010
They have been this way week to week, going back to last year. How long do you plan to wait?
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
you’re funny….
Wait, this is a joke, right?
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Analyze the specific adjustments, or lack thereof,and what KC was doing compared to what the browns attempted to do. Stop with the vague ’it’s the lack of a strong leader’ crap. You’d see far more issues of that manifest themselves off the playing field before you’d see it on it if that were truly the case. Besides, Mangini’s issues were tied into being perceived as a dictator—too strong of a leader, not weak.
johnnyphoenix - September 19, 2010
it’s really less strength of leadership, and more game management. Either way, he sucks at both
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
actually I was a youth leader in boy scouts, led patrols, made it all the way up to assistant senior patrol leader. I see more leadership in him than Crennel, Butch Davis, Chris Palmer, and even Marty Shottenheimer who you above mentioned as someone you would like. Now he is not a great leader IMO, but if you put the right pieces in place and call the right plays, he is definitely a good enough leader to win.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I think you hit the nail on the head when you say “good enough.” There are only 32 people in the world that can be NFL head coaches at a given time, surely we can find someone better then good enough?
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
who is out there? Gruden is the only guy that is available that I feel can lead a team. I think cowher is done, but he can do it too. There are not a lot of guys available who are better leaders IMO than mangini. as a pure leader and locker room decider, I like mangini over John Fox (who is supposedly gonna be gone). If not mangini? who else? Anyone competent is either retired (like Gruden or Cowher) or hired.
there are coaches out there who have had good teams, but I don’t think can ever win a Super bowl. Brad Childress is one. Mangini is a guy that, if you put him in a situation as good as the one childress is in, I believe can win a SB. There are maybe only about 16-18 coaches in the NFL that I believe that about. Granted, Mangini is near the bottom of them, but that still puts him in the top half, which gives us a fighting shot if we execute.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
to be honest, at this point if Mangini gets canned after an 0-5 start or something I’d let Ryan get his interim shot. Of course that brings up the question just who the hell is going to be OC…but I’d like to see him get a chance.
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
I would be in favor of ryan. there is something about the ryan family, but they all have that intangible leadership quality about them.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
That’s just what you believe, which is frankly far from reality.
HenryDawg - September 20, 2010
so its far from reality that there aren’t guys who are SB coaches out there?
Its obvious that you have a hatred for mangini, but he has shown that when you give him competent players, he can coach them up pretty well.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
All that and you barely graduated high school? Bross sir, I am impressed. You posses the intangibles. You are most certainly a . . .
Just messing with you by the way.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
I figured. the barely graduated HS is a joke with some serious (mostly, I had to take Gym as a senior and just didn’t show up and barely passed…damn senioritis).
I spent most of my time working on my intangibles such as community service, leadership, and the occasional sport (‘intangibles’ when applying for college)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
bross has lots of ‘intangibles’.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
He’s a winner?
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
you should change your screen name to “The Intangible”
Dawg Nuts - September 19, 2010
maybe…that sounds like a good name for a movie…or maybe the title of my autobiography (if i ever do anything worth writing about)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
With all of those intangibles, how could you not?
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
I’m not sure what the Boy Scouts has to do with football but I’m pretty sure there is no merit badge for Head Coach Talent Scout.
browndawgbacker - September 20, 2010
you notice how scout is in the name of that merit badge? plus, they have a sports merit badge…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
f you, go cheer for the Jets.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
Chris…Final score was 16-14, not 17-14 as you have listed in the opening paragraph.
We’ve lost 2 games by a total of 5 points. Amazing.
KC was 4-12 last year.
TB was 3-13 last year.
Either those teams have improved or we have gotten worse. By the looks of it, we have gotten worse and we will get the first pick in the 2011 NFL draft come next April!
I predict a 3-13 season.
BROWNS GREATEST SEASONS 1996 1997 1998 - September 19, 2010
I think we’ve bother improved, but those teams have improved more than we have. At least personnel wise. Our coaching seems to have regressed.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
Regressed? I don’t really think playcalling has regressed… The playcalling would have had to be good/ better than now in order for it to regress, but it wasn’t. It sucked ass all of last year until the last 4 games of the season, and now it’s still sucking ass.
shep615 - September 19, 2010
What is sad all of see this so why does Daboll still have a job?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
The last 4 games of last year are 25% of the season. I’d say that that was a progression from the first 12 games, which we have since regressed from. If we were calling plays like we did in the last four games of 2009, we’re a 2-0 team.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
exactly. The last 4 games are just the period where we won 4 in a row. However, I think the offensive playcalling showed improvement even before then. After being shut out by Baltimore, we came out the next week and had a good offensive showing. yes, the lions sucked, and we lost, but the offensive playcalling still showed drastic improvement. I would say the last 7 games we showed market improvement (though we did regress a bit against cincy, but they were on fire then).
So, we had a good 30-40% of a season where at the end, the playcalling was good.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
The Bills are still 8 times more terrible then we are.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
So we were expecting to get an above average NFL starting QB for a 7th round draft choice? I think Seneca showed his colors today, not terrible, somewhat multifunctional, 2nd string QB.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
no, we were expecting to get a competent backup, which is what Seneca is, more or less.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Agree. I think he is a relatively competent backup and adds a lil bit of a kick to the Wildcat. I guess he made 1 less terrible throw than Jake.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
Sorry to hijack the thread, but can anyone quickly lay out the # of draft picks we have next year by round? Pretty sure it’s more than 7, but can’t recall how they break down.
cheech99 - September 19, 2010
I think we only have 1 additional right now in the Quinn trade.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
0-2
Here we go again with mounting loses even tho its only the 2nd game of the season. When will the Browns decided to get ri d of the MAGGOT Mangini and the idiot OC Dumbell Daboll
CharleneRene - September 19, 2010
I may be in the minority, but I think Mangini knows what is going on. I think we can definately win with him, but Daboll is just killing us.
AG7 - September 19, 2010
I think Mangini is football smart but I question his leadership ability.
troy145 - September 19, 2010
I agree Mangini loyalty to Daboll is what will get him run out of town.Daboll should be gone after this week.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
They’d probably like this over at cleveland.com. Yikes.
Dawg Nuts - September 19, 2010
ha. I posted that on another thread and got cursed out by Henry Dawg.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I don’t know, I kind of like the MAGGOT. Never heard that one before. It definitely needs all caps though for full effect. Super hero material.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
yeah. Maggot didn’t work on the other thread with a lower case.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Because around here its an overused cliche, and especially when the other guy was just venting after another bad loss it was so unnecessary.
You people may have water in your veins or you didn’t actually watch these last two games so it wasn’t as painful, or maybe you just don’t really care or understand how frustrating it is to be a Browns fan, but let people vent once in awhile.
HenryDawg - September 20, 2010
You may vent at cleveland.com. This board is for discussing football.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
This.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Well, yes, to a point, but aren’t game threads expected to be a bit ephemeral and of the moment?
Not to defend HD really, but to vent is human, to forgive Joe Thomasesque.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
this is also a recap thread, not a game thread.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
Emphasis mine, quote from HD.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
true…but this was also a comment several hours after the game I believe. I can understand venting during a game, but this was just slinging crap all around several hours later. people are allowed to do it, but even for venting, it felt cleveland.com-esque
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Bingo.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
don’t question my fanhood, or anybody’s on here, considering you don’t know us.
don’t tell us how to run our blog; and i say our blog because i feel like we as fans and contributors make this site what it is. it’s a great site because we call people out for baseless, mindless rants.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
there is still no reason to curse me out the way you did. what you said i undefensible in any situation.
there is ranting about a bad loss and bieng frustrated, and then there is making your first post here as an all caps comment along the line of KILL MANGINI (which it wasn’t was, but it was just as ridiculous…though at least ‘kill manini’ randomly might be funny)
I understand what it means to be a browns fan. THAT is why I am upset but not surprised we blow it, therefore less off my rocker than some.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I agree 100%.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
Now you’re questioning my fanhood?
Prediction: this will not end well.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Hide the kids and pack your breakables.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
water boils
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Wow, what a catch by Moss beating Revis.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
One hand no-look.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
Definitely a disappointment. I think I’m getting on the Fire Daboll bandwagon. The team shows some decent flashes of ability but the lack of consistency reveals …
Holy mackerel – what a catch by Moss!
Spidey - September 19, 2010 via mobile
Anyway, Daboll has not shown anything to make me believe he is some mastermind or genius. What are we losing by letting him go?
Spidey - September 19, 2010 via mobile
att yds avg
1st half
run- 19, 60, 3.15
pass 20, 182, 9.1
att yds avg
2nd half
run— 7, 13, 1.85
pass 11, 44, 4
9James - September 19, 2010
Those numbers suggest to me that we should have passed more in the first half.
They also suggest that we flat out sucked in the second half.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Of course, those first-half numbers were largely influenced by one reaaallllyyyy long pass.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
If we can complete really long passes at a high enough rate, it’s worth it.
rufio - September 21, 2010
True, but I don’t think either of us really believe we can complete long passes at that sort of rate.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
We did in the first half.
rufio - September 21, 2010
We had one successful play. Surely you’d agree that’s not nearly enough sample size to say that we could be successful with Seneca flinging up deep balls.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
Thanks for putting those up, I was going to last night but got tired. And we were absolutely brutal in the second half.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
OF COURSE Braylon makes the tough catch . . .
Les Fleurs Du Mal - September 19, 2010
Yeah… What a douche. He makes me sick.
shep615 - September 19, 2010
and now he will drop the next 5 easy pass’s
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
First post-game player tweet:
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
If I were on that defense I’d be pissed.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
As the D should be.The 2 games have been lost by a total of 5 points.So the D IMO has a right to be frustrated with the lack of a O in the 2nd half of games is just down right wrong with the way the D has played so far.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Defense has played great. It’s our own QB’s that keep scoring for the other team
bbstirrd - September 19, 2010
Going to be a long year. These weeks ahead are not going to be pretty.
Western Reserve - September 19, 2010
I think we will be in a lot of close games thanks to our D. At least looking forward to that and watching our young up-and-coming players improve. Despite the loss, I liked watching Bernard, Haden and Ward out there.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
*Benard
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Just like everyone else I’m sure, I’m quickly falling in love with TJ Ward. that kid seems to be around the ball a lot, but unlike some of our guys in the past, he’s there in time to make the play instead of just pile on. he very well could be the best thing to come out of this draft for us.
and Benard is just flat out disruptive. he’s a big part of the reason this defense is playing so well.
the defense deserves better than what the offense is giving them.
Dawg Nuts - September 19, 2010
Agree 100%. Haden is a throwback – very fundamentally sound and tackles very well. TJ Ward looks even better. Benard getting better every snap.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
The way Haden hit Arenas in coverage, it seemed like there might have been a little pay back for last years SEC championship game.
OSUMoneyball - September 19, 2010
+1
emily522 - September 19, 2010
I can see that, sure. I just think we’ll win very few of those close games. Our offense is so horribly anemic. We die a slow death out there.
Western Reserve - September 19, 2010
If we can keep things close, at least it will be a sign that we are competitive and we’ll have chances to win games. Either of these games are 1 JC return away from being victories.
rufio - September 20, 2010
True. Although keeping things close looks to get increasingly difficult in the weeks ahead.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
This is true.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Yesterday could have quite possibly been one missed field goal. Or one non boneheaded interception. We just aren’t at a place where we can afford these kind of mistakes and still win games.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
See, this is the line of thinking the coaches are taking, only after we make the really big mistake.
Like deciding to never play the lotto again after you buy 100 tickets for the mega millions and then lose. If anything, we should take the opposite approach: stop buying lotto tickets after we hit the big one.
I am ok with playing conservative, but we can’t go to that strategy only immediately after making the big mistake. I am also ok with us playing aggressive, as doing so has led to 1. us scoring a lot, and 2. us having a lead.
rufio - September 21, 2010
I’m not saying go conservative with our playcalling decisions i’m saying stop making bonehead mistakes we can’t afford to make.
I don’t like playing scared to lose, so i have no problem with the coaches putting the players in position to make plays even high risk plays occasionally. I just think at some point the players have to be held accountable for their decisions while the ball is in play and all the blame can’t fall back on the playcalling. Daboll should surely get blame for predictable uninspired playcalling, but i would hope that NFL players would be able to execute NFL plays.
In other words, i’m upset with the missed field goal and the bad interception more so than the playcalling afterwards. I don’t think we are a good enough team where we can make those kind of mistakes in execution and still maintain a strong chance at victory.
Villeslgr - September 21, 2010
Players are going to make mistakes. Coaches could try to limit the amount of mistakes by calling lower risk, lower reward plays. Coaches could probably limit the severity of those mistakes to some extent, say, throwing an INT deep rather than in the flat for a pick-6.
I just don’t see us playing 14 error-free games. There are going to be bonehead plays here and there. It is frustrating to watch, for sure. But we have to set ourselves up to overcome them when they happen, and I think that means either trying to keep our foot on the gas in the second half (after bonehead plays) or calling it more conservative in the beginning of the games.
You may be right, and we might just have too little talent to make any mistakes at all and win. But if that’s the case, the coaching decisions are not in line with what our team needs to do to win.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Have the Steelers scored an offensive touchdown?
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
They did get the long Mendenhall run in overtime.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
wow, I didn’t realize that game went to overtime. I saw Tenn get the onside kick, but then left the bar. Ha.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Last week was the OT TD
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
yikes, I missed that. I didn’t see the highlights and just assumed 15 points was 5 FG’s. Oh well. Still, they haven’t played well at all on offense, but their defense looked scary.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
They should be fine when Rapistberger gets back.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Yeah, the fact that they’ve gotten two wins over pretty good teams despite having no quarterback is scary.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
Yeah, the Steelers are really good again with their defense healthy — there shouldn’t be any doubt about that. And to think that just a few weeks ago some people here were mocking Peter King for picking them to win the Super Bowl and saying it was “unrealistic.” Of course they’re a long way from doing that, but they’re definately going to be a contender once Ben gets back.
But I still hate them and want them to lose every game.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
Except when they play the Ravens. They may tie the Ravens.
woodsmeister - September 20, 2010
That’s when we root for the asteroid.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
I rec this comment.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Excellent! This should be the sites banner during that week.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
They do look like a defense that has been playing together for 5 years. I am surprised that Troy is looking this good this early.
rufio - September 21, 2010
they beat a vastly overrated cincinnati team and beat a team that had 7 turnovers. When they can score an offensive touchdown every week I’ll admit I was wrong.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
So their defense doesn’t get credit for forcing those turnovers? And their offense is playing right now with their 4th string QB; they’re going to look much better when Ben is back.
Again, I’m not saying they’re going to win the Super Bowl or even win a playoff game. But to say they have almost no chance winning the Super Bowl is absurd. They just won it two years ago and most of those players, along with the coaching staff (or at least the really important ones), are still on the team. They have a really good team, and most people thought if they could go 2-2 without Ben then they’d have a good chance to make the playoffs. Now they’re guarenteed to do that and have a really good chance at 3-1.
Buckeye Brad - September 21, 2010
I’ll give the defense credit for some of them, but I can’t give them credit for all 7. that would be ridiculous. I’m more inclined to give them credit for the 3 picks than the 4 fumbles. fumbles should not happen, ever. 4 of them is outrageous and truly a gift.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Dixon left the game with a knee injury, right?
rufio - September 20, 2010
They were one QB away from Randle El…
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
ouch…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I have no statistical proof, but I still feel better about the Browns this year then I did last year at this point. The QB play to me seems more competent than last year (yet still not great). The defense is off to a much better start than last year.
With all of the talk about he Wallace/Cribbs wildcat package, I think we will see more of it in the coming weeks, much like Miami waited until they played New England to reveal theirs.
OSUMoneyball - September 19, 2010
I will go on record as saying that we will lose by less than 14.5 points next week and be competitive in the first half.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
Well, I have statistical proof, I believe.
At this point last season, we hadn’t scored an offensive touchdown. This year, I believe we have scored 2 already.
I’m feeling optimistic about this year already…
shep615 - September 19, 2010
we’ve scored three I think, Hillis run, Cribbs catch, and MoMass catch.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
4 then, 2 Hillis TD’s and the two catches.
OSUMoneyball - September 19, 2010
I would say we were tanking the second halves of these games to make sure we get the #1 pick over these other bad teams…
…but who wants Jake Locker now?
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
Locker played terrible vs. Nebraska. I would prefer Andrew Luck . . .
Les Fleurs Du Mal - September 19, 2010
That was my point…
Ryan Mallet has looked pretty good too
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
so far…
Mallett has to do more than put up gaudy stats in 3 games against Sh*tty teams to be worth a high pick IMO.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
and you’re the one who loves Luck? Mallett’s stats from last year blow Luck out of the water. It’s not even close. So far this year I’d be hard pressed not to give the advantage to Mallett statistically again, and who has Luck played? What has Andrew Luck done that Ryan Mallett hasn’t?
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
I like luck because he makes good decisions, has a great pocket presence, and has shown consistency in the ability to read the field. Malletts game reminds me of DA on steroids. He is better than DA, but you still get those times where he makes a great play one play and then you are left scratching your head the next play. Mallett is in a very QB friendly offense (look at the stats such bums as Chris Redman and Dave Ragone put up in Brohms offense) and has great tools. However, I still very wary on his intangibles. Out of the QBs in this draft, I like the intangibles and the ‘QB brain’ of luck the best.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Walter actually made his nfl comparison DA haha.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Good point and I like Luck as well. I don’t quite understand the infatuation people have with Jake Locker. He reminds me of Ryan Leaf Part Deux. I would rather have Luck or Mallett if we were to draft a QB.
And I only bring any of this up because i have zero faith in Colt McCoy as an NFL qb. Regardless of intangibles or decision making…you have to be able to throw it more than 20 yds downfield.
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
I disagree with most of this, especially because I don’t trust your judgement of such subjective things such as pocket presence or intangibles. I mean, what do you know about his intangibles?
This sounds an awful lot like regurgitated internet scouting reports, which, forgive me if this seems harsh, I put almost no stock in.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
fine. don’t trust my judgement. However, I saw a couple plays when mallett was playing well last week that, although he did well, the decision making behind it made me scratch my head. When I see him throw, it doesn’t seem like he has much touch at all on his passes. i also think his footwork isn’t great from what I have payed attention to in this area. He at times seems a little off balance because of his footwork. Plus, he is immobile…
I think he has all the tools and he is putting up some good numbers, he is just not all the way there yet IMO (though if he keeps improving like he has so far in the first 3 games, he may make it)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
Brohm was playing for the 49ers, Bucs and Broncos when Redman was the QB. He didn’t become a coach for UofL until 2003, by which time Ragone was already gone. Also he was only the QB coach.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
You don’t know anything about Mallet’s intangibles so stop pretending that you do. That’s just something people say when they don’t have anything better to say.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
actually, I was unimpressed with things about him such as pocket presence and decision making. how he is a leader, and other intangibles, I don’t have as much knowledge about.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Then don’t comment about it if you don’t know.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
You do know you are talking to Bross right?
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
Bross is intangible.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otCpCn0l4Wo
I got intangibles like MC Hammer.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
well…some of that falls into ‘intangibles’ and that was more of what I was talking about. I made the mistake however of using a more broad term.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
Looked much better on film.
rufio - September 20, 2010
He is a statue though.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
Have you ever tried to tackle a statue? Very hard…
Snarky comment aside, I’d take a 6’6 statue over delhomme, wallace, or mccoy right now. At least a statue isn’t athletic enough to throw a terrible interception while falling down.
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
Isn’t DA about 6’6 and pretty statuesque?
Les Fleurs Du Mal - September 19, 2010
But we’ve somehow established that this is…and I quote “DA on steroids”
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
Maybe DA is on roids and this could be the reason he has 0 touch on the ball?
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
…has a great arm…had some consistency issues dating back to college…sometimes makes headscratching decisions…etc.
Mallett I don’t think will ever be DA because he is already better than DA was in college and has more physical skills.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
he’s already miles better than DA ever was. seriously, Mallett’s 2009 is infinitely better than DA’s one college season.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
yep. He is already much better than DA ever was. doesn’t mean he can’t suffer from the same deficiencies, but just in a lesser degree.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
If the Browns do want to draft a QB round 1 then they might as well put Colt out there to see what he can do with the first stringers.
OSUMoneyball - September 19, 2010
I see three wins at this point unless we improve:
Jacksonville, Carolina, and Buffalo
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Should’ve started Lloyd over Aromashadu. Lloyd has 3 points. Aro didn’t even catch a thing. Damn.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
yup. Aromashadu apparently had a falling out this week with Martz over dropped passes. Too bad the all mighty media didnt pick up this story before I started the dude.
Les Fleurs Du Mal - September 19, 2010
I know.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
I should have benched ward. He gave me nothing and I had knox on my bench.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
A couple of thoughts. First, our personnel is pretty bad, and because of that it’s hard to evaluate the coaching staff. I think some people have been extremely generous to our skill position players; I love one half of our offensive line, but our QBs are terrible, our RBs are mediocre, and our number one receiver is a guy that would be better suited as an interesting project for a good team.
With the guys that we have, I’m not entirely comfortable just saying “Daboll sucks,” because he’s calling pretty conventional plays and our team is completely incapable of executing them. However, I think it’s safe to say that the plays we’re calling don’t fit our players at all, and if your personnel is bad you at least have to try something clever to make something happen. I don’t think Daboll has called a play yet that you could describe as “inspired,” so while I’m not sure Daboll flat-out sucks, I’m pretty certain he isn’t anything special. Might as well make a change.
I’m not sure, though, why everyone is letting Mangini off the hook, other than simple coach-switching fatigue. Mangini is responsible for Daboll. He’s his boss! If Daboll is as terrible as everybody here thinks he is, Mangini certainly deserves a lot of blame.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
I agree with your personnel assesment to a degree, although I still have a modicum of hope that our QB situation will not be terrible. Brady Quinn and DA are terrible in my book, and no matter how poorly Seneca and Jake played they are not even close to that level just yet.
However, that being said, Daboll needs to go, and of course Mangini is ultimately responsible for his play calling.
johnnyphoenix - September 19, 2010
Agree more with you than Chemo. The problem that will start to dog Daboll is the offense of the second half. We now have 2 first downs in 4th quarters, no 2nd half TDs, and have blown first half leads. These are the same players that put up some numbers and production in the first half. Sort of implies that the opposing DC is adjusting better than Daboll, and puts his coaching abilities in a bad light.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
…an especially disturbing thought considering that DC just happened to be Romeo Crennel.. .
That’s like playing checkers and losing to the downs syndrome kid who smells his finger and pisses in the water fountain during recess.
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
Since when does downs syndrome give kids awesome pissing ability?
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I was thinking Romeo was a good coordinator?
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Except Romeo Crennel is an world-class checkers players, whatever his unrelated and irrelevant disabilities at other activities may be.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
Crennel has proven himself to be a very good defensive coordinator.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
This is just so frustrating. You know why I was predicting 7-9? Because I figured it wasn’t completely stupid to think we could start of 2-0 this year! This is ridiculous. Jerome Harrison isn’t doing crap. Can you imagine our running game without Hillis? Wallace wasn’t terrible. The INT was, but I think this was about the best you could expect a backup to do. Robiskie’s disappointing me, MoMass is still doing okay, and at least Cribbs had that nice TD. I can’t help but wonder if we could’ve won with Delhomme. Not that Delhomme is that much better, but I don’t think he would’ve made such a bonehead DA-like throw.
It was encouraging to see our run defense get some stops on third and short. Also good to see some QB pressure. Our coverage was kind of up and down, pretty iffy at times.
Bottom line though is that until we get a capable QB we are still going to have these problems. I can’t believe we’re already talking about the draft on here! I’m not being accusatory, but my point is is that it sucks! We’re 2 games into the season and here we are talking about Locker, Luck, the WR prospects.
We looked competent in the preseason. We looked capable. Now we just look like the same old Browns who can’t hold a lead and find ways to lose.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
It could be worse. We could be Buffalo. Now that is bad.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
I don’t think he would’ve made such a bonehead DA-like throw
I hope Jake wouldn’t have done that for the SECOND week in a row! Buy he was out, so it’s not an issue. the issue is we lost 2 games we “should” have won. so now, can we win some games that we “should” lose?! .. and not at the end when they are meaningless…beat a playoff contender and that will make a statement. also, the special teams need to step up.
JDawg in Cbus - September 19, 2010
I preferred watching Seneca play today than sitting through another DA-fest.
This team isn’t bad. The coaching staff isn’t bad. The game did look fixed due to the questionable calls by the refs.
They were fun to watch today, and were in the ball game until the 2 minute warning.
Yeah, everyone wants to win every week, but sheesh, this is much better than watching the chaos in Crennel’s headcoaching tenure.
tribe71 - September 19, 2010
Well, we can look at it this way. We were really good in the only half that we had our #1 QB healthy.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
Agree 100%. Sad, sad, sad.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
The season’s over before I get to see a single game.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
Maybe you’ll catch our too-late-to-matter-but-faintly-hope-producing late season surge.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
props to yoy guys on 2 fronts
1. There is very little excuse-making in the comments. After we beat the chargers last week there were almost no fans who would own up to the fact they lost. It was just excuse after excuse as to why the chiefs’ victory was a fluke or didn’t count or whatever.
2. As fans you have put up with as much horrible play as the chiefs over the last few years, yet your site has lots of activity, info, and honest assessments. Over at AP we pride ourselves on quality of content and discussion and I see a lot of the same here. Way to be good fans through thick and thin.
I feel bad for you guys because as a chiefs fan i have had to deal w a lot of the same maddening deficiencies on my team over the years (players and coaching). Good luck the rest of the season and hopefully lots of progress will be made. I’m gonna keep pinching myself and we’ll see how many more wins the chiefs are able to squeak out this year. It sure didn’t look like we were a much better team, just fortunate to make a couple more plays at the right times.
Good luck w the rest of the season!
thehulk - September 19, 2010
good luck to you as well, if a team besides the browns has to win games, I’d prefer it be a team that has a long history of not winning.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
you guys are stellar.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
The quality teams have two things in common – good ownership and a consistent F.O., we have had neither. We probably can’t change owners, but we have a shot at consistent management if Homgren and co. stick around for a few years, we should feel free to rid ourselves of the disaster that Mangini and Daboll present. Make Ryan the HC for the rest of the year and evaluate at the end of the year.
HenryDawg - September 19, 2010
No.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
I would take our owner over the Saints’. I’m not sure that has anything to do with it at all.
The hope is Holmgren is the consistent FO we are looking for.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
This Skins/Texans game is insane.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
What’s going on? My roommate’s taking an important test so I can’t have the TV on.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
And sadly we both still have work to do so I don’t think I’ll be watching the Manning bowl.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
This is why I live at home and commute.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
Houston scored 17 unanswered points to force overtime, including Andre Johnson winning an amazing jump ball on fourth down to tie the game. Both Schaub and Mcnabb have well over 400 yards passing. Washington has had a field goal blocked and missed the potential game-winner in overtime. It’s nuts.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
Wow.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Schaub has 497 right now
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
I wonder how many points he has.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
I have him in one of my 2 leagues and he has me 32
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
he got me 35 in the DBN league and it would have been 38 without the pick. AP got me 24. I guess all that complaining I did about last week payed off.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Best looks to be the best this week with 40.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
on a related note, isn’t Chris undefeated in FF regular season for over a year or something? I need 5 points between Dallas Clark and Colston to beat him.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Not undefeated, I’ve just had the best regular season record the past two years. I need Clark to score 3 points or less for you; I’m not too hopeful.
Chris Pokorny - September 19, 2010
in my yahoo league, he got me 89. Literally saved my heinie.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
And Houston wins it on a field goal.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
Anyone watching the Manning Bowl?
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
I am.
BrownDawg1409 - September 19, 2010
I’ve got it on a pretty bad stream.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
I want to, but homework calls.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
you have all night to do homework.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Nope. I have to wake up at 6:15 tomorrow to go tutor at 8 in the morning. I’m an education major. I need to get to sleep by 10:30 or I’ll be dead for the week.
And with that said, I’m outta here. Hopefully Steve Smith catches a TD this week.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
hopefully eli has like 400 yards and 5 TDs…maybe then I can survive this terrible fantasy (and real) week.
bross09 - September 19, 2010
No. I have a twenty-two point lead and Reggie Wayne. My opponent this week (rufio) has Eli and Frank Gore left.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
well…i am rooting for Eli because I desperately need points. I am 28 points behind and my opponent has had his guys play already and I still have manning and my D.
He got 2 huge weeks though that killed me (cribbs and San Diego D…who would have predicted such a fantasy day from cribbs?)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
While i would rather Eli do nothing, I’m up by 70 pts with Alex Smith and Vernon Davis left against Eli and Dallas Clark (its a 2 QB/12 team league, I would not voluntarily use Alex Smith). I had a nice week from Jahvid Best :)
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
I had a nice week from my RBs. I got 30 points combined from my top 2 RBs which is nice…but got less than a point from Hines ward (and my opponent had rodgers, SD D and cribbs)
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I think you got me after Eli’s terrible day. Good lord they looked bad. That game is an example of why pass rusher > CB of equal talent.
rufio - September 20, 2010
I also thought you had me before Eli’s terrible day, just for the record.
rufio - September 20, 2010
YOU’RE AN EDUCATION MAJOR TOOOOOOOOOOO!?
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
Yup! English. I may end up switching to just English or Elementary Ed.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
=D
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
Secondary math for me.
StuckInPa - September 19, 2010
Good man.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
Don’t do elementary education if you want to find a job when you graduate. The market is satured with them.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
Everyone can teach 2+2 and maps.
Just like everyone can teach social studies… I hate the jackasses saturated in my field.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I’ve read that teaching jobs are really supposed to open up in the next 4 years. I don’t think I’ll be switching to elementary though.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
Meh, they say a lot. Most of time, it’s crap though.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
As someone that has been waiting for things to open up for the last five years, I can attest to this.
Chief WaDrew - September 20, 2010
I am.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Brandon Jacobs should be suspended for throwing his helmet into the stands.
I don’t care if it was an accident, control your emotions.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
didn’t Kyle Turley (sp?) get suspended for throwing his helmet?
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
He threw another player’s.
From what I know right now, this is what went down.
1. Jacobs was pissed off because he is horrible.
2. Jacobs comes off the field, Coughlin yells at him, probably something along the lines of “Sweet Jesus you suck”.
3. Jacobs throws his helmet “at the bench”
4. Helmet airmails the bench and goes ROWS deep into the crowd.
5. Jacobs then yells/argument with the fans that had the helmet thrown at.
I don’t know about you all, but it would take a mis-fire of epic proportions to miss a bench and have it reach rows deep into the stands.
If Jacobs did this on purpose, and I’m not saying he did, he should be suspended for multiple games if not the season.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
I could see a season long suspension for this. That’s incredibly dangerous. it’s not like at a baseball game or even a hockey game where people know something could come flying into the stands.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
A helmet to the head when you’re wearing a helmet f-ing hurts!
I’d rather not be hit by one not wearing one.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
There was this guy who went to my high school named Sean McHugh, I’m pretty sure he’s the steeler’s fullback now. Anyway, I was a ball boy for a game once and after he scored on about a 70 yard run where he must have run over every player on the opposing team, he took his helmet off and head-butted a teammate who was still wearing his, he was that psyched up.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
I don’t know why. But the O lineman I played with always liked to grab each others facemask and headbutt each other. I wasn’t into that stupid crap and needless to say it hurt like hell when they did it to me, no matter how much adrenaline I had going.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I knew a few kids who would do that. then every once in a while their facemasks would get stuck together, which I thought was hilarious.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
This actually happened a lot to me in game. I wouldn’t get my facemask stuck to the D lineman but they would get their facemask stuck in my shoulder flap. It thought it was awesome because it was legal holding. I’d just drag the f-er around till he popped off haha.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I was one of those guys. Yes, your bell does ring a bit, but it hyped me up.
Brownie's Year - September 20, 2010
God I hated you people. I tried to avoid having my head hit by the other team, much less my own team.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
I was all about contact. A headhunter. A hit isn’t a hit unless snot bubbles occurred. Those thing burn like hell.
Brownie's Year - September 20, 2010
I liked running and catching the ball. I didn’t like contact.
Naturally, after one year of football, I became a conference champion tennis player.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
I just read that Andrea Kramer reported the helmet was 10 rows up.
Look how far 10 rows are up into the stands.
I’m not buying this was an accident.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
They actually sent security up to recover the helmet.
Um, sorry bitch, this is mine now. Don’t cry like a little baby next time.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
roid rage
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Nyjer Morgan. Talk about a rough week.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
If Brandon Jacobs sucks as bad at throwing helmets as he does running the football, I could see how it could’ve been an accident…
shep615 - September 20, 2010
Anderson threw a couple of picks in a blow out loss proving, once again, that there’s always someone who has it worse.
BrownDawg1409 - September 19, 2010
lest we forget.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Trent Edwards is worse too.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Can we get Bruce Gradkowski back?
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
I apologize, but could someone please explain to me why we just don’t start McCoy? I don’t blame the QB’s but could he be any worse? And he would gain experience as well. I just have a hard time with a season off to this start and not letting the rookie get the reps so we can see what he has got. Let the kid learn by playing
Kimble_79 - September 19, 2010
Well, if McCoy gets his ass kicked it would kind of kill his confidence.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
The organization can’t do such a thing because it says, in Week 3, that we give up already on this season.
McCoy was drafted “for the future” and it was stated he would not play this season. To turn around on that statement so quickly would say to a lot of fans “don’t bother showing up, the rest of this season is exhibition”. If nothing else, it’s a $ thing.
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
I suppose so…I just really don’t think it could be any worse with the kid learning on the fly with a true playing environment. I am of the mind that if this team doesn’t turn it around soon, this season is over.
Kimble_79 - September 19, 2010
before anyone says it, I’m not saying McCoy will be better. I would just like for him to learn while playing this year if we continue this way for the whole season.
Kimble_79 - September 19, 2010
Also to that point…learning on the fly would be a not so good idea with the Browns, Bengals, Falcons and Steelers coming up. Those are all easily top 10 defenses.
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
sorry Ravens….not browns obviously :)
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
I like your confidence in the Browns being a top 10 defense though.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
Top 3, I have blind faith.
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
thats the best kind.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
Sadly, I’m pretty sure Colt could be worse.
Chemo - September 19, 2010
Losing sucks. Blowing leads and losing really sucks.
Are we see improvement + regression? Or are we really just seeing only suck?
To my nonprofessional eye it seems we have improved the team in many ways but it also seems we have replaced some previous shortcomings with new shortcomings.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
I am just really, really disappointed yet again, with our play for these first two games. It is really starting to get old with the excitement of an off season and then disappointment of the actual season. Not sure if we are going forward or backward?
Kimble_79 - September 19, 2010
I would have to say that we are overall improving.
1. The defense is giving up less than 10 points – can’t blame them for the offensive turnovers.
2. The offense is moving the ball fairly well in the first two quarters without having to rely strictly on the run. Unfortunately, the NFL is not a first-half-only league.
JustBob - September 20, 2010
The Chiefs QB and RB(s) fooled me at least three times today.
A replay on the scoreboard showed that he fooled the camera man at least once also.
tribe71 - September 19, 2010
Play action is good if you got a decent RB/QB to pull it off…….
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
Until we have at least one difference maker/play maker on each side of the ball, the Browns will not be a .500 team much less a winning team.
kingcrimson2 - September 19, 2010
we have more than one difference maker on each side of the ball. we just need difference makers at the right positions (QB, WR).
Dawg Nuts - September 19, 2010
I wish we had a QB like Manning or someone who was 1/2 as good. Because he would probably still be awesome.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
Here is some reasons for optimism -
1. Both teams we have lost to have beaten other teams. Maybe they are not as bad as anticipated. KC beat a quality team, and the Bucs won on the road.
2. The defense has been good enough to be 2-0.
3. Don´t these turnover issues tend to run in cycles?
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
The first 2 are good points…
The 3rd sounds more like wishful thinking.
jeffbp - September 19, 2010
the turnovers are still bothering me.
i feel our team was better disciplined last year.
hard to put in words, but we’re just….careless now.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
The fact that those two teams beat us only because of the points that were essentially handed to them by our offensive mistakes would argue that they are not really that good.
JustBob - September 20, 2010
You know, Pittsburgh would be going 2-0 with their creeper starting QB on the sidelines. Geez.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
As much as it pains me to say this, the Steelers earned both wins.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
I had this game on another TV while watching the Browns.
Vince Young looked horrible. The Steelers just destroyed him. His early INT in Pittsburgh’s zone was a backbreaker. CJ had a 85 yard TD called back for holding that also changed the game early.
That being said, I cannot fathom a Browns team that could gut out a win using their third-string QB and facing the most dangerous offensive weapon in the NFL.
I should probably never say this, but a huge reason I hate the Steelers is because I am jealous of that franchise. Doesn’t matter the coach, doesn’t matter the QB/Rapist, they just continue to win games when they shouldn’t. Kills me to type that.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
I’m jealous of their luck.
emily522 - September 19, 2010
But how much of it is luck, and how much of it is just being better than others at what they do?
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
Yup. They’re good all over the field. It’s not luck, it’s years and years of good drafting.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
rec
J. W. - September 19, 2010
It really is unbelievable and pretty scary. So much for that “steep decline,” eh?
StuckInPa - September 19, 2010
Kansas City C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT RATING
Cassel 16/28 176 6.3 0 2 46.1
Cleveland C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT RATING
Wallace 16/31 229 7.4 1 1 73.2
Rushing Leaders
Kansas City CAR YDS AVG TD LG
Jones 22 83 3.8 0 11
Charles 11 49 4.5 0 20
Cleveland CAR YDS AVG TD LG
Hillis 8 35 4.4 1 12
Harrison 16 33 2.1 0 8
We also missed a field goal.
Daboll has made some mistakes and some bone headed calls, but we are also not executing. Were these first two games that we should have won by more than a touchdown? No, I think they were games we should have had a chance to win, which we did, but they have also proven to be games that we have been unable to finish. I think some of that needs to fall on lack of execution as well.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
We had a few crippling penalties that negated gains as well and put our offense in a position that it was unlikely to gain a first down.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Against Tampa Bay our last 12 plays after the bucs TD were passes 8 of which were either incomplete or intercepted.
J. Freeman 17/28 182 6.5 2 1 88.7
Team 17/28 169 6.0 2 1
J. Delhomme 20/37 227 6.1 1 2 59.2
J. Cribbs 1/1 9 9.0 0 0 104.2
Team 21/38 236 6.2 1 2
After scoring their touchdown Kansas City ran the ball 9 times and were sacked once.
Tampa Bay Rushing
CAR YDS AVG TD LG
C. Williams 22 75 3.4 0 20
J. Freeman 2 34 17.0 0 33
E. Graham 6 10 1.7 0 6
Team 30 119 4.0 0 33
Cleveland Rushing
CAR YDS AVG TD LG
J. Harrison 9 52 5.8 0 39
P. Hillis 9 41 4.6 1 12
J. Cribbs 3 11 3.7 0 6
J. Delhomme 1 1 1.0 0 1
B. Watson 1 -1 -1.0 0 0
Team 23 104 4.5 1 39
In the second half prior to TB’s TD, we threw 6 passes to 12 runs. I think we probably have issues with our playcalling but I don’t believe the pass/run balance is as out of wack as it appears. I haven’t looked at the breakdown for today’s game yet so i’m not saying this is right but looking at our first game as far as the amount of passing plays to running plays during our second half collapse we were obviously not all that passwacky.
Villeslgr - September 19, 2010
I don’t either, but not for the same reasons. Hopefully more coming soon if grad school lets me breathe.
Speaking of, I’m out the door.
rufio - September 20, 2010
I would really like to see your analysis on it. I have no expertise so all i could really post where the simple numbers.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
It isn’t just the raw number of passes vs. runs. It is the flow to the play calls and the types of passes called and types of runs called. Especially in the second halves.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
I agree. My level of tiredness and my level of expertise pretty much limited me to a simple analysis of passing v running. I do however feel that after they took the lead that the subsequent playcalling skews the raw numbers on both sides.
Hopefully rufio can find the time to give us another Pulitzer worthy post.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
This
bross09 - September 19, 2010
For those who were able to watch the game today (I was stuck at home and couldn’t find a feed), any opinions on what’s going wrong with the running game? Is the Offensive Line getting dominated at the LOS? They were able to open massive holes for Harrison at the end of last year. I’m guessing that wasn’t the case today?
bbstirrd - September 19, 2010
Linebackers are playing really close to the LOS and corners are daring the go routes to be completed which means they are in position to help in run support. It’s why Watson was able to get that huge gain and also why we managed to score on a huge play to Cribbs, but the Chiefs didn’t think we could execute those plays consistently and they were correct.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
My solution is run more 2 TE sets with both Moore and Watson running routes over the middle of the field behind the linebackers. The taller targets will make the linebackers need to sit back in coverage a bit more.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
you and or Rufio should probably give Brian Daboll a call.
or a swift kick to the nuts.
discoinferno083 - September 19, 2010
I don’t know much about X and O’s, I would rely more on rufio’s analysis. I am curious if he would agree.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
I would mostly agree with this, though I was watching at a bar yesterday and was trying to enjoy the game more than analyze the chess match too closely. There just didn’t look like there were many holes in the running game (though you can never tell for sure due to the TV camera angle), and we don’t do a good enough job keeping defenses honest through the air.
I thought we’d see more big sets and less shotgun, with passes to Watson, Moore, Hillis, and Harrison to keep defenses honest. If we run no huddle as a means of trying to deal with the disparity in talent between our offense and other defenses, we could keep that personnel + Robi or Cribbs +Mass in the game and run a lot of different looks. So, a big, Single Back, 2TE formation one down and then no-huddle to shotgun, Moore out wide or in the slot, maybe Harrison or Hillis as well. I haven’t seen us really try to take advantage of this yet.
If the other team wants to stack the line and really try to stop the run, one way to deal with that is to just stack the line even more. Based purely on simple math, they should neeed to have 8 in the box to stop the run when we are in 2RB, 1TE, 9 in the box when we are 2RB 2 TE (which should make any DC at least mildly nervous). It gets a lot more complicated than that in real games.
rufio - September 20, 2010
I would love that. first of all, I like what a no huddle offense can do, especially in the passing game. second of all, putting guys like hillis and Moore in the slot in shotgun situations can maybe force some mismatches. Imagine if a team puts a nickel corner on watson or Moore…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I honestly fear that this concept is over Brian Daboll’s head.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
He’s gotta know. I just don’t know why we aren’t trying SOMETHING, especially in the 4th quarters when what we’ve done hasn’t been working for a while.
I’d love to see the Cyclone or some no huddle or some “eff you, we are running the ball”, anything once our offense has hit that wall.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Daibol
I said this from the start….WHO PROMOTES A LINE COACH TO RUN AN OFFENSE????
sean222 - September 19, 2010
Daboll was the Patriots WR coach and then the Jets QB coach.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
If you don’t think linemen have to know an offense you are sorely mistakin’.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Wanted to note that TJ Ward led the team in tackles again.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
I really am starting to like that young man.
Brownsfan4ever - September 19, 2010
I thought he played well. Hopefully he is still not 100% there in terms of the mental aspects of the game, and he can improve from his current level. At his current level, he is doing pretty good for us.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Yes, some of us hate draft talk, but this #1 QB and WR has me thinking.
Just a shot in the dark, but we should take Vick next year and draft a #1 WR next year. If the D stays as good, and how great our o-line is, we’d be great.
Well, I don’t know if Daboll could handle that actually.
StuckInPa - September 19, 2010
Vick will never be a Brown.
Granted, he didn’t rape anyone but a convicted criminal, is still a convicted criminal.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
He did his time.
I think what he did was reprehensible, but I would take him as our QB. He looked great today (against the Lions).
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
This is true. Too bad I don’t think we’ll see much else this season.
StuckInPa - September 19, 2010
Vick paid his dues, and maybe then some. Only dude I know that did hard time due to mistreatment of animals. Not that I agree with what he did – just sayin.
I do think we need to worry about talent acquisition, take some chances to get talent, and stop worrying about getting a collection of special teamer quality guys.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
What do you call the deal to move up and take Hardesty if not taking a chance to get talent?
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
A good start. Now do the same for QB, WR etc
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
We traded up to get Quinn a few years ago. We took two wideouts in the second round last year.
If you don’t think we (or any other team in the league) isn’t taking chances to get talent, I don’t know what to tell you.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
Point taken. Just sayin I would take Vick over Delhomme because he has talent at the key position.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
We traded up to get Quinn a few years ago. We took two wideouts in the second round last year.
If you don’t think we (or any other team in the league) isn’t taking chances to get talent, I don’t know what to tell you.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
We traded up to get Quinn a few years ago. We took two wideouts in the second round last year.
If you don’t think we (or any other team in the league) isn’t taking chances to get talent, I don’t know what to tell you.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
C-C-C-Combo Breaker
bross09 - September 19, 2010
I agree, but some have better lawyers. Case in point is Ray Ray.
J. W. - September 19, 2010
I do think that the best way to get a good quarterback in the NFL is to steal one that’s already in the league. Schaub, Favre, Hasslebeck, Mcnabb, Cutler — it’s a lot easier to identify talent that’s already playing/practicing with NFL players than to pluck one out of college. The problem is that not a lot of those players are available. Still, I would have loved to see us take a chance on Mcnabb last year or Vick this year.
And no, signing Trent Dilfer and Jake Delhomme doesn’t count as acquiring good QBs that are already in the league.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
From your lips to Holmgren’s ears.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
I would trade Jake Delhomme for him, and throw in the 6th rounder from Quinn, and let them have any WRs that they would be interested in.
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
I realize this issue goes beyond our newly reemphasized DBN charter, but I’ll never be able to root for Vick and so I fervently hope he’ll never land here.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
Vick would never be one of my favorite players, but he did his (much deserved) time and should now have a chance to turn over a new leaf. If he was a Brown, I would root for him to do well.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
That’s a very reasonable point of view, but this is an area where I doubt my ability to be reasonable. I don’t wish him ill; I just hope he’s never our QB, as I’ll always be prone to regard him with disgust.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
while I disagree with you I can’t exactly fault you for feeling that way.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
This, and I’ll say no more about it.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
Umm, he’s only under contract for this year.
StuckInPa - September 19, 2010
Is anyone else just wincing at the ‘Fan Confidence Poll’ on the home page now?
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 19, 2010
1. Brian Daboll isn’t the only problem, but I have seen enough of this garbage to believe that he is a good playcaller. The fact that Vickers was MIA is frustrating.
2. I think the addition of Hillis has taken away from Vickers playing time. Hillis is a nice short yardage back with good hands, but he sure as hell isn’t the best blocking FB in the NFL.
3. I think I mentioned it in the preseason, but does Harrison look a little bulkier this season? Maybe he put on a little muscle this offseason to be “the guy” here, but he seems a step slow. Again, I don’t have anything to prove this other than my mind and memory.
4. Marcus Benard may be the best front 7 defender we have on this roster, and I think the world of Rogers (and the development of Pick-6-Tuba Rubin). He is amazing in getting to the QB.
5. Our starting WR’s have 5 catches combined in two games. Good Lord.
6. The Browns have thrown the ball 69 times. The Tom Brady led New England Patriots have thrown it 71. That seem disproportionate to anyone else?
7. One play out of the flash package today? With our second string QB? Wouldn’t that be something to lean on?
8. Sheldon Brown’s INT was a great play. Nice to see him stick with a WR on a 9 route, since speed was supposedly his weak spot.
9. As for the Wallace or Delhomme question, I don’t really care. Neither one of them should be trusted to throw often and when they do, ball security should be job #1.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
Some interesting points. Maybe we need to go primarily Hillis and Vickers?
realmccoy - September 19, 2010
That would work for me.
Running without Vickers just makes little sense to me.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
We have who I would consider the top blocking FB in the league, and we don’t use him. Daboll has been listening to Holmgren’s guys too much.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
Don’t blame that stupidity on Holmgren. He used a FB in GB. William Henderson was the starting FB for him in GB and he was not only used as a blocker but also frequently as a receiver. He also had Rathman in SF so it’s not like he hates the position. Forget who he had in front of Alexander in Seattle but they used a FB there too.
mgtbfb - September 20, 2010
we have a top blocking full back, not a receiving one. The WCO throws lots of passes to the fullback. I know the WCO can be altered to be a running scheme, but in it’s original form it’s a passing offense.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
in the last 2 games, how many throws have actually been thrown to the QB (I also don’t know how much of a WCO we are running now)? I know we have thrown a bit to hillis, but i thought it was when he was lined up at RB mostly.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
you’re restating my point. In a WCO if you don’t have a pass catching FB you don’t use one.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
a) I don’t know if we are running a WCO per se and how much elements of a WCO we have run so far.
b) We have had FBs in, but its been a greater # of hillis than we were expecting. how much of the time are we passing with hillis as FB compared to vickers at FB (this is gonna be a terribly small sample size if we can find it).
I agree with your basic point, but I have know knowledge if this is what the browns are actually doing.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Throwing to the QB is an interesting idea. Brady Quinn had a pretty sweet catch once. Nobody expects Jake “Pistons” Delhomme running long!
Chemo - September 20, 2010
I think we had one in the first game, cribbs to seneca (wallace was the QB technically and cribbs was lined up in the wildcat/flash).
I think I meant FB
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I remember that catch. It might have been the highlight of BQ’s Browns career.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
More importantly, if Holmgren was the OC/head coach, he would play to our strengths. His offenses didn’t look the same from San Fran to Green Bay to Seattle. They were altered for a faster QB and really good WRs in San Fran to a huge arm QB in GB to a star RB and average-y QB in Seattle.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
I have a feeling Holmgren wants to really maintain a separation of job responsibilities and doesn’t want to start giving coaching advice from the president’s seat….so I’d be very surprised if Daboll is getting any influence from holmgren or his ‘guys’ about the fullback situation.
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
Holmgren noted more than once this offseason that Daboll was talking to one of his former OCs almost every day. That sounds like influence to me.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
Apparently it didn’t take, though.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
No, it did.
Pass, pass, pass, run without Vickers, pass, pass, pass.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I don’t understand why everyone thinks Holmgren loves the pass so much.
He isn’t Andy Reid, Holmgren has shown the ability to run the ball just fine.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
Not saying he mandates more passes than runs but the West Coast offense is predicated on the short passing game setting up the run, which is a change of what we did successfully at the end of the season.
Holmgren did this effectively in Green Bay and Seattle and yes he was able to run the ball and had no problem doing because he had QB’s that were a threat to complete passes.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I am not so sure about this. I would say that “the West Coast offense is predicated on improving passing efficiency by leaning heavily on shorter passes and horizontal stretches” is more accurate. Walsh is the reason “extended handoff” is a cliché.
But of course, there is no one homogeneous, unchanging WCO.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Right. Holmgren is smart enough to alter his offense to fit the personnel. But when Daboll was learning west coast concepts most of the stuff they were talking about was probably short passes. Daboll is not smart enough to figure out how to work that into a power running offense, so he just passes a lot.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
We were running some Walshian WCO passing concepts last year.
rufio - September 21, 2010
I think the issue some might be seeing is that they think Daboll might have heard about passing concepts and couldn’t fit them all in his head with what we had success with last year. So something gets pushed out and we can all pretty much see where that has led to.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Corners have looked really good. The only guy I saw a little soft on coverage was Elam today.
Roger Dorn - September 19, 2010
Agreed. I am quickly loving our top 3 corners. Plus I really like Ward. And Adams is in a good role for him. Quickly turning into a top unit.
Ryan Kelsey - September 19, 2010
when is he strong?
bross09 - September 19, 2010
If our defense is going to become all-world, Elam should be the 3rd safety.
rufio - September 20, 2010
if our D is going to be top third in the league, he should be 3rd safety.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Don’t look now.. but our D is in the top 3rd of the league.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
is it? well, we haven’t played a whole season…plus, I believe Adams started the first game, and going just by the chiefs game, we would be 18th in total defense.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Your power of observation is astounding.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
I know. it took me a lot of research to come up with that one. first, the browns team page, then wikipedia…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Well, we’ll see when DVOA and DAVE numbers come out this week. Before this week, they were top 10 in both those metrics. They are tied for 12th currently in points allowed per game- though that might change after tonight and it would be even better if you take away points that the defense had nothing to do with- i.e., the Wallace pick-six. They are 14th in total yards allowed per game, not that I think this means as much, especially after two games (and tonights game could alter this).
So, by any measure they are top half so far, and right around top third.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
Does 12th in pts per game allowed take out the 7 that was scored on the INT?
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Not to mention at least 2 other scores I can think of that were a direct result of the offense.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
It includes that TD. Without looking too hard, all I was able to find was raw numbers. i.e., we are giving up 16.5 points per game.
Furthering my point that we have a top third defense at the moment.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
We should look at “success rates” on the defense. I.e. stop an offense on 3rd/4th down, force FGs instead of TDs inside the redzone, etc.
Does FO look at this?
rufio - September 21, 2010
That is heavily factored into their DVOA for defense, I believe. I’ll look into this more once the numbers come out for this week.
Ryan Kelsey - September 21, 2010
yeah. i am not surprised. the D is playing good, but I think those numbers will regress a bit once we face stiffer competition…and like I said, this is 2 games.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Uh, wut?
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
Obviously I meant isn’t*
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
Your next Advotcate should be why Daboll is a good OC
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
It would be the shortest article in DBN history.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
Do it dude. Maybe Holgren will see it.
Brownie's Year - September 19, 2010
This would be bad unless he knew it was an overly sarcastic article.
This exact thing has backfired on Bernie before with JaMarcus.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
Some people are soo smart.
Brownie's Year - September 19, 2010
Devil’s advocate: Why Daboll is a good OC
“Because Bross says so.”
Along those lines?
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
I would at least try and give a good reason.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
“Because Bross says so and he’s never wrong.”
Gold.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
ehh…I don’t think he is good.
i just don’t think he is terrible…
I think I am somewhere in the middle…but thanks for the shoutout.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Ugh, you contradicted yourself.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
And I’m guessing that he did that over a greater number of total snaps. 69 attempts from the Browns with all of the three-and-outs does not paint a pretty picture.
JustBob - September 20, 2010
Browns 49 rushing attempts
Patriots 43 rushing attempts
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
Whatever…
Brownie's Year - September 19, 2010
I’m so happy I paid for the Sunday ticket. What a waste of money for me. My chore list is getting smaller every weekend. Guess I get to be like everyone else, wait till next year.
J. W. - September 19, 2010
Some of us don’t get to watch the games. Stop crying.
Brownie's Year - September 19, 2010
right. i have the sunday ticket as well and am extremely grateful to see every game. i don’t care if we go 0-16, i’ll be there in front of my TV every week watching my team and i’m thankful to be able to see them play.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
I’m going to be pissed if that garbage time Giants TD costs my fantasy team a win.
golanbatrac - September 19, 2010
The other guy have Nicks? That would suck.
Brownie's Year - September 19, 2010
My opponent had Nicks – I won by 2 points – I almost had a fit when they scored that TD!
DaveDawg09 - September 20, 2010
If it makes you feel any better, the Giants are morons for not running the ball right down Indy’s throat.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
I say we do Rogers straight up for Jacobs.
They obviously do not give a crap about him anymore.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
I don’t want anyone who throws sh*t on the sidelines.
Brownie's Year - September 19, 2010
They don’t give a crap about him because he is horrible.
Bernie19Kosar - September 19, 2010
Eh, if he’s pissed with the Giants he’d be really pissed with us.
But he’s far from horrible.
SpecialBrownie - September 19, 2010
3.7 YPC is horrible in my mind.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
Giant’s line isn’t as good as they were 3 years ago.
Actually, they’re on the brink of average to below.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
It’s not hurting Bradshaw.
Then again Bradshaw isn’t fat, washed-up and pissed about losing carries.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
He’s also fast and small as f*&k.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Seriously, you are 260lbs, plant your foot, get vertical, lower your shoulder, and pick up 5 yards. Don’t try to run horizontally around a bunch of faster, lighter defenders.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Exactly, I’m not sure why he keeps trying to be a finesse runner. He is a power back.
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
yeah. that was stupid. the announcers were noticing this and were talking about this. you are huge. run over people, don’t try to make them miss.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Well, thank god you’re not our GM.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
If I had a nickel for every time someone said that around here…
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
The Giants ran 13 times and passed 9 times in the first half, and a lot of those passes were on third downs. After that, they were so far behind they had to try to score fast.
That’s the problem with the “you can just run it straight at the Colts” theory — if you don’t score early, Peyton is going to put up points so fast that running won’t be an option.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
Even if Manning scores early and quick, the best way to attack the Colts is to run the ball right at them.
Teams often panic when down more than one score. Dangerous part is that soon as they do that, they are in a shoot-out with Peyton Manning. Peyton Manning doesn’t lose shoot-outs.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
This.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
With the way those ends were shooting up the field, the Giants should have run draws all night long.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Freeney might have taken the handoff.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
This is fair.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Like I said, they ran a ton in the first half, and they wound up down 24-0. At that point they had no choice.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
Ahmad Bradhsaw had two carries in three drives after one quarter. I’m no offensive genius, but that isn’t nearly enough.
From what I saw, the Giants got down 10+ and decided that throwing the ball was the way to go. They couldn’t block Freeney and Mathis, and did absolutely nothing to slow them down (draws, screens, etc.) and Manning was then a sitting duck for I believe two strip sacks.
Colts can beat, you just have to stay very, very patient. Texans did, even after blowing a 13 point lead.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
If they thought they could stop Freeney from taking those handoffs, they should have run more draws/screens.
Passing every down to get back in the game is extremely hard if the defense knows you are passing every down. You almost need some sort of constraint plays to work; they should gain you yards and keep the D honest when you do pass.
rufio - September 21, 2010
This is all true. Good points. I’m just bothered by the people that were saying before the game, “The Colts are easy to beat, you just run right at them,” and who are now saying, “The Giants are dumb, if you run the ball on the Colts you win.”
That’s been the book on the Colts for four or five years now, and they still win 13 games every season. .
Chemo - September 21, 2010
The best way to beat the Colts is to run the ball right down their throat. If you don’t, you are going into a shoot-out with Manning.
Any team that voluntarily goes into a shoot-out with Manning is stupid. The Giants were stupid Sunday night.
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
The Giants did not voluntarily go into a shootout with Peyton Manning. Manning put up 24 points on them before they could blink. The Giants were utterly dominated, and their play-calling wasn’t going to make any difference at all.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
Did we watch the same game?
After the first quarter, it was 7-0 Colts and the Giants starting RB had TWO carries.
Arian Foster had 3 carries on Houston’s first drive.
I’m not saying that this was the sole reason the Colts lost, but it is a huge reason. Peyton Manning can’t score when he is on the sideline.
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
Dude, you’re destroying me. Don’t worry about it.
rufio - September 20, 2010
I frickin’ knew it.
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
I got beat in a PPR thanks to Pierre Thomas getting 8 catches.
F%$* you Pierre Thomas.
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
I can’t believe it.
Also, I thought I was done for sure when they subbed Gore out for that TD run.
rufio - September 21, 2010
I was at the game today. I think what sickened me most about the team (and there were many things) was the complete lack of “fire”, “desire”, “drive” or anything resembling enthusiasm. This problem is further exacerbated by the mundane play calling of that troll Daboll. The lack of any kind of creativity takes any possible chance of excitement out of the fans as well as the team. I swear – they looked like they were standing around doing whatever it took to pass the time long enough to lose. Pathetic.
DaveDawg09 - September 19, 2010
I think the defense played with plenty of fire.
notthatnoise - September 19, 2010
I don’t think “fire” and “desire” were the problem. I think it was “talent” and “decision-making.”
Chemo - September 20, 2010
I’ll buy that – revise that statement to apply to the offense
DaveDawg09 - September 19, 2010
The play calling looks like the vanilla crap from the pre-season. Like we’re trying to not give something away. No creativity and no attempt to best utilize what talent we do have.
DaveDawg09 - September 20, 2010
Daboll is almost exactly like Howie.
He looks like him and is hyped up to be the best damn thing and when you get the final product, it’s terrible.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Howie Mandell?
DaveDawg09 - September 20, 2010
Yep.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Should we get a "Fire Daboll" petition going and send it to the FO? We were pissed last year and it continues to this day.
Brownie's Year - September 20, 2010
I have a feeling this FO could give a rats ass about a petition.
DaveDawg09 - September 20, 2010
Maybe stage a stairway/ramp sit out before kick off?
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Does anyone here have Lerner’s cell number and a dog bone hat?
Brownie's Year - September 20, 2010
Our Howie treats creativity like the real Howie treats germs.
DaveDawg09 - September 20, 2010
This is a little OT, but Clay Matthews is the best defensive player in the NFL right now.
I love watching him play.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
I really wish we could’ve kept the Matthews tradition in Cleveland.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Amen. Who did we take when we passed on him?
DaveDawg09 - September 20, 2010
Seems to me we drafted a linebacker when he was still on the board – but maybe I’m wrong?
DaveDawg09 - September 20, 2010
We took Mack.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
As we should have.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
you’re right….since drafting Mack is really helping our rush offense….and having one player who could even come close to being a starting OLB is more than adequate
The Licensed Pessimist - September 20, 2010
Benard and Roth have seemed like starting OLB’s to me.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Imagine if we had Aaron Rodgers on offense and our D didn’t have to worry about giving up more than 9 points/game in order to win. We might actually be able to turn them loose for sacks.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Exactly! I think our defense has been pretty damn good (points hat towards Rob Ryan), its just the offense that can’t keep up. As said several times on here, we do decent the first half and then hit the wall. I know Mangini is more defense minded, so maybe this would be a good time for the Big Show to share some knowledge with his coaches about how to make changes during half time?
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
It isn’t just making changes at halftime, if this is the same problem as last year (I have not reviewed this year’s tape). It’s the success of the depth of the gameplans.
You need to know what the other team is probably going to do to stop what is working for you. You need to know how to beat that. You need to know how to beat the other things that they might try to do to stop you. You need to know how to beat the thing that they are going to do to stop you once you’ve made the first adjustment. Ad nauseum.
It is hard for me to believe that we don’t know how to counter punch, or that we don’t have it somewhere in the playbook. Mangini practices everything. We just aren’t good at programming those contingencies into the week’s gameplan or we just aren’t good at running them.
My bet is that we try to put every play ever into the playbook and we practice them all. Such a wide breadth of plays could kill us if we never get enough reps with any one given play.
If I were Daboll I would probably try to make smaller, simpler changes to a more limited amount of plays.
rufio - September 21, 2010
He is getting a bump because GB’s system makes him look good.
Not that he isn’t a very good player, I just don’t think he’s THAT good.
rufio - September 20, 2010
Buffalo at Cleveland 12/12 shaping up as AFC losers’ bowl (only 2 AFC teams unable to post a victory yet).
palcal - September 20, 2010
i’ll be at that game. could be ugly. going with a buddy of mine who is a bills fan.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
Seriously though. I find it completely stupid the NFL needs to send it’s goons into the stands to retrieve a $300 or less helmet that Jacobs willingly tossed.
The helmet is the fans the minute it fell in his lap and that is some serious complete bullshit, sorry about the language. I mean really? And apparently, the goons were such dicks, they called the cops into the stands as well then ripped the helmet out of an old man’s hands with force.
With a cop there, they stole, harassed and assaulted…
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Players are pretty protective of their helmets (get it?) They’re especially fit to their heads and to a football player there kinda akin to a baseball glove to a MLB player. You gotta get it back.
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
Boo hoo. The dick willingly threw it.
He can get another exactly made. Hell,he wasn’t going to be using it anytime soon.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
If Jacobs loved his helmet, he shouldn’t have chunked it into the stands.
I understand why he wanted it back, but when you act like a child, you should get treated like one.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
He says it slipped and it was an accident it went flying into the stands. Not saying he should be throwing it st all, and I think fans should be able to keep footballs and such, but not helmets.
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
Refer to comment about it being 10 rows up and how 10 rows up is.
OF COURSE HE’S GOING TO SAY IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. He doesn’t want to lose a paycheck.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I think its more likely he lost composure and threw it in a rage and it got caught on his finger. And he could have gotten far more than just losing a paycheck. He could have actually been arrested for assault had it been clearly shown to be intentional.
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
This is the thinking of a naive fan who assumes everyone is good in the world and all problems are just simple mistakes.
The dude threw the helmet with intent to start something. You cannot throw at a bench and overthrow it 10 rows. It just doesn’t happen.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Well, DA might be able to….
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
Excellent.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
nicely played.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
That’s great.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
BQ or DA could have missed that mark easily. It’s do-able.
browndawgbacker - September 20, 2010
Ok Brad, whatever you say. I must be ‘naive.’
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
Please dont blame the lose on the refs
The fumble was questionable, but there wasnt enough evidence to overturn it. The first down could have gone either way. Still, you guys didnt score all half, what makes you think you would have just drove it down the field with no timeouts and scored. Also, the Chiefs had a bad call go against them that led to your TD. Blame the lose on Dawson and your team, not the refs.
darwithabar - September 20, 2010
Considering how little either team did on offense, the fact that you were gifted 3 pts from the refs – which sorry was obviously not a fumble – makes a huge impact on the game.
The main play I am upset about though is the “roughing the passer” that gave you a key first down late and eliminated any chance we had at good field position.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Even without those horrible calls we still should have won the game. The fumble and roughing call were both pretty bad but not sure about the spot. Was listening to the game so I didn’t see it but Dieken and Donovan both seemed to think that the Chiefs got the first down.
Guess I’ll check it out on NFL replay.
mgtbfb - September 20, 2010
I think he got the first down. The fumble though…
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
I don’t think the ball ever broke the plane of the 1st down marker. It certainly wasn’t where the spot was and we were pretty damn close to stopping them even with a generous spot.
rufio - September 20, 2010
who here was completely blaming the loss on the refs or even partly? please don’t make blind accusations that are just false. yes there were some questionable calls, but no, no one was blaming the game on that.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
that fumble call is the worst call I’ve seen in a football game since 2002. It’s even worse than the call earlier this year that ruined a perfect game for the tigers. At least after that guy saw the replay he admitted he was wrong.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
There was absolutely enough evidence to overturn the fumble.
I thought there were several bad calls throughout the game that favored both teams, 2-3 more that favored the Chiefs. A few of them were atrocious. Please don’t act like there weren’t flat-out-awful calls.
That said, the Browns can’t control the refs, and we had plenty of opportunities to win that game that were under our control. Good teams capitalize on those opportunities.
Plain and simple: KC capitalized on Sunday, Cleveland did not.
But don’t act like the game was evenly called.
rufio - September 20, 2010
This. And if Phil Dawson makes the field goal, we win anyway, despite getting thoroughly hosed by the refs.
woodsmeister - September 20, 2010
yeah. we had so many opportunities, it was just a clusterf*$&. if dawson makes the field goal we win, with some better play calling, we might have more points (though this is the most speculative), our offense just forgot how to play football, and seneca threw a terrible pick 6.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
There is not one thing wrong with the defense to this point, nor the running backs (although they could hold on to the damn ball) The receivers are average, Josh Cribbs is the talent. There is offensive talent (enough to win) on this team. THE PROBLEMS IS QUARTERBACK GURU MIKE HOLMFATGREN chose three inept players as the teams signal callers. Donovan McNabb could have been had, SO could have Jason Campbell and I swear at this point I dont think Derek Anderson would have been any worse. By the way Holmgren was also wrong with Jim Brown.
Mangini is going to be let go. I like him but it is looking that way as I said with (Ravens, Bengals, Falcons, Steelers, Saints, Patriots, Jets) 0-9 looks quite possible. Oh wait we have a bye at this point I would take Bye over Daboll’s offense and the three boobs at quarterback) When will the chants of COWHER COWHER start?
champion64 - September 20, 2010
Jason Campbell sucks just as bad as our current QBs.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Ahhh, ya beat me to it. Campbell has already been pulled for Gratkowski. Judging from how the Redskins offense has been playing and his performance so far in Oakland I’m guessing that he’s just not very good. Better than what we have? Possibly. Good enough to have given up draft picks? Not in my opinion.
mgtbfb - September 20, 2010
I would gladly have Campbell and you can have the choice of two of The Browns’ quarterbacks in exchange. Any two on the current roster, Campbell for any two you choose.
Wouldn’t you rather had McNabb as the Quarterback for the next three or four years till the next quality quarterback was drafted?
champion64 - September 20, 2010
Hm, awesome young Safety over a not so awesome aging QB who is just going to hold a spot like Delhomme or Wallace.
No.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
This is a good point though, we wouldn’t have TJ Ward if we went for McNabb.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I would take Delhomme over Campbell. I would take Campbell over Wallace. I would take McNabb over all of them. Where did I say I wouldn’t prefer McNabb?
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I’d take Campbell over Delhomme- but it is really close. Agree on everything else here.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
I am pretty low on Campbell as well as Delhomme but I think Campbell is in the DA class of QBs and I consider Delhomme a slight upgrade.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I guess I’m looking at it at this point in their careers. Campbell has higher upside in my mind. Though it is by a small margin.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
This is true, I was looking at who I wanted more on the Browns right now since I don’t think either would be a good option in 2 years.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
You are stooping pretty low to say “Campbell is in the DA class of QBs.” Give him a little credit, he’s not that bad. He always did have to learn a new offense virtually every year.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
He was benched last week by Oakland
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
Oakland is also entirely dysfunctional. Not trying to defend Campbell, I just think DA is on another planet entirely of bad QBs.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
agreed. Campbell is not all that great, but DA is just DA. there is just no way better to explain it.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Using Oakland as a barometer of good decision making is faulty.
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
Now why would you say something like that?
emily522 - September 21, 2010
He likes being punched by his dominatrix that is Tom Cable.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
I laughed out loud on this one. Nice
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
Is he having a cocktail during the presser?
Western Reserve - September 21, 2010
Sorry he’s the same level as me. You get benched for Bruce Gradkowski, you are no good.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
same level for me
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
It sorta works either way.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
There’s always been a Jason Campbell support group here, and for the life of me, having watched quite a bit of him, I cannot figure out why.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I’m not part of any Campbell support group — I don’t go to meetings or anything.
Western Reserve - September 21, 2010
I’d probably take Campbell over Delhomme, but only because he’s younger and we might be able to get lucky with him. I don’t think either is/or would really do much for us offensively.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
I wouldn’t have minded Kellen Clemons.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
I probably wouldn’t have either. Really I think it came down to the FO projecting what they felt we needed to improve on and what they felt we could do this season and then assessing how much they wanted to spend (picks, money, etc.) in each area of the team and then making their decisions. Although I wouldn’t call Clemons very young, I still wonder if the FO felt ready to bring in a younger QB and name them the starter knowing the caliber of team that would be surrounding him.
If we brought in Clemons is the FO saying he’s our future? Or are they saying he’s a stopgap? I think it might be easier for the typical fan to accept failure from a old QB such as Delhomme who is obviously not the future than from a young QB like Clemons whose acquisition might be seen as choosing a QB for the future.
Not saying that Clemons can’t be that, but I don’t know if he’s the guy we want to go after with the possibility of him being anointed as such (see Charlie Frye, Kelly Holcomb).
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
It’s moot anyway because McNabb probably would have attempted to sabotage any attempt to trade him here seeing as we aren’t a contender, plus after the whole “LeBron” saga no city has a worse image among athletes, especially black athletes than Cleveland does. Not saying it’s fair but it’s just the way it is. He sure as hell wouldn’t have re-signed here barring a miracle.
Would I trade a one and done year with McNabb where we MAYBE win 7 – 9 games for a 2nd round pick?
Nope.
mgtbfb - September 20, 2010
How did LeBron impact our image amongst black athletes?
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
Yeah I’m missing that.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
I was going to ask this as well, but I didn’t want to stir up a Community Guideline Violation.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
Though we haven’t had one in awhile. But there is a mod here now, so shhhh….
Just joking BB.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
Ah crap, it’s the heat. Everybody act casual!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
What are you talking about man? I don’t even know you. I was just on my way to the store to buy some milk and eggs for my family. You trying to set me up or something?
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
No matter what you post, your sig makes it more awesome.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
Ha, it works really well with that picture.
Buckeye Brad - September 21, 2010
Not only that but why is it “LeBron” in quotes? Does he not really exist? It’s a pretty serious charge, likely lacking any evidence whatsoever, and not worth exploring, but I’ll go out on a limb and say, if the guy would win 9+ games a year, no one would much care which box he checked under ‘race’ on his census form. But I digress.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
Actual name: Patsy. Patsy “LeBron” James.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
I laughed.
Western Reserve - September 20, 2010
Patsy?
bross09 - September 20, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHFXG3r_0B8
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Sure. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patsy
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=patsy
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
look at the video posted…I screwed up posting the video. I know what a patsy is.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
yup, the video captured it.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
the problem you fail to address is
a) McNabb is a free agent in 2011 (which, if there isnt’ a lockout and a CBA deal gets done, will be the next year of free agency)
b) Mcnabb will be 34. he knows himself he isn’t invincible. he wants to get a super bowl because if you add one to him, that could make him a HOFer (right now, its questionable whether he is one). With the vanilla playcalling and the lack of legitimate threats, even with mcnabb, I don’t see this team as a serious contender to go deep in the playoffs and thats the kind of team he WILL sign with.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
1. A couple of years worth of McNabb would have cost us TJ Ward plus more picks or a 2011 first rounder. No thank you.
2. Holmfatgren? What are you, seven years old? Grow up.
3. Jason Campbell was benched this week.
4. DA shoulkd have been benched this week.
5. Jim Brown is an asshole. Pissing him off ranks among the best of our offseason moves. Good riddance to the racist old fool.
6. Mangini’s going nowhere.
7. Is 2-7 all that much better than 0-9?
8. If we continue to develop our young players and establish an identity on defense, this year is a win. The win column is the least of our concerns. Entering the offseason with a quality defense, and then being able to address our talent deficiencies in the offseason should be the priority, and the measure of the success of this team.
9. I like boobs.
10. Cowher will never be coach here so long as Holmgren is the GM. Anyone who chants for Cowher is a buffoon.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
I’d like to second number 9.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
7. Actually 2-7 is huge over 0-9. Ask anyone who ever played organized sports and has any competitive spirit left in their body. Ask anyone on the team, win 2 or get shut out? Stupid.
browndawgbacker - September 20, 2010
The point
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Your head
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
No one is talking about what 2 wins means to the players. Honestly, who gives a shit? We’re talking about what two wins mean to the less intelligent fans (like championship64 and, apparently, yourself) who are ready to jump out a window because the Browns lost a couple of games. Come week twelve, the difference between 0-9 and 2-7 won’t matter one bit to the slopeheads. You’ll still be the same dimwitted, chicken little assholes you’ve always been; demanding that this person and that person get fired and that the Browns trade away future draft picks for placeholders. Good franchises (and good fans) don’t panic. If the Browns are to ever be a good franchise,they’ll continue to build slowly and purposefully. If you and your ilk are ever to become good fans, you’ll learn a little fucking patience.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
Well said.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - September 20, 2010
hmm 1 playoff game in 12 years (they wont make the playoffs this year either so I already counted it) Lerner and his father have owned the team in that period and you say it is not time to panic. THE CLEVELAND BROWNS are awful and the product they are selling (their brand of football) is crap. May I ask your age, you cant be over 21
champion64 - September 20, 2010
I am staying out of this, but be warned this will not end well for you.
notthatnoise - September 20, 2010
I’ll ignore the personal question, though I’m pretty sure golan won’t.
But this issue- that the team leadership needed change- perceived or real- was what the Holmgren move was all about.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
I am well aware of the history of this franchise since expansion. It is not time to panic. For the first time since expansion, we have a quality Front Office with a proven track record and a quality head coach who has experience rebuilding a team. The important pieces are in place. Be patient. Let Holmgren and Heckert and Mangini do their jobs. The wins will come.
(And, for the record, I’ve been a fan since Brian Sipe was quarterback. Not that that has any bearing on the conversation.)
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
Have you ever thought that maybe the problem was with past regimes who panicked instead of building slowly the right way?
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
We have a winner.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
What?!? Did we sign Trent Dilfer?
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
He’s our new OC. He’s just going to do his job from the studio because he hates Cleveland so much he can’t even stand to be around the team.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Go root for Buffalo.
rufio - September 21, 2010
is that the politically correct version?
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
let it be green.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
dude, you need to stop with the jason campbell bullshit.
and as long as you’ve been around, I would think you’d have gotten the point that cleveland.com-like rants will destroy your chances of gaining credibility here.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
AREN’T YOU TIRED OF THIS TEAM BEING A JOKE?
I would have given up a 2nd round pick for Donovan McNabb (who is only 33). You can’t really defend the current quarterback situation, it is not improved and if Colt McCoy is the hope the Browns are lost.
Jason Campbell is better than any quarterback on the roster. McNabb does not compare he is so much better than all those quarterbacks on our roster and Campbell.
Lastly I did not say I wanted Cowher, I said the chants will start. They should have gotten Marty back 2 years ago instead of taking this direction. (Schottheimer is not what I want now but the total football operation would not have deteriorated this badly)
Based on the play in the 2nd half of each game so far against bad football teams, the Browns and the Rams are the worst football teams in the league. Atleast the Rams have their quarterback of the future on their roster and IS playing.
Maybe getting the 1st pick in April 2011 the BROWNS will finally get their quarterback of the future.
Honest question: Do any of you think the Browns could win now, with a competent quarterback? ( I think they would at least be 1-1 if not 2-0 so far, and win closer to 7 or 8 games this season. They do have so talent on offense) I like the current defense.
Don’t you think they could win now with a decent quarterback?
champion64 - September 20, 2010
What don’t you understand about the term “retired”?
The Browns are at least better than the Rams and Bills.
No #1 pick please.
They can win now.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I would rather have a 23 year year old TJ ward who we have under contract for the next 4 years than a 33 yeard old donovan mcnabb whose contract expires next season and unless we make the playoffs (which, even with him here, would be tough) and have success there, he leaves.
I actually think Oakland has better weapons than us. However, he is just as bad, statistically if not worse than the QBs here. NO. Campbell is not better. you can maybe make a point for it, but I don’t buy it.
Actually, I would say the bills are 10 times worse than the browns and rams combined…the bills are THAT bad.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
we would have given up too much for Mcnabb, who wouldn’t be around long enough for this team to be a SB contender.
delhomme is exactly what we need if not asked to throw 40 times per game; therein lies the problem.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
I contend we could win now if we had McNabb. T.J. Ward is a good player, his talent no matter how great does not compare to McNabb.
champion64 - September 20, 2010
Who the hell cares if we win now? I want to win in the future with a team built from good drafting, not old aging FA’s that won’t get you anywhere but 7-9 wins and a close call at the playoffs.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
and 1 draft pick T.J. Ward is the only key to future success of the Browns? You want to watch this misery all year for what? They have had 10 years our of 11 of good draft picks (HAVE THEY WON ONE PLAYOFF GAME??)
McNabb has been to 5 (THAT IS 5 Championship games and 1 superbowl) and is younger and MUCH better than Cajun Delhomme.
champion64 - September 20, 2010
Delhomme wasn’t brought into win, he was brought into place hold and mentor.
But McNabb is? Wtf? And I didn’t say Ward is but he’s a building block. I said drafting will bring success. We will have future success DRAFTING, not picking up old FA’s.
Congratulations for knowing this. Do you want a cookie for going to wikipedia?
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Don’t weaken your point with your insult.
Point is no denying, The Cleveland Browns would be a better football team with Donovan McNabb (who could have been had) then Wallace/Delhomme.
The rest of the league did not want Delhomme as a starter but you do. Wonderful choice.
I say the Browns would win with McNabb (didnt say Superbowl) but would be much more competitive and interesting. This team sucks because we have no shot of scoring.
champion64 - September 20, 2010
This is the feeling of a front running fan.
You only want to win now. You don’t want a successful team for years to come, you want to be the Yankees. Yes, we would win with McNabb, that’s obvious, but we would’ve sacrificed much more in the long run. Sacrificing stability and future success to win now never works, it’s a very foolish thing to wish for.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
You really do not make sense at all. If they got Delhomme to stabilize the offense short term, and have a quarterback learn to be the future of the Browns in the long run, who are you (please tell us now) saying is that quarterback being groomed? Please tell me his name. (if you cant name one that is being groomed, ISNT IT BETTER TO BE COMPETITVE NOW WITH MCNABB) By the way Delhomme is NOT GOOD. He is and will always be a bad acquisition. I am waiting for the name of the quarterback learning under Delhomme’s calming influence and stable stellar freakin play? Who is the heir apparent?? Well we’re waiting…..
champion64 - September 20, 2010
how many different ways can we say it: getting mcnabb would have cost too much in the long run. you are arguing wanting average right now for years of well below average later. senseless.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
They have had high draft picks 10 of 11 years since coming back and one 2nd round player and a 4th rounder next year would not have killed the team going forward. Idiot
Second & 3rd round picks of the Browns, some names since 1999
Brodney Pool (not with team)
JuanJuan Dawson (cut and WHO?)
Melvin Fowler (cut)
Cris Crocker (sucked and cut)
Charlie Fry (OMG!!! we could miss out on another Fry)
Brady Quinn (1st rounder BLOWS and not with team)
Chaun Thompson (horrible and gone)
Travis Wilson (awful and cut)
Quincy Morgan (awful and cut)
Andre Davis (gone)
Abdullah (cut)
Sean Jones (gone)
still on the team Eric Wright (not a superstar and can be replaced)
DQ’well Jackson
So Mcnabb is not worth the gamble?
champion64 - September 20, 2010
you blast people for insulting you, then call me an idiot. well played.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
Do you see the point now? (and you said sensless first so I spoke to you in a way you could maybe understand, since i showed you , you were wrong)
champion64 - September 20, 2010
the only thing I see is a fool. I’m all finished with this dispute.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7fsM9q27sc
bross09 - September 20, 2010
actually Chaun Thompson was very athletic (ranked top 5 in all physical categories at Combine) the problem with him was that he came from West Texas A&M. Butch Davis was hoping he could coach him up & make him a WLB on the cheap. Lots of LB’s have been found like that. However he didn’t make the transition mentally & was a really good special teams player. He went to Houston & did well on their special teams before finally deciding to retire.
sleepy042 - September 20, 2010
rufio - September 20, 2010
so you are going to fault Holmgren and Heckert, two individuals with a great track record in the draft, for what idiots did for 10 years?
You know, no one who drafted ANY of these guys is associated with the team anymore? in fact, all of them actually got demoted. Savage had his first stint as a GM and then went back to becoming an area scout, something he hadn’t done since the mid 90s.
Butch Davis is a bum and look at all those violations around his program in college (and the only place that would hire him was a school with a Sh**ty team at the time). Dwight clark retired from all of football.
Heckert however, actually served as GM on a successful team. it is idiotic in fact, to say the draft pick is a waste because of browns history of drafting. TJ ward so far has looked great and to judge him by past picks like this, without looking at his merits so far on the field, is mind boggling to me.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
So what do you think they should do? Tell us
champion64 - September 20, 2010
ummm…
a) not trade for one season of McNabb (which they didn’t
b) build through the draft
the rest should be obvious…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Mike Holmgren accepts team president role with Cleveland Browns
And no I don’t believe that getting Holmgren will automatically make us contenders. But that’s the point, we have to do the hard work of building of team after 11 years of creating a mess. Getting McNabb, although I would love to have him, at the cost and in the position we are currently in would not do much for us to rebuild the organization, which I believe is the real task for the FO. This team has been a mess and gone through so many organizational philosophies since we’ve been backed that our continuity as an organization has a shelf life of about a year.
We have to build a successful organization capable of competing year in and year out in the AFC north not just an 8-9 win team for this season with the hope of competing for a wild card slot every 5 years, and I believe that is what the current FO realizes and is attempting to do.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Think about how much $ a single winning season would bring to Cleveland. This about maybe other pro’s wanting to play for a multiple playoff QB. Think about maybe the draft scouts suck as they are wont to do in Cleveland. I say again – the $$$ it would bring the city!! Cleveland can’t wait to rebuild a team any longer. It has to get some wins or no one will want to play here and you won’t get all your talent from the draft like everyone here seems to think. Besides – contracts get broken all the time so the “we get 4 years of TJ ward…” is a moot point.
browndawgbacker - September 20, 2010
I agree, and you make a lot of sense.
champion64 - September 20, 2010
actually, not as much money as you may think. maybe, for a year, mcnabb brings in a bit more money, but he would be the only player people would really pay to watch.
…which will be in 2011 if there isn’t a lockout. however, McNabb is a free agent in 2011 and even if we do trade for him, I can’t see him staying here unless we are a legitimate title contender.
by saying it again, does that increase the money?
so we should just sign over the hill guys every year so we can go 7-9 for the next decade?
becase thats what they do.False. name me one elite franchise that builds mostly through free agency. The key players from Indy (wayne, sanders, peyton, etc..), the Pats (Brady, Light, Warren), the Steelers (Rapist, Polamalu, woodley), the Eagles (Mcnabb, Desean, Cole, etc..), and others that I could mention are acquired through the draft. you build through the draft, not through free agency.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Not as much as losing Lebron, but really what’s the point?
McNabb is not going to float the Cleveland economy and I don’t think the Lerner’s are strapped for cash, so i’m not certain where the amount of money a winning season brings to Cleveland has any relevance.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
We should not make panicked moves in order to bring a few millions to the City of Cleveland.
If you really think the Browns exist to bring money to Cleveland or could somehow help jumpstart the economy, think about how much money a 23 year old Pro Bowl QB and the decade of wins he would bring would make the city.
rufio - September 21, 2010
If only…
emily522 - September 21, 2010
we just need to draft Peyton Manning. It worked for the Colts.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
DUH!
Did anyone say otherwise? Most of the arguments just state we wouldn’t be good enough to keep McNabb for more than one season (which is valid). this not a team missing just one piece and if they get it, are suddenly great. even with McNabb, they would have to catch quite a few lucky breaks to go 9-7.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
for this team, his talent surpasses McNabb. we don’t need a good but aging QB to get us 8-8 this year. we need good, young players that can get us 12-4 in a few years. TJ Ward, and some of our other young guys, are exactly that.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
We have him under contract for longer as well. Matters.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Maybe we win more games now, maybe we go 9-7 or 10-6 and make the playoffs. HOWEVER, this team would have to go far into the playoffs to keep mcnabb. Plus, with mcnabb we don’t have ward which means adams and elam are starting. even with mcnabb and if everyone else is playing good, a team would have go get really lucky to make the playoffs with both of them as starters. even if you consider us getting a lesser safety (like a Major Wright), thats still a downgrade, plus that means that that’s another 2nd-3rd round pick that we used on wright instead of one of the guys we got.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
Actually, while Champion64 is borderline incoherent, I think we would have been better off getting McNabb. Yes, he’s a free agent after this year, but the NFL isn’t like MLB. When was the last time you saw a quarterback leave his team in free agency when the team wanted to keep him? We definitely could have found a way to hang onto McNabb, and he would have been a good quarterback for us for the next four years or so — enough time to find and bring along a good young quarterback, rather than drafting Jake Locker and throwing him into the fire next season (which I’m terrified we’re going to do). As for him sabotaging a trade because we stink, well, he went to Washington, didn’t he?
Like you guys, I love TJ Ward, but I think he’s going to be a good safety, not another Troy Polamalu. And a good QB is always going to be better than a good safety. Give me McNabb.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
really?
a) I am not sure if he has 4 years left, probably no more than 2. i know favre lasted till 40, but he was an iron man who never got hurt and didn’t take a ton of hits. because of his mobility, McNabb actually takes a fair amount of hits. Mcnabb is always nicked up and has had some major surgeries on his knees.
b) since he doesn’t have a ton of time left, I think he would want to go to a contender. He didn’t specifically choose to go to washington. I think he would want to finally win that super bowl and I dunno if he sees cleveland as the place to do it.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
1) He’s 33, so I gave him till 36. That’s not so long for a good QB. Sure, he’ll be banged up off and on, but most quarterbacks are.
b) I’m sure Cleveland wouldn’t have been his first choice, but that’s why we were trading for him. Washington isn’t a place to win a Super Bowl either, and he went there.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
I don’t know how much say he had in the team he was being traded to. My assumption would be not a ton.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
That’s my point exactly. We were trading for him. It doesn’t matter if he wants to come to Cleveland or not.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
With a year left on his deal, it most certainly does matter if he wants to come to Cleveland. If he doesn’t want to come to Cleveland, there’s no sign and trade or contract extension, and we’re giving up picks for a one year rental.
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
As I mentioned earlier, when was the last time you saw a free agent quarterback leave a team that wanted to keep him? We could have hung on to him if we wanted to.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
By ‘wanted to’, you mean if we were willing to give a 33 year old quarterback who couldn’t win it all with a decade’s worth of great teams in Philly a multi year deal with lots of guaranteed money. To stay in Cleveland he would want Brady or Manning money. Not worth it to a rebuilding team. We’d be giving up picks to rent him for a year.
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
Not to mention, he might retire earlier if he is on a team that sucks.
rufio - September 21, 2010
If you draft a quarterback in the first round, you’re giving him Brady or Manning money too. No matter how you acquire him, if you have a good quarterback, you’re paying through the nose for him.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
But we pay him Brady or Manning money for fresh, young legs and a long 7 year contract.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
With no guarantee of future performance. If you draft a first-round QB, you have to consider yourself lucky if you get four years of Donovan McNabb production out of that deal.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
At 33 you have to consider yourself lucky if you get two years of Donovan McNabb performance out of Donovan McNabb.
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
Not with a rookie wage scale you don’t. The teams who pay big bucks for QBs this year will regret it next year.
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
This is an interesting point, and it makes sense. But without knowing what that scale will be, or how it will work, I’m not comfortable shaping the direction of my team around it.
Also, if there’s one position I’m comfortable overpaying for, it’s a guaranteed good quarterback.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
Uncertainty should be met with caution. We’re in no position to be throwing money around like Washington or Dallas and giving away picks in the process.
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
This. Also imagine that I type ‘This’ for all of your other comments. I agree with every thing you are saying.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
This is a bet you have to take in today’s NFL. If you don’t have the guy, you need the guy.
rufio - September 22, 2010
But he is a free agent in 2011. Who knows if he wants to stay here more than one year. I am inclined to believe otherwise.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
I think I agree with Chemo. But, really, this debate stopped being relevant in May.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
Yup. Might as well debate if we should have taken Couch or McNabb in ’99.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
True. But it’s this or think about Seneca Wallace, so it’s kinda lose-lose.
Chemo - September 21, 2010
Borderline? That’s being generous.
Buckeye Brad - September 20, 2010
Next weeks game is probably going to be something like 7 – 3 half way thru the 3rd quarter and then our defense is just going to collapse.
Early prediction 21 – 6 Ravens. Browns with less than 150 yards of offense unless Daboll suddenly becomes Bill Walsh overnight.
Hoping Cribbs goes nuts and Flacco picks up where he left off this week otherwise we are screwed. I just don’t see how we are going to move the ball against Baltimore.
mgtbfb - September 20, 2010
I think are D is just as Good as Cincy so the points the D will be mild.Now the O will be what kills us and they might give up 14 points on there own :(
Brownsfan4ever - September 20, 2010
English, please. This isn’t twitter.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
just a quick random question from you fantasy guys…so last night I ended up down about 1.4 pts. I wasn’t too concerned since my opponent was finished and I still had frank gore to go tonight…but this morning I discovered all of a sudden I am up by about 1.2 pts. Do they amend/correct official stats at some point during the evening or something?
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
Ummmm….didnt you see the Browns lost…nothing else matters…
Red-Right-88 - September 20, 2010
yeah I did. At least fantasy can possbily salvage me a small amount of satisfaction from the weekend. I guess.So the browns game was all around suckage.
johnnyphoenix - September 20, 2010
Yes that happens sometimes.
It usually has something to do with a pass being changed to a run (think lateral) or something like that.
Bernie19Kosar - September 20, 2010
Yes, stuff always gets corrected overnight. You should still be ok if Gore could at least get you 5 points or so.
cboldt12 - September 20, 2010
OT (ish): I am sitting here in math class and we divert subjects onto the browns. My teacher says ‘how about that browns game yesterday’. a very depressing 5 minute discussion about it ending with my math teacher saying “people should just go to browns games with signs saying ‘do your best’”
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I would hate to be in a real life Browns discussion with you…
Also, you probably helped the Browns lose 100+ fans quicker than they can lose them on their own.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
haha. I actually didn’t participate, mostly listened.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I find that hard to believe…
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
I am tired…I don’t feel like talking…
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I like your counterpoints, dont agree alot but I know you believe what you are saying. At least you make points instead of insults.
champion64 - September 20, 2010
i doubt you know he is believing what he’s saying.
And at the expense of Bross and yourself, the points you guys make (you much much more than Bross) are terrible. People hit the point where insulting is the only way to get it into your head and I haven’t insulted you anyways. I’ve just disproven your points very well and you can’t handle that so you need to make an excuse, such as, I’m insulting you.
=D
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
Bross brings up football points, you make an insult and do not enlighten anyone.
You would rather have Delhomme/Wallace than McNabb/Campbell? if so you should not comment on the Browns or football.
champion64 - September 20, 2010
This is so ironic my head hurts.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
You are ignoring the draft picks given up in trades to acquire McNabb/Campbell. This is why no one takes your point seriously.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
No I am not. The draft picks given up to get McNabb (2nd rounder this year and 3 or 4th rounder next year) and or a 4th rounder next year for Campbell. These picks would have been worth it to have those two quarterbacks on the roster.
THe Browns are giving up a late round pick for Wallace and I still contended Delhomme is and will be a mistake.
Cleveland could compete and win with McNabb and the price would not have killed them
champion64 - September 20, 2010
picture me banging my head off the wall…
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
READ WHAT YOU JUST WROTE:
That, above, directly contradicts this, below:
I would take McNabb in a straight up trade for Delhomme without hesitation. It would be a no-brainer. I would not trade a 2nd round pick and another pick for McNabb.
rufio - September 20, 2010
i agree with SB completely. have I insulted you in anyway? we’ve all tried making the same football points about 10 times, you just don’t want to hear them.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
Roger Dorn…
Would you not rather have given up a couple picks to get McNabb and at least see a chance at winning then to wait to possibly draft a quarterback next year for 3 or 4 seasons down the road?
champion64 - September 20, 2010
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
hilarious +1 rec
sleepy042 - September 20, 2010
I was actually in favor of acquiring McNabb during the offseason, and I believe the front office wanted to as well. HOWEVER. The Eagles were not willing to trade him intiially if you recall and the Browns could not sit around and wait for them to make a move, so they moved on without the Eagles. I don’t fault the Eagles for changing their minds, I don’t fault our front office for not waiting around to make a move on Delhomme, and I sure as hell am not going to bitch about it.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Here is a million dollar question. Vick is out of Philly next year…should we be interested? He has looked pretty good in the last two games! Vick in the DawgPound….I like it!
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
I would be interested.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I would as well. Reid has already said that Kolb will start next week. I don’t see Vick staying with Philly after this season.
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
Granted I am probably going to regret opening this can of worms, but anyone else in for a Mornhinweg-Vick marriage?
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
Nope, I’m only in for a Vick, Hardesty, Cribbs, and MoMass reunion. I think that combo would strike fear in the heart of defenses.
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
I would be in for Vick + OC of reasonable competence not named Daboll. Doesn’t have to be Morninhweg.
woodsmeister - September 21, 2010
Kimble is it looks as though you have ripped off a donkey appendage and putt it over your head and are enjoyng playing with it. Oh well enjoy
champion64 - September 20, 2010
or you could have hit reply. either way.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
No, I’m saying we have beat this horse to death during the off season.
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
My question is how does the team look so clueless in the second halves of these 2 games? You can point to a number of things, but my opinion is its the coaching, can I hear some your guys opinions!
cboldt12 - September 20, 2010
Yes, we all agree it’s Daboll.
SpecialBrownie - September 20, 2010
My only question is whether its Haskill trying to help too much with Daboll, Haskill only, or Daboll only? I’m not sure which (or both) to blame.
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
I don’t think it’s Haskell, he is only an advisor, and Daboll actually calls the plays.
cboldt12 - September 20, 2010
Daboll has been sub-par at making adjustments (or planning more than a series or two) for some time now. Quinn looked very good on opening drives during his second stint last year, and I’d say it was thanks to Daboll. After the opening drive or two, it seemed like our offense hit a wall.
So it would be hard for me to blame Haskell.
It isn’t 100% Daboll’s fault, some fault always lies with the players. There have been open receivers and we can’t execute. But it does seem like whenever a D figures out what we are trying to do and they counter punch, we have no counter back. Is it that Daboll is bad at thinking on his feet? Is it that we have great plays called but can’t execute them? Is is that the players aren’t good at audibling out of things? Is it that we are simply not that great of an offense?
Probably all of the above.
rufio - September 20, 2010
I agree partly. I just don’t know if daboll is trying to incorporate too much WC and isn’t sticking to his bread and butter that he knows how to call better.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
I would imagine if it has anything to do with Haskell, it’s probably Daboll not being able to comprehend.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
This is about the 600th post in a thread entirely about how the Browns are clueless in the second halves of games. Are you asking this ironically?
Chemo - September 20, 2010
No, I have been away from the board for a long time, sorry if I didn’t see any previous posts.
cboldt12 - September 20, 2010
I was just joshing. No biggie.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
1.) Our starting QB has only been healthy for 1 half this year.
2.) Daboll hasn’t made a half-time adjustment worth a damn in 18 games.
3.) We lack top end skill position players that make QBs and offensive coordinators look good.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
Game 2 and we are already in the doldrums of Browns fandom. I didn’t have time to read all the posts above, there are just too many. Here are my observations.
1. I have some friends that constantly fault Daboll’s play calling. I’d have to look at lot more closely at every down and see if it is the wrong call or if it is just bad execution. What does this mean? The Browns have the worst combination: poor coaching AND poor players. That’s why we are bad. No quick fix here that I can see.
2. When I say “poor players” above what I really mean is no reliable big play makers. True they are somewhat rare in the league but teams that win usually have a couple on each side of the ball. I see potential on defense with our rookies this year but not even potential on offense. Who is going to break out on offense and become a “Javid Best”-type star on the Browns? There are a lot of good, serviceable players on the team but without some real threats at receiver, running back, etc. those players don’t look as good as they should.
3. There are some bright spots but they seem to blaze for a moment and them fade. I like the toughness of Hillis and Moore. The O line is decent most of the time. But I have to say that Harrison is a fake. He wasn’t very good before the last few games of last year and seems the same now. Those last games last year are the flukes… reminds me of DA’s one good season. And are we going to see Davis this year at all? Is he still on the roster?
4. I thought Seneca Wallace was supposed to be accurate? I didn’t see a lot of accuracy in his short throws and especially on the long ones. He had the long throw to Cribbs but most of the rest of the long attempts looked like he was throwing it away. I honestly couldn’t tell if he was trying for a reception on a lot of them as they were so far out of bounds. He looks scared and tentative most of the time and he telegraphs what he is about to do. I think the bad, deep throws highlight his fear of getting picked off. How long has he been in the league as a backup? That should tell you something.
5. 0-9 is a very realistic possibility for this team, this year. Who are we going to beat in the next 7 games? If you look down the list all the games look like locks against the Browns. I don’t think anyone would pick the Browns to win any of those games. And who would you have on your fantasy team from the Browns? I wouldn’t have any of them on my team in our 10-team league. There will probably be one game that the Browns will win that they are not favored to win—that kind of thing happens in the NFL but to my eyes we seem to have another 4-12 season brewing.
I’ll still watch all the games and visit here often… I love the Browns but man, how can I be thinking about the draft after the second game of the season?
Brownsyup - September 20, 2010
cynical nature of cleveland fans especially with the recent events with the cavaliers & the lousy dont care attitude of the indians makes it happen.
sleepy042 - September 20, 2010
2. We could really use one of these guys, particularly at WR. One guy at the top moving everyone down a notch would make everyone’s job easier.
rufio - September 20, 2010
We will beat at least 2 teams we aren’t expected to in the next 7 games, I promise you.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
yep. every year, you win at least one game you are not supposed to and you lose at least one game you are supposed to win and should win (you, meaning NFL teams). Sometimes its more than one, and I have this feeling that because we blew 2 games we should have won, we will come out with a couple surprise victories and still end up 2-7.
bross09 - September 20, 2010
If we end up 1-8, I’m coming for you, RD! You promised!
Chemo - September 20, 2010
49ers, after looking clueless against Seattle, looked like the contender many predicted against the Saints tonight.
I really hope we make Ward follow Reggie Bush everywhere on the field if he is healthy, because we don’t have any LBs as athletic as Patrick Willis (no one does).
rufio - September 21, 2010
Bush is out for 6 weeks. We’ll be getting an extra helping of Shockey and Lance Moore, I’d guess.
golanbatrac - September 21, 2010
A couple players??
If the Browns had a decent quarterback, One above average receiver (to go along with the receivers they have now) and a right tackle, one more good db, and an Offensive Coordinator where would they be?
champion64 - September 20, 2010
2-0
Brownsyup - September 20, 2010
If you add those pieces to any team in the league, they’d become a playoff team.
Chemo - September 20, 2010
and if i was stronger, taller, and faster, and better at football, I could play for them too.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
Superbowl..
StuckInPa - September 21, 2010
Hello from KC.
I just wanted to point out one thing this article didn’t mention. How good the Browns special teams are, exp in return coverage.
Budd Jones - September 20, 2010
Thanks! We actually use quite a few rosters spots for Special teams only type players that wouldn’t see the field in game action – Blake Costanzo being the most notable. These guys are part of the reason we have some of the best special teams in the league. Good luck with your electric new return men the rest of the season.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
I say we get Mike Vick, regardless of his past he looks extremely well so far.
MDBrownie - September 20, 2010
Honestly I’m ok with him getting a second chance but I think that if any team signs him from the Eagles they will have a potential public relations nightmare on their hands.
Say Vick, has an outstanding season as a backup/wildcat option. Maybe he starts next week and has another great game and then goes back to being a back up once Kolb is healthy. He doesn’t get another start but is so dynamic running the wildcat that you just know he can be a starter in the league again. So we sign him and he comes to town and the FO talks about getting second chances and being allowed to recover from past mistakes, etc.
Then the season starts and Vick sucks, not just because he isn’t playing well, but also because maybe we aren’t as good/talented/well coached a team as the Eagles. So now we have brought in a guy many people already have a problem with in hopes he leads our team with visions of him making us better and then he sucks.
That would be a major gamble for Holmgren and Co. to take in only their second year and if this year blows up after he decided to keep Mangini and Co, that’s two major blunders in only two years on the job. Also if the season is uncapped I could forsee Vick commanding a substantial salary, which could become a problem if we sign him to multiple years and the cap comes back having an effect on his remaining years. Pressure would be ridiculous and would probably lead us back on to the dysfunctional organization carousel.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
That might have been the most pessimistic view on the topic possible. However, I do see your point and I agree that he would be a great risk but him and Harrison together could possibly form a duo equal to Vince Young and Chris Johnson. No I do not think Harrison is anywhere as good as CJ but Vick is better then Vince Young and many of those read option plays could work very well with Harrison’s speed and skill set. Also, even though Vick is thirty he had 2 years off to basically rest his body and I think he has at least 5 good years left barring injury.
MDBrownie - September 20, 2010
Oh yeah, it was very pessimistic, but I’m just thinking that we’re wanting to operate in a semi-pessimistic manner. Try to build a strong foundation by building upon some solid, sustainable decisions and improvements without making too many risky decisions. It might take longer but in the end I think it is the best course. I think many decisions were rushed in the early years since 1999, and that the team has been stuck trying to correct those mistakes and have unfortunately compounded those early mistakes with more mistakes.
I also definitely think Vick has some more years in his body and I would love to see him get a chance to run our offense, I’m just worried not many others share that view and that it could be creating a combustible situation.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
I agree that we cannot rush into things, but the quarterback position is something that the FO needs to fix as soon as they can. If it means giving up a draft pick or something to get Vick I say do it.
MDBrownie - September 20, 2010
I wish I would have kept reading before posting above. I was wondering what people here thought about bringing Vick on board next year.
Kimble_79 - September 20, 2010
I would really like to see us draft a QB in the first round. We should make due with veterans until that guy is ready.
rufio - September 21, 2010
There will be some good choices this year, and we’ll have a high draft pick.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Then we’ll need a RT somewhere in the draft, too.
rufio - September 21, 2010
The ballboy - reprised
It really does not matter what the owner does in the front office….unless they give Holmgren the authority to fire the ballboy!
Only question is whether we are 0-3 or 0-4 or 0-5 or 0-6 or 0-7 or 0-8 or 0-9 when we trade the ballboy for a pick to be named later…
I’m putting a fiver in the office pool on 0-7…
Time to throw Colt to Ravens….let the birds pick the road kill’s bones clean
keiker - September 20, 2010
So poetic.
Villeslgr - September 20, 2010
Nothing done matters
Unless Holmgren has power
To fire the ball boy
Chemo - September 21, 2010
How many games are lost?
Three, four, five, six, seven, eight?
Trade ballboy for picks!
Chemo - September 21, 2010
Oh and Two we Start.
How many more will we lose?
7? 8? 9? Who cares…
bross09 - September 21, 2010
do we have a ballboy? Who is he and why does he deserve to be fired?
bross09 - September 20, 2010
if we could trade a ballboy for a draft pick I’d do it in a second.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
Jeez, any chance Pierre Thomas and Garrett Hartley score less than 4 points combined from here on out? That’s what I need to beat Dawg Nuts. Otherwise, I will be the least lucky in the league (I’ll have lost twice to the leading scorer).
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
i didn’t think i’d be waiting this long into the game to pull ahead of you. i’m sweating it.
Dawg Nuts - September 20, 2010
I think you’ll still get me. But I’m hopping it stays right here.
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
damn… now I need a Thomas fumble…
Ryan Kelsey - September 20, 2010
I need a piano to fall from the sky and land on Frank Gore.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
Well that sucked.
golanbatrac - September 20, 2010
if it makes you feel any better, I needed a huge game from Thomas and Vernon Davis….they pulled me within 20pts, but I got blew out this week also
Kimble_79 - September 21, 2010
I needed a game from eli manning…actually pretty much every one. my opponent got 3 big weeks from his guys whereas I had guys starting that pretty much laid goose eggs.
bross09 - September 21, 2010
I think I am the opposite of you then. Have squeaked by 2 of the lowest scores in consecutive weeks.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Same. My fantasy team isn’t very good. I’m an awful drafter. I need to figure out what to do about my WRs… they aren’t very good besides Miles Austin. Hopefully Steve Smith (NYG) breaks out soon.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
holy crap, you won with 62 points.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
I won with 73.
emily522 - September 21, 2010
I believe Dawg Nuts was not the leading scorer this week.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Damnitt, I was wrong.
rufio - September 21, 2010
It was me until last night… I’m tellin you, I"m getting screwed.
Ryan Kelsey - September 21, 2010
yeah, i’m happy with the win, but sympathetic toward you losing this one. its tough getting beat when you score big points.
Dawg Nuts - September 21, 2010
READ THIS CHIEFS FANS
According to MKC, the Browns have sent tape of Jerome Harrison’s “fumble” into the league office for review. Apparently, they don’t think it was a close call either.
Roger Dorn - September 20, 2010
Why would it matter?
We get a sorry?
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
I’ve always wondered about this, what happens if the NFL is like “yeah, we screwed up”?
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
It’s the sound made by a tree falling in the forest when nobody is around to hear. If the offending official gets any censure at all, it will all be under the rug and not made public. And let’s face it – there is a heirarchy of officiating and the NFL knows which officials are the better ones and which games are more important. The Browns will be getting more crappy NFL officials this year because they will be playing fewer important games. That’s just the way it’s going to be, so we might as well anticipate that we’ll not only be playing against the other team, but also the officials.
woodsmeister - September 21, 2010
We feel the tiniest bit better.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Realistically, they probably take the fumble from Harrison’s stats.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
I have a random question.
What does it mean when a QB kind of makes an O shape with his hands and taps his fingers together repeatedly? Does that just mean to hurry up and get to the line?
(I was watching the 49ers game and Alex Smith kept doing that.)
emily522 - September 20, 2010
Huddle. They were in hurry-up mode, but he did that when the previous play stopped the clock.
Ryan Kelsey - September 21, 2010
Ok, thanks.
emily522 - September 21, 2010
I asked this exact same thing last monday!!!
It means huddle up.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
It’s been bothering me for at least 2 seasons now.
emily522 - September 21, 2010
Haha, I always saw it and assumed huddle but I swear sometimes they do it and don’t huddle!
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
I’m up by 3 points. The guy I’m playing has Brees. I have Thomas.
Crap. 1 minute left and Saints have the ball. They’ll be passing.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
I just won fantasy by 2 points.
emily522 - September 20, 2010
nice.
Ryan Kelsey - September 21, 2010
Alex Smith has matured like he freaking hit puberty.
Counting last week as a fluke, San Fran is legit.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
What if this week is the fluke? (for the record i picked them to win their division)
Villeslgr - September 21, 2010
Woah, a spin on things. A positive fluke?
But no. They imploded throughout the game with turnovers and simple mistakes and still looked legit.
That O – line is freaking beast. Not to mention that offense of weapons.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
Seeing as how they have since figured out how to call their plays in with >5 seconds left on the playclock, I think last week was the fluke.
rufio - September 21, 2010
Yeah I’m suprised Coach Singletary didn’t air somebody out over that. Or atleast pull down his pants once or twice.
Villeslgr - September 21, 2010
Apparently, they did it multiple times last week.
I have a feeling he is talking to that punt returner right about now.
rufio - September 21, 2010
…what if last season after getting a shot was a fluke? what if all his success in the NFL has been a fluke?
bross09 - September 21, 2010
Yeah that’s pretty unthinkable that he went from bust to an ok starter.
emily522 - September 21, 2010
He didn’t have the same coordinator for 2 consecutive years for a while. He had no veterans in front of him who had found success in the league. His line was awful for a while, and he hasn’t had very good targets until very recently.
If I am drafting a guy #1 overall, I am not doing that to him.
Lastly, he looked ok when he had Norv Turner as an OC.
rufio - September 21, 2010
The 49ers OLine os going to be good for quite some time.
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
bross09 - September 21, 2010
But it wasn’t early in Smith’s career. He had relatively no shot behind some of those lines.
rufio - September 21, 2010
I was just making a point after watching the game last night.
I am jealous of them having Iupati.
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
He does look very good.
rufio - September 22, 2010
One thing that really struck me about watching San Francisco is how often they had receivers that were WIDE OPEN in almost any place on the field. New Orleans is a good defensive team too. Is this how an offensive scheme is supposed to look?
I don’t think I’ve seen a receiver catch a pass on the Browns this year without someone breathing down his neck. Is that all lack of talent in the receiving corps or could it be that our scheme is too simplistic? The defenses we have played are not exactly top-tier and they seemed to be able to figure out just about every route.
Brownsyup - September 21, 2010
On the plays where that happened, it was usually because the play had broken down and Smith was buying time with his feet.
There were a few times where NO blew the coverage, but you cant scheme your offense to make defenses screw up.
In HS receivers are wide open, in college they are open, and in the NFL you have to throw them open.
Those throws to Crabtree over the middle where he caught the ball and juked two guys out and the one to The Disease on a vertical route down the field were NFL throws. Just like the one to Cribbs in our game. Brees also had one to Coltston in the last seconds that was a back-shoulder type pass, which is really the throw that puts NO over the top. They use it all the time on fades.
rufio - September 21, 2010
You know what I hate? How people from NO who I never heard cheer on the Saints before last season are now they’re biggest fans. Jumping on the bandwagon for sure.
emily522 - September 21, 2010
You’ve said this before.
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
I know. That’s because it just popped up on my facebook. It’s just incredibly irritating.
emily522 - September 21, 2010
You should throw some football smackdown on their ass. You know more about the Saints than them and you’re a Browns fan!
SpecialBrownie - September 21, 2010
Haha probably. I could be wrong, but I don’t remember these people being so vocal about their support. Whatever. We’ll see what happens if the Saints get out of the playoffs early or something.
emily522 - September 21, 2010
At least some of them have stopped cheering for the Steelers.
Bernie19Kosar - September 21, 2010
Rec.
StuckInPa - September 21, 2010
King me!
rufio - September 21, 2010
god…awful memories…
bross09 - September 21, 2010
I heard Gruden’s name mentioned. Here we go…..
champion64 - September 21, 2010
Here we go indeed.
notthatnoise - September 21, 2010
To replace Mangini?
emily522 - September 21, 2010
Yikes, look at all the comments when I take a one-day break from the site! Working on my game review; should be up some time today.
Chris Pokorny - September 21, 2010
Why oh why isn't this guy on our team?
All he needs is an axe in one hand and a severed head in the other (complete with football helmet) and he’d be Conan.
Brownsyup - September 21, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.