Rob Chudzinski?
Well, if former fullback Mo Carthon was going to feature fullbacks in his offense, we might be a little better off with former tight end (and tight end coach) featuring our tight end formations.
I'm glad to see they went outside the organization. I think the whole Davidson/Scherer idea seemed tainted by proximity to Mo Carthon, and what they've "accomplished" with the Browns over the past couple years. However, Chud is also of the Butch Davis coaching tree, which is more than a little scary. But he did OK in San Diego, so that can't be a bad sign.
He was Offensive Coordinator for Miami U during the 03 Fiesta bowl. He had his best seasons as a coach with Ken Dorsey throwing to Kellen Winslow. Lets hope he doesn't get some crazy sentimentality about giving Ken Dorsey another shot.
I look forward to finding out more about him, and what he plans on doing with this offense.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
A couple draft thoughts
I'm not upto speed on the draft yet. Even when I am, I will just be repeating what I read elsewhere, since I don't know squat about college football. But, based on the little bit I've seen/thought about so far, here are a couple thoughts:
> Raiders draft first. They're the real wild card. Logic says that they could use help at QB or LT, but last year they passed on Matt Leinart to take a safety. So I think there is a good chance they defy logic and steer clear of QBs again this year. They also probably wouldn't take Joe Thomas (LT) considering their fiasco with bust Robert Gallery a couple years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Oakland went after Calvin Johnson (WR). They lika dem playmakers, even if the position isn't exactly a need. But, again, they're a wild card.
> Lions go next. Last year, they also passed on Leinart in favor of a LB. I think last year might have been more of a stabilization, putting Kitna at QB. I could see them deciding that now might be a good time to draft a high QB to sit under Kitna for a year, ala the Bengals and Carson Palmer. They probably wouldn't go with Joe Thomas, with Jeff Backus getting a huge contract last year.
> That brings us to the Browns (or the Bucs, depending on the coin flip). My thoughts:
- We will NOT take a QB. Too many other needs, and they want Frye to get another year.
- We SHOULD NOT take a WR, even if Calvin Johnson is a demi-god. I think with Edwards, Jurivicis, and Travis Wilson, we would be loath to take a WR even if they get the best grade.
- Linebacker is not a need. While we could certainly use another impact OLB to start filling in for the aging McGinest, its a very low need right now. If we take any linebackers, it shouldn't be in round one.
- Safety probably isn't a need. If we resign Brian Russell, that will be a safe sign that no safety will be drafted. Unless they've given up on Pool.
- Tight end is set.
- Other than that, we could use players at any of OL, DL, CB, RB. Alot of people have been tossing the name Adrian Peterson (RB) as a Browns pick. It certainly seems like a possibility, but I would prefer to stick it out with the guys we have already, and work on fixing the line. I think I could be happy if we drafted nothing but OL and DL.
Alot of this is premature, since free agency will have a huge impact on our perceived needs (eg, if we sign one or two OL starters, it will drop on the priority list).
However, now is probably a good place to point out one of my draft pet-peeves:
There is no need to suggest "We should try to trade down". That is a given. If a team approaches you and offers you fair value (ie multiple 1st rounders, or even a 1st + 2nd + more) for your first round pick, you should ALWAYS take it. But the fact of the matter is, it that doesn't happen all that often.
Teams who draft later on are drafting later on because they have better teams, and so fewer needs. They aren't about to gamble their future on a single pick no matter HOW good he looks. Now, of course there are the occasional teams that DO target a particular player (Denver going for Cutler, Giants going for Manning, Saints going for Williams) that result in monster deals. But those deals are NEVER started because a team wants to trade down. They're started because a team wants to trade up, and the team that trades down just happens to be lucky to get the windfall.
Hopefully we'll get lucky and someone will want to trade up to get our pick. Seeing Brady Quinn or Jemarcus Russell fall to us certainly could help.
> Raiders draft first. They're the real wild card. Logic says that they could use help at QB or LT, but last year they passed on Matt Leinart to take a safety. So I think there is a good chance they defy logic and steer clear of QBs again this year. They also probably wouldn't take Joe Thomas (LT) considering their fiasco with bust Robert Gallery a couple years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Oakland went after Calvin Johnson (WR). They lika dem playmakers, even if the position isn't exactly a need. But, again, they're a wild card.
> Lions go next. Last year, they also passed on Leinart in favor of a LB. I think last year might have been more of a stabilization, putting Kitna at QB. I could see them deciding that now might be a good time to draft a high QB to sit under Kitna for a year, ala the Bengals and Carson Palmer. They probably wouldn't go with Joe Thomas, with Jeff Backus getting a huge contract last year.
> That brings us to the Browns (or the Bucs, depending on the coin flip). My thoughts:
- We will NOT take a QB. Too many other needs, and they want Frye to get another year.
- We SHOULD NOT take a WR, even if Calvin Johnson is a demi-god. I think with Edwards, Jurivicis, and Travis Wilson, we would be loath to take a WR even if they get the best grade.
- Linebacker is not a need. While we could certainly use another impact OLB to start filling in for the aging McGinest, its a very low need right now. If we take any linebackers, it shouldn't be in round one.
- Safety probably isn't a need. If we resign Brian Russell, that will be a safe sign that no safety will be drafted. Unless they've given up on Pool.
- Tight end is set.
- Other than that, we could use players at any of OL, DL, CB, RB. Alot of people have been tossing the name Adrian Peterson (RB) as a Browns pick. It certainly seems like a possibility, but I would prefer to stick it out with the guys we have already, and work on fixing the line. I think I could be happy if we drafted nothing but OL and DL.
Alot of this is premature, since free agency will have a huge impact on our perceived needs (eg, if we sign one or two OL starters, it will drop on the priority list).
However, now is probably a good place to point out one of my draft pet-peeves:
There is no need to suggest "We should try to trade down". That is a given. If a team approaches you and offers you fair value (ie multiple 1st rounders, or even a 1st + 2nd + more) for your first round pick, you should ALWAYS take it. But the fact of the matter is, it that doesn't happen all that often.
Teams who draft later on are drafting later on because they have better teams, and so fewer needs. They aren't about to gamble their future on a single pick no matter HOW good he looks. Now, of course there are the occasional teams that DO target a particular player (Denver going for Cutler, Giants going for Manning, Saints going for Williams) that result in monster deals. But those deals are NEVER started because a team wants to trade down. They're started because a team wants to trade up, and the team that trades down just happens to be lucky to get the windfall.
Hopefully we'll get lucky and someone will want to trade up to get our pick. Seeing Brady Quinn or Jemarcus Russell fall to us certainly could help.
Sunday, January 14, 2007
So does that mean we should have kept Jeff Faine?
Grossi keeps pointing to the Saints and Jets as examples of organizations that turned it around in one season while the Browns continue to fail. Here is a quick history of their records:
Saints
. W L
2001 7 9
2002 9 7
2003 8 8
2004 8 8
2005 3 13
2006 10 6
Jets
. W L
2001 10 6
2002 9 7
2003 6 10
2004 10 6
2005 4 12
2006 10 6
Both those teams, if you throw out 2005, have been very successful in the short/mid term. They both experienced extenuating circumstances in 2005 (Saints with Katrina, Jets with Pennington going down) and ending up dweilling in the cellar for a year. But its not like they lost their core players from their good seasons.
I don't want to make excuses for the Browns. They should be better than they are by now. But pointing to the Jets and Saints as examples of why a one year turn-around is possible is just intellectually dishonest.
-----------------------------------------------------------
And what's with Grossi spreading rumors that Savage asked Crennel to resign? He admits its nothing but a rumor, but if thats the case, it doesn't belong in print in a newspaper, at least without some substantiation.
Now, I don't think that its impossible. But highly unlikely. Who knows, though? Not me.
Saints
. W L
2001 7 9
2002 9 7
2003 8 8
2004 8 8
2005 3 13
2006 10 6
Jets
. W L
2001 10 6
2002 9 7
2003 6 10
2004 10 6
2005 4 12
2006 10 6
Both those teams, if you throw out 2005, have been very successful in the short/mid term. They both experienced extenuating circumstances in 2005 (Saints with Katrina, Jets with Pennington going down) and ending up dweilling in the cellar for a year. But its not like they lost their core players from their good seasons.
I don't want to make excuses for the Browns. They should be better than they are by now. But pointing to the Jets and Saints as examples of why a one year turn-around is possible is just intellectually dishonest.
-----------------------------------------------------------
And what's with Grossi spreading rumors that Savage asked Crennel to resign? He admits its nothing but a rumor, but if thats the case, it doesn't belong in print in a newspaper, at least without some substantiation.
Now, I don't think that its impossible. But highly unlikely. Who knows, though? Not me.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Rewinding to the backup QB debate
After our failed experiment at QB, alot of people are recalling their preseason calls for the signing of a veteran backup QB as a sort of "I told you so". I still don't buy it.
I'm glad that we got a chance to see Frye and Anderson in action. Not that they have convinced me (or anyone) that they are genuine starting QB material, but we have a better idea than we did going into the season.
As I understand it, the argument for the veteran backup QB went something like this:
i) He can take over if the youngun isn't ready
ii) He can mentor the younguns
My responses to each:
i) Who is this veteran? Who are the available QBs who are of starting caliber, whose veteran saavy is enough to justify putting him in over a supposed "QB of the future"? The fact is, you've gotta choose a direction at QB. Do you want to try out a young guy? Or do you want to rely on known mediocrity? Personally, I prefer our current situation, where we now know that Frye has limits and questionable potential. The alternative is that we could have put Kerry Collins out there to get us to 3-9, only to throw in the towel in on him, and then watched Frye go 1-3 with "promising signs" and "great poise under pressure" so that we would now still be under the mistaken belief that Frye may be the next Brett Favre.
ii) This is the more common argument, thrown in when people realize that the veteran backup probably won't be expected to play. To which I say "God, if you're going to hire someone who can be Charlie's friend and hold his clipboard and give him advice, why does that guy have to wear a uniform and count against the salary cap? Why not find a recently retired QB who you can put on the payroll to do the same thing? You can even give him some sort of title. Like QB coach or something."
I'm glad that we got a chance to see Frye and Anderson in action. Not that they have convinced me (or anyone) that they are genuine starting QB material, but we have a better idea than we did going into the season.
As I understand it, the argument for the veteran backup QB went something like this:
i) He can take over if the youngun isn't ready
ii) He can mentor the younguns
My responses to each:
i) Who is this veteran? Who are the available QBs who are of starting caliber, whose veteran saavy is enough to justify putting him in over a supposed "QB of the future"? The fact is, you've gotta choose a direction at QB. Do you want to try out a young guy? Or do you want to rely on known mediocrity? Personally, I prefer our current situation, where we now know that Frye has limits and questionable potential. The alternative is that we could have put Kerry Collins out there to get us to 3-9, only to throw in the towel in on him, and then watched Frye go 1-3 with "promising signs" and "great poise under pressure" so that we would now still be under the mistaken belief that Frye may be the next Brett Favre.
ii) This is the more common argument, thrown in when people realize that the veteran backup probably won't be expected to play. To which I say "God, if you're going to hire someone who can be Charlie's friend and hold his clipboard and give him advice, why does that guy have to wear a uniform and count against the salary cap? Why not find a recently retired QB who you can put on the payroll to do the same thing? You can even give him some sort of title. Like QB coach or something."
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Phil Speaks
Just watched Phil Savage's State of the Browns address.
I didn't get much out of it. He's good at candidly talking in a professional manner. Whenever questions come up about why guys were fired, or why guys were kept, he stuck to his line that "We make all our decisions as a team." He talks about it so naturally, I kind of believe him.
One point I did find interesting was when he was talking about Crennel's relationship with his coordinators. He made the point that Crennel really liked giving his coordinators alot of personal space, and that he was hands-off in alot of ways. He also said that that would change next year, and Crennel would be alot more into what was going on inside the meeting rooms. I read Savage's comments as saying that Crennel was giving his coordinators TOO much room, and that is in part why he was ineffective this year.
Steve Doerschuck asked a good question about the D-Line and not stopping the run. Phil certainly sounded concerned, much more so than when he was talking about the O-line. I fear that we might see the O-line fixed before the D-line ever gets there. That might turn us into a Bengals like team.
He explained the logic in bringing in Kevin Schaeffer, but he sounded like he has seen the light, and that maybe Schaeffer isn't elite left tackle material, and that he might get moved around if we can get in a new prospect.
Mary Kay Cabot threw Savage a softball of "Is it fair to say that Jeff Davidson had his hands tied in that he was stuck with Maurice Carthon's playbook", and Savage didn't take a swing. That certainly doesn't put much in Davidson's stock as next Offensive Coordinator. Phil's answer was essentially "Jeff did alot of good things from an operations stand point of making sure we got plays in on time and making sure guys knew what was coming. But, his play calling would not be alot different than Maurice Carthon's, it would just have some new tweaks". Phil, if you're of that mindset, and you will speak it to the Cleveland press, you would be a fool to bring Davidson back as coordinator.
Savage also had an interesting line about Edwards and Winslow: "The Face of the Browns' offense in the future is clearly Number 17 and Number 80". Phil really sounds sold on Edwards, and did alot of apologizing for him. He pointed out that Braylon's strengths are:
-Jump balls
-Catching a shorter pass in some traffic and breaking a big gain
-Blocking
I assume on that second point, he was referring to Edwards ability to break something IF he caches the ball.
Savage also made a comment about how the scouts all spend most of the season not even looking at the elite players, because they assume that they will be picking mid-round, and that the elite players will be gone by then. I wonder if that's why so many top-ten picks end up being busts. Everyone assumes that they're great, and they don't spend the time picking out their blemishes until its too late.
I didn't get much out of it. He's good at candidly talking in a professional manner. Whenever questions come up about why guys were fired, or why guys were kept, he stuck to his line that "We make all our decisions as a team." He talks about it so naturally, I kind of believe him.
One point I did find interesting was when he was talking about Crennel's relationship with his coordinators. He made the point that Crennel really liked giving his coordinators alot of personal space, and that he was hands-off in alot of ways. He also said that that would change next year, and Crennel would be alot more into what was going on inside the meeting rooms. I read Savage's comments as saying that Crennel was giving his coordinators TOO much room, and that is in part why he was ineffective this year.
Steve Doerschuck asked a good question about the D-Line and not stopping the run. Phil certainly sounded concerned, much more so than when he was talking about the O-line. I fear that we might see the O-line fixed before the D-line ever gets there. That might turn us into a Bengals like team.
He explained the logic in bringing in Kevin Schaeffer, but he sounded like he has seen the light, and that maybe Schaeffer isn't elite left tackle material, and that he might get moved around if we can get in a new prospect.
Mary Kay Cabot threw Savage a softball of "Is it fair to say that Jeff Davidson had his hands tied in that he was stuck with Maurice Carthon's playbook", and Savage didn't take a swing. That certainly doesn't put much in Davidson's stock as next Offensive Coordinator. Phil's answer was essentially "Jeff did alot of good things from an operations stand point of making sure we got plays in on time and making sure guys knew what was coming. But, his play calling would not be alot different than Maurice Carthon's, it would just have some new tweaks". Phil, if you're of that mindset, and you will speak it to the Cleveland press, you would be a fool to bring Davidson back as coordinator.
Savage also had an interesting line about Edwards and Winslow: "The Face of the Browns' offense in the future is clearly Number 17 and Number 80". Phil really sounds sold on Edwards, and did alot of apologizing for him. He pointed out that Braylon's strengths are:
-Jump balls
-Catching a shorter pass in some traffic and breaking a big gain
-Blocking
I assume on that second point, he was referring to Edwards ability to break something IF he caches the ball.
Savage also made a comment about how the scouts all spend most of the season not even looking at the elite players, because they assume that they will be picking mid-round, and that the elite players will be gone by then. I wonder if that's why so many top-ten picks end up being busts. Everyone assumes that they're great, and they don't spend the time picking out their blemishes until its too late.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
QB controversy
After last nights game, I might be convinced that Troy Smith might fit in with the Browns, after all. I mean, we have to discount that genuine Heisman trophy worthy regular season. But I'm sure Crennel and the new O-Coordinator could coach him to the Browns level.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
Friday, January 05, 2007
Let the real Browns season begins
4-12.
Yup, that was alot worse than alot of us expected.
I'm not going to do a full "Season in review". I just don't have the time to waste on such a fruitless exercise. What's the point in reviewing if alot of the names and faces are going to be different next year? And they WILL be different.
So instead, I'm ready to jump right into the offseason. And for Browns fan, the offseason is our REAL football season. The 17 weeks that the Browns are playing games just serves to drive home how bad our team is. So the offseason comes as a nice respite from the cruel realities of incompetence.
During the offseason, we can talk about our young players who are turning the corner. We can talk about our injured players who will be back, stronger than ever, ready to return us to our glory days of 2005's 6 wins. We can talk about our draft picks, who will surely all contribute immediately. And we can talk about our free agent signings, the cream of the crop who have never been injured and who have never failed to live up to their billing.
Some might say that we're just setting ourselves up for disappointment, since those corners are never turned, new injuries come faster than old injuries heal, draft picks are busts, and free agents are content hauling in their big paychecks. And they'd be right. But really, even with low expectations the Browns still would be a 4-12 team, so its not like we're missing out on that much.
Grossi mentioned something in a chat along the lines of "I thought the Browns would win at least 7 games. Of course, I was being optimistic, because thats what the fans want". You know what Tony, you're right. That is what I want. If we're going to watch crap for the 17 weeks out of the year that the season is going on, I'm OK playing a little game of self-deception the other 35 weeks of the year. Thanks, Tony. Time to haul out a little optimism.
So I'm ready to talk about free agency and the draft. I'll leave end of season analysis to those more qualified than myself.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Various end of season notes:
> Sean Jones really stopped looking like a ball hawk towards the end of the season. No interceptions past game 9, only a handful of passes defensed in the last few games. He probably had to play alot more conservatively with the CB crew being down with the plague, so I'm not saying cut him. But he sure didn't look like anything special.
> Last game of the season. We are short one guard. We have two options: Isaac Sowells, our 4th round pick and potential guard of the future, and Rob Smith, undrafted rookie who couldn't hang on as center because he was too sweaty to hold onto the ball. So who plays? Rob Smith of course. So, is Sowells such a bust that he can't beat out an undrafted player? Or does Crennel just have some talent management issues? I think its a little bit of both.
> I think alot of the offensive coaching staff shakeup is justified. Especially "offensive quality control coach Carl Crennel". There was quite obviously no quality on this offense.
> Word is that the Browns will interview Jason Garrett, Miami Dolphins QB coach, for offensive coordinator. Does anybody share my sentiment of WTF!?! Our offense is a shambles with a lack of personel, our head coach doesn't know play calling from linear algebra, and we're going to bring in a guy with no direct experience calling plays, and very little indirect experience? What exactly are his credentials? That he coached Daute Culpepper and Joey Harrington to greatness in Miami?
Yup, that was alot worse than alot of us expected.
I'm not going to do a full "Season in review". I just don't have the time to waste on such a fruitless exercise. What's the point in reviewing if alot of the names and faces are going to be different next year? And they WILL be different.
So instead, I'm ready to jump right into the offseason. And for Browns fan, the offseason is our REAL football season. The 17 weeks that the Browns are playing games just serves to drive home how bad our team is. So the offseason comes as a nice respite from the cruel realities of incompetence.
During the offseason, we can talk about our young players who are turning the corner. We can talk about our injured players who will be back, stronger than ever, ready to return us to our glory days of 2005's 6 wins. We can talk about our draft picks, who will surely all contribute immediately. And we can talk about our free agent signings, the cream of the crop who have never been injured and who have never failed to live up to their billing.
Some might say that we're just setting ourselves up for disappointment, since those corners are never turned, new injuries come faster than old injuries heal, draft picks are busts, and free agents are content hauling in their big paychecks. And they'd be right. But really, even with low expectations the Browns still would be a 4-12 team, so its not like we're missing out on that much.
Grossi mentioned something in a chat along the lines of "I thought the Browns would win at least 7 games. Of course, I was being optimistic, because thats what the fans want". You know what Tony, you're right. That is what I want. If we're going to watch crap for the 17 weeks out of the year that the season is going on, I'm OK playing a little game of self-deception the other 35 weeks of the year. Thanks, Tony. Time to haul out a little optimism.
So I'm ready to talk about free agency and the draft. I'll leave end of season analysis to those more qualified than myself.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Various end of season notes:
> Sean Jones really stopped looking like a ball hawk towards the end of the season. No interceptions past game 9, only a handful of passes defensed in the last few games. He probably had to play alot more conservatively with the CB crew being down with the plague, so I'm not saying cut him. But he sure didn't look like anything special.
> Last game of the season. We are short one guard. We have two options: Isaac Sowells, our 4th round pick and potential guard of the future, and Rob Smith, undrafted rookie who couldn't hang on as center because he was too sweaty to hold onto the ball. So who plays? Rob Smith of course. So, is Sowells such a bust that he can't beat out an undrafted player? Or does Crennel just have some talent management issues? I think its a little bit of both.
> I think alot of the offensive coaching staff shakeup is justified. Especially "offensive quality control coach Carl Crennel". There was quite obviously no quality on this offense.
> Word is that the Browns will interview Jason Garrett, Miami Dolphins QB coach, for offensive coordinator. Does anybody share my sentiment of WTF!?! Our offense is a shambles with a lack of personel, our head coach doesn't know play calling from linear algebra, and we're going to bring in a guy with no direct experience calling plays, and very little indirect experience? What exactly are his credentials? That he coached Daute Culpepper and Joey Harrington to greatness in Miami?
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Year End Goals
Here are my goals for the rest of the season:
> Don't lose any more guys for the 07 season. We already have two starters gone for next year (Baxter & Bentley). Lets not add to the list.
> If Frye's hand is OK, I say let him play. With a little fire under him, he may pull something new out. And if/when he starts to dance like Jeff Garcia, pull the plug and put Derek Anderson back in.
> Win out. Not for pride, but for the draft. I hate drafting in the top 5. You overpay, and you "have" to pick players despite your needs. Nobody is gonna pretend that WR was our number one need in 2005, but we were practically forced to pick Braylon Edwards because he was (or seemed) the best talent on the board. Lower down, not only do you pay less, but you also have the luxury of picking more for need than for "talent". If we win out, we would be drafting somewhere between 5 and 13.
> Audition DBs for next year. Yeah, Holly made some bad plays last week. Kind of gives you an idea why he was a free agent this past spring. But, rather than continue to drop guys to help Holly, I say challenge him. Give him man coverage, blitz the QB, and see what our DBs can handle. Will he give up a big play or two? Maybe. But it will help us decide if we're desperate for another corner for next year.
> Don't lose any more guys for the 07 season. We already have two starters gone for next year (Baxter & Bentley). Lets not add to the list.
> If Frye's hand is OK, I say let him play. With a little fire under him, he may pull something new out. And if/when he starts to dance like Jeff Garcia, pull the plug and put Derek Anderson back in.
> Win out. Not for pride, but for the draft. I hate drafting in the top 5. You overpay, and you "have" to pick players despite your needs. Nobody is gonna pretend that WR was our number one need in 2005, but we were practically forced to pick Braylon Edwards because he was (or seemed) the best talent on the board. Lower down, not only do you pay less, but you also have the luxury of picking more for need than for "talent". If we win out, we would be drafting somewhere between 5 and 13.
> Audition DBs for next year. Yeah, Holly made some bad plays last week. Kind of gives you an idea why he was a free agent this past spring. But, rather than continue to drop guys to help Holly, I say challenge him. Give him man coverage, blitz the QB, and see what our DBs can handle. Will he give up a big play or two? Maybe. But it will help us decide if we're desperate for another corner for next year.
But it must be the coach
I have nothing to say about the Browns.
But I did want to make a quick observation. Pro Bowl rosters came out today (they call it the 2007 Pro Bowl, but that confuses me since the players are earning their spots based on the 2006 season). As expected, the list is devoid of Browns.
Now, far be it from me to give the Pro Bowl any undue creedence. But, here is an interesting chart of the number of Pro Bowl picks by team over the last 4 years (my apologies if this doesn't post legibly). I will allow the chart to speak for itself.
But I did want to make a quick observation. Pro Bowl rosters came out today (they call it the 2007 Pro Bowl, but that confuses me since the players are earning their spots based on the 2006 season). As expected, the list is devoid of Browns.
Now, far be it from me to give the Pro Bowl any undue creedence. But, here is an interesting chart of the number of Pro Bowl picks by team over the last 4 years (my apologies if this doesn't post legibly). I will allow the chart to speak for itself.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Scapegoat of the week
Sorry for the lack of posting. But what is there to say about a crap game like the one the Browns played against Pittsburgh? Not much, apparently, because the lull has been apparent around Browns-bloggerdom.
Just to get some quick hit thoughts out before we move on to the Ravens:
- Yeah, I gave Crennel a pass on not showing up against the Bengals. But its starting to wear on my patience. As Peter King pointed out (yeah, I know, but this time his sound-bite agrees with me), the Browns have more talent than they showed against Pittsburgh.
- On the other hand, do we really have the talent? A lotta that loss rests on the shoulders of players not doing well. Yeah, you want the coach to be able to get them ready, but some guys are, though gifted athletes, bums who just can't hack it. How many of those guys are holding us down?
- On that note, I nominate my scapegoat: Dennis effin Northcutt. Tell me, why does this sad excuse for a receiver still get downs? Why do we have a 3rd round draft pick, Travis Wilson, "The Best Receiver in the Draft", sitting inactive?
- I know, Romeo is a player's coach, as opposed to Butch Davis who loved nothing better than picking one player as a scapegoat when his whole team stunk. So if Dennis is gettin' it, its behind closed doors. But then, why does he still take the field?
- I'll wait till next year to call Edwards a bust.
- I have no opinion on Derek Anderson vs. Charlie Frye. Who cares who's tossin it? A Peyton Manning ball can bounce off of Northcutt's hands just as easily as a Charlie Frye pass.
Just to get some quick hit thoughts out before we move on to the Ravens:
- Yeah, I gave Crennel a pass on not showing up against the Bengals. But its starting to wear on my patience. As Peter King pointed out (yeah, I know, but this time his sound-bite agrees with me), the Browns have more talent than they showed against Pittsburgh.
- On the other hand, do we really have the talent? A lotta that loss rests on the shoulders of players not doing well. Yeah, you want the coach to be able to get them ready, but some guys are, though gifted athletes, bums who just can't hack it. How many of those guys are holding us down?
- On that note, I nominate my scapegoat: Dennis effin Northcutt. Tell me, why does this sad excuse for a receiver still get downs? Why do we have a 3rd round draft pick, Travis Wilson, "The Best Receiver in the Draft", sitting inactive?
- I know, Romeo is a player's coach, as opposed to Butch Davis who loved nothing better than picking one player as a scapegoat when his whole team stunk. So if Dennis is gettin' it, its behind closed doors. But then, why does he still take the field?
- I'll wait till next year to call Edwards a bust.
- I have no opinion on Derek Anderson vs. Charlie Frye. Who cares who's tossin it? A Peyton Manning ball can bounce off of Northcutt's hands just as easily as a Charlie Frye pass.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Cowher's last stand?
This could be our last time facing Bill Cowher.
Not much to say about this game, as it was just 18 days ago that we last played Pittsburgh. The big difference is that the Steelers are down Hines Ward, and we're up Leigh Bodden, so Pittsburgh won't be nearly as effective if they go into the spread formation. Of course, we also have Derek Anderson starting for us, so thats a HUGE unknown.
So, to prepare for the game, I would like to invite you all to intone a prayer with me:
Oh ye football gods on high, and little baby Jesus,
Thou most loyal and suffering fans,
Those who doth bleed Brown and Orange, verily beseech ye:
Shine thy graces upon the army of Crennel,
and smote with great anger the cursed Steelers!
Might our offerings of spilt beer and burnt Couch Jerseys
suplicate thy spirits' thirsts,
so that thou might take pleasure in the Browns.
Let the balls bounce our way.
Let the tipped passes end up in our hands.
Let the injuries be draped in black and yellow.
Great gods, and little baby Jesus, lead thy Browns to victory!
Not much to say about this game, as it was just 18 days ago that we last played Pittsburgh. The big difference is that the Steelers are down Hines Ward, and we're up Leigh Bodden, so Pittsburgh won't be nearly as effective if they go into the spread formation. Of course, we also have Derek Anderson starting for us, so thats a HUGE unknown.
So, to prepare for the game, I would like to invite you all to intone a prayer with me:
Oh ye football gods on high, and little baby Jesus,
Thou most loyal and suffering fans,
Those who doth bleed Brown and Orange, verily beseech ye:
Shine thy graces upon the army of Crennel,
and smote with great anger the cursed Steelers!
Might our offerings of spilt beer and burnt Couch Jerseys
suplicate thy spirits' thirsts,
so that thou might take pleasure in the Browns.
Let the balls bounce our way.
Let the tipped passes end up in our hands.
Let the injuries be draped in black and yellow.
Great gods, and little baby Jesus, lead thy Browns to victory!
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Michael Vick of the AFC North?
I don't have much to say about Sunday's win that hasn't already been said.
Before the game started, one of my buddies asked who the Browns' back-up QB was, and I couldn't think of Derek Anderson's name. I think that I'll probably remember it for at least the rest of this season.
Its impressive that he led us to a comeback and a win. But, he benefitted from some very impressive offensive line play. Frye was benefitting from the same offensive line play before he went down. I'm glad that we'll get to see a little more of Mr. Anderson, but, just like everyone else that I've read, I wouldn't be ready to say he's earned anything more than a stronger hold on the back-up job.
Its hard to single out any hurculean efforts from this game. Pretty much everyone on offense contributed. I think that the first screen to Jason Wright was the perfect representative play for this game: Well executed play, with some very big contributions by key players (Anderson, Jason Wright, Cosey Coleman, and Joe Jurivicis).
I liked the play calling. I hope we see some more of those screens during the Pittsburgh game.
As has also been said by others: This game should be a VERY clear sign that Romeo Crennel has not "Lost" the team.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the game winding down to the last seconds, I had some scary flash backs to the game, and even the play, that gave this blog its name. On the Chief's last throw down field before going to OT, we were only one Dwayne Rudd away from giving the game away.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking ahead for this short week, I see that the Steelers are already down Hines Ward and Troy Polamalu. Geez, thats a real shame. I was looking forward to a now healthy Leigh Bodden shutting down Ward. I guess he'll just have to shut someone else down, instead.
Before the game started, one of my buddies asked who the Browns' back-up QB was, and I couldn't think of Derek Anderson's name. I think that I'll probably remember it for at least the rest of this season.
Its impressive that he led us to a comeback and a win. But, he benefitted from some very impressive offensive line play. Frye was benefitting from the same offensive line play before he went down. I'm glad that we'll get to see a little more of Mr. Anderson, but, just like everyone else that I've read, I wouldn't be ready to say he's earned anything more than a stronger hold on the back-up job.
Its hard to single out any hurculean efforts from this game. Pretty much everyone on offense contributed. I think that the first screen to Jason Wright was the perfect representative play for this game: Well executed play, with some very big contributions by key players (Anderson, Jason Wright, Cosey Coleman, and Joe Jurivicis).
I liked the play calling. I hope we see some more of those screens during the Pittsburgh game.
As has also been said by others: This game should be a VERY clear sign that Romeo Crennel has not "Lost" the team.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the game winding down to the last seconds, I had some scary flash backs to the game, and even the play, that gave this blog its name. On the Chief's last throw down field before going to OT, we were only one Dwayne Rudd away from giving the game away.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking ahead for this short week, I see that the Steelers are already down Hines Ward and Troy Polamalu. Geez, thats a real shame. I was looking forward to a now healthy Leigh Bodden shutting down Ward. I guess he'll just have to shut someone else down, instead.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Also surprised Jason Wright was starting over Kevin Mack
I don't have time to do a full post about the Browns' great win over the Chiefs, but I wanted to get this up before ESPN realizes its mistake.
As of 9:30 this morning, ESPN.com's "Last Call" has this thoughtful blurb from John Clayton:
John, its not really that interesting. In fact, it would have been downright shocking if it had been Holcomb instead of Derek Anderson, seeing as Kelly Holcomb hasn't been in a Browns uniform since 2004.
As of 9:30 this morning, ESPN.com's "Last Call" has this thoughtful blurb from John Clayton:
• The loss of Charlie Frye with a possible broken right wrist is a big blow. He had made progress this season and he certainly had established a good throwing relationship with tight end Kellen Winslow and wide receiver Braylon Edwards. It's interesting that the Browns went to Derek Anderson instead of veteran Kelly Holcomb, and it's pretty wise. At 4-8, it's better to test young players. Even if they find no break in the right wrist of Frye, Anderson will probably get the start against the Steelers because there will be little practice time before the Thursday game.
John, its not really that interesting. In fact, it would have been downright shocking if it had been Holcomb instead of Derek Anderson, seeing as Kelly Holcomb hasn't been in a Browns uniform since 2004.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Savage: Quit yer Whining
Phil Savage held a press conference to back up Crennel:
Tony Grossi has been pushing the "Crennel is gone" story as much as anyone. He started the rumors that they're looking into Jim Tressel. He has also claimed that WTAM's calls from Crennel's head were instigated by Browns management. It looks like, with Roger Browns' departure creating a void in the Plain Dealer's Making-Things-Up department, Tony Grossi is pushing to be the new Man-with-an-ear-to-his-own-mouth.
To be fair, I'm sure Grossi does have some inside source who feeds him rumors. But just because he hears from Joe in accounting that "Marty in accounting has checked out OSU's web page to see when Tressel's contract is up", that doesn't make the rumor anything like true. And the fact that Profootball.com, who is never afraid to pass along any unsubstantiated rumor, especially anti-Browns rumors, hasn't mentioned anything about Crennel being on the hot seat really drives home how bad a source Grossi is working with.
I wonder how much Grossi was the story behind the "inside information" that Todd Grantham was going to be the next MSU coach (for those out-of-the-loop, MSU hired someone else to be their coach, with Grantham not even making the final cut). I know that it was a teevee station that first reported the "it will be announced after the Steelers game" story, but I doubt that Grossi wasn't at least part of alot of the "chatter". In one of his recent podcasts, he was blaming the Browns for the rumors getting out because "they didn't go out of their way to stifle the rumors" (I'm paraphrasing). So let me see if I got this right:
Grossi: Coach, is it true that Todd Grantham is going to be hired by MSU on Monday.
RAC: I don't know, and even if I did, I wouldn't comment on it.
Grossi: Aha, so it must be true!
Maybe I need to re-examine my trusting of the PD Browns news. I read them because they always seem to have stories that Akron Beacon Journal, Dayton Daily News, and Steve Doerschuck don't have, but maybe thats because those are just made up stories. . .
General Manager Phil Savage said with emphasis, “Romeo has the total support of Randy (Lerner, the owner) and I. He’s earned his way here. He’s left a positive impression on hundreds of coaches. He was going to create a team-first philsophy, with discipline, hard work and unity. He brought an experience level to us. “The bottom line is we felt we needed someone to come in and provide a steady hand. We needed to regain the trust and respect of the players from the head coach position. He has done that on an hourly, daily and weekly basis. “He has the respect of the team. They believe in him. Randy and I are 100 percent behind him. We’re going to do everything in our power to help him rest of five games and next year.“
I'm glad to see that the people in charge aren't going hysterical, just because some vocal fans/Cleveland sports press have concluded that Crennel is gone.Tony Grossi has been pushing the "Crennel is gone" story as much as anyone. He started the rumors that they're looking into Jim Tressel. He has also claimed that WTAM's calls from Crennel's head were instigated by Browns management. It looks like, with Roger Browns' departure creating a void in the Plain Dealer's Making-Things-Up department, Tony Grossi is pushing to be the new Man-with-an-ear-to-his-own-mouth.
To be fair, I'm sure Grossi does have some inside source who feeds him rumors. But just because he hears from Joe in accounting that "Marty in accounting has checked out OSU's web page to see when Tressel's contract is up", that doesn't make the rumor anything like true. And the fact that Profootball.com, who is never afraid to pass along any unsubstantiated rumor, especially anti-Browns rumors, hasn't mentioned anything about Crennel being on the hot seat really drives home how bad a source Grossi is working with.
I wonder how much Grossi was the story behind the "inside information" that Todd Grantham was going to be the next MSU coach (for those out-of-the-loop, MSU hired someone else to be their coach, with Grantham not even making the final cut). I know that it was a teevee station that first reported the "it will be announced after the Steelers game" story, but I doubt that Grossi wasn't at least part of alot of the "chatter". In one of his recent podcasts, he was blaming the Browns for the rumors getting out because "they didn't go out of their way to stifle the rumors" (I'm paraphrasing). So let me see if I got this right:
Grossi: Coach, is it true that Todd Grantham is going to be hired by MSU on Monday.
RAC: I don't know, and even if I did, I wouldn't comment on it.
Grossi: Aha, so it must be true!
Maybe I need to re-examine my trusting of the PD Browns news. I read them because they always seem to have stories that Akron Beacon Journal, Dayton Daily News, and Steve Doerschuck don't have, but maybe thats because those are just made up stories. . .
My feelings were hurt too
From today's PD (their news is still OK, even if their commentary is crap):
Ummmm. . .
What, exactly, is an emotional injury?
And how is it the kind of thing that can strike in the middle of a football game, making the player incapable of finishing the game?
Only the Browns. We can't have things as simple as a broken bone. No, we have to have torn patellar tendons and emotional injuries.
Ryan Tucker is out for the season with what's believed to be an emotional illness, but he told Crennel he wants to return.
Ummmm. . .
What, exactly, is an emotional injury?
And how is it the kind of thing that can strike in the middle of a football game, making the player incapable of finishing the game?
Only the Browns. We can't have things as simple as a broken bone. No, we have to have torn patellar tendons and emotional injuries.
Monday, November 27, 2006
Off with all the heads
With the weather growing colder, the sounds of salvation army bells as you enter stores, and the constant commercials reminding you which giftcards are the best way to show you care, its definitely that time of year again. With the Browns season winding down, with another unacceptable number in the W column, we need to find our new scapegoat.
Actually, we'll kind of be double-dipping this season, since we've already tossed Mo Carthon. Although, to be fair, he did just as much as the fans and the media to secure his role as "the goat". His playcalling simply wasn't getting things done.
People want Crennel gone. People want Savage gone. People want Charlie Frye gone. The usual suspect, the offensive line, is sure to be gutted. I've even heard someone calling for the head of Todd Grantham.
Its funny, each time we go through this, we do such a great job of finding the top personell man (Savage, or Carmen Policy) and the top coaching candidate (Crennel, or Butch Davis). We bring these guys in, and they are the solution to what ails the Browns. And then they're here for a couple seasons, and they transform into the problem. Its amazing. We had a problem before they were here, we still have that problem, but now these new guys are cause of the problem.
So we toss them. We get rid of the problem, and bring in new solutions. The faces keep changing, but somehow nothing gets better.
I don't claim to have all the answers. But I do know one thing for sure: Firing Romeo Crennel and Phil Savage and gutting the team isn't going to improve the Browns.
Actually, we'll kind of be double-dipping this season, since we've already tossed Mo Carthon. Although, to be fair, he did just as much as the fans and the media to secure his role as "the goat". His playcalling simply wasn't getting things done.
People want Crennel gone. People want Savage gone. People want Charlie Frye gone. The usual suspect, the offensive line, is sure to be gutted. I've even heard someone calling for the head of Todd Grantham.
Its funny, each time we go through this, we do such a great job of finding the top personell man (Savage, or Carmen Policy) and the top coaching candidate (Crennel, or Butch Davis). We bring these guys in, and they are the solution to what ails the Browns. And then they're here for a couple seasons, and they transform into the problem. Its amazing. We had a problem before they were here, we still have that problem, but now these new guys are cause of the problem.
So we toss them. We get rid of the problem, and bring in new solutions. The faces keep changing, but somehow nothing gets better.
I don't claim to have all the answers. But I do know one thing for sure: Firing Romeo Crennel and Phil Savage and gutting the team isn't going to improve the Browns.
Patently Offensive
Not too much to say about yesterday. The team fell apart. Hopefully they'll get put back together.
I'm not about to worry about the sky falling because of the defense's collapses (both yesterday and in the 4th quarter against Pittsburgh). With our injured secondary, was there ever any question that we were vulnerable against the pass? I mean, we've got Ralph Brown starting for us. They need to be fixed, but we know they have the potential to be good.
My worry is the offense. Its just plain broke. I mean, they were shut out by the worst defense in the league. I kind of wish we still had Mo Carthon around calling fullback options, because then we could still point a finger at his play calling and say "thats why we're so bad". But instead, I have to conclude that the whole thing is broke. The o-line is the start of the problems, but Frye hasn't been able to pull off any excitement since week 3 against Baltimore.
Next up is Kansas City. That game could end up just as bad. Hopefully Davidson will get some suggestions from Mo Carthon before the game.
I'm not about to worry about the sky falling because of the defense's collapses (both yesterday and in the 4th quarter against Pittsburgh). With our injured secondary, was there ever any question that we were vulnerable against the pass? I mean, we've got Ralph Brown starting for us. They need to be fixed, but we know they have the potential to be good.
My worry is the offense. Its just plain broke. I mean, they were shut out by the worst defense in the league. I kind of wish we still had Mo Carthon around calling fullback options, because then we could still point a finger at his play calling and say "thats why we're so bad". But instead, I have to conclude that the whole thing is broke. The o-line is the start of the problems, but Frye hasn't been able to pull off any excitement since week 3 against Baltimore.
Next up is Kansas City. That game could end up just as bad. Hopefully Davidson will get some suggestions from Mo Carthon before the game.
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Maybe this is "That Game"
The Browns season has followed a pattern since 2003, and that pattern seems to be continuing this year.
They start off looking really bad over the first game or two. Then they seem to turn it around and win one or two, giving signs of hope, and get near to .500 after 5-6 games. Then, through October and November the Browns keep losing, but they play alot of close games where they give hope that we might finally turn the coroner. Then as we hope that they can finally turn it around going down the stretch, they turn truly pathetic and get totally embarassed at home. Only after they hit rock bottom, do they rebound with a win or two to close the season on a good note.
In 2003, the rock bottom came in a December game against Baltimore, where Jamal Lewis embarassed us with 205 yards rushing, and we layed a goose egg, with the final score showing 0-35. I was at that game, and I stayed most of the game in the bitter cold.
In 2004 Butch Davis was already gone, and we were giving Luke McCown his shot at losing for us. On Dec. 19 we lost to San Diego 0-21, as we gained 13 yards rushing. I was also at that game, and not only was it bitterly cold, but there was a blizzard. I left sometime in the second half as I was sick of my beers freezing before I could finish them.
I wisened up last year, and didn't bother going to any games live. We all remember the 0-41 shellacking by the Steelers on Christmas eve.
With us down 0-17 at halftime, looking absolutely pathetic, its looking like today could be rock-bottom.
They start off looking really bad over the first game or two. Then they seem to turn it around and win one or two, giving signs of hope, and get near to .500 after 5-6 games. Then, through October and November the Browns keep losing, but they play alot of close games where they give hope that we might finally turn the coroner. Then as we hope that they can finally turn it around going down the stretch, they turn truly pathetic and get totally embarassed at home. Only after they hit rock bottom, do they rebound with a win or two to close the season on a good note.
In 2003, the rock bottom came in a December game against Baltimore, where Jamal Lewis embarassed us with 205 yards rushing, and we layed a goose egg, with the final score showing 0-35. I was at that game, and I stayed most of the game in the bitter cold.
In 2004 Butch Davis was already gone, and we were giving Luke McCown his shot at losing for us. On Dec. 19 we lost to San Diego 0-21, as we gained 13 yards rushing. I was also at that game, and not only was it bitterly cold, but there was a blizzard. I left sometime in the second half as I was sick of my beers freezing before I could finish them.
I wisened up last year, and didn't bother going to any games live. We all remember the 0-41 shellacking by the Steelers on Christmas eve.
With us down 0-17 at halftime, looking absolutely pathetic, its looking like today could be rock-bottom.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
We already had the turkey
I was going to post with a list of things to be thankful for. But, A) thats trite, and B) it would end up being a kind of short list. After all, even if we've shown improved play nearly accross the board, the number in the W column still puts us on track for a top 5 draft pick.
> There has been alot of hot air swirling about Simon Fraser's hit(s) on Roethlisberger during the Daven Holly interception return. First Romeo comes out and defends Fraser, then TMQ, invoking yours truly, says that Fraser should be suspended, and then the NFL gives Fraser a $5,000 fine. I searched the various video sites, but I couldn't find a clip of the play (I did, however, find this awesome clip of Winslow PWNING Joey Porter).
Without reviewing the video, I have to go off how I remember the play. Holly gets a (very lucky) interception and makes a wild, criss-crossing return to the 3 yard line. While Holly is running through the area of Roethlisberger, Simon Fraser blocks Ben to the ground. Ben gets back up, and this time with Holly beyond the vicinity of Roethlisberger, Fraser knocks Ben down once more. (TMQ claims there were three hits, but I don't remember a third one).
A) The first hit, when Holly was in the vicinity, was perfectly fine. After all, if a Colt had given Rothlisberger a block like that during last year's playoffs, Nick Harper would've scored a TD off the Bettis fumble and we'd all have been spared the Steeler's Super Bowl. While Ben wasn't making any overt moves towards the ball carrier, he also wasn't making any overt moves away from the play. Now, I understand that the NFL will give the benefit of the doubt to the QB, but I disagree with that. I would give Fraser the benefit of the doubt, and would only call a penalty if Roethlisberger was clearly removing himself from the play.
B) The second hit, once the play had moved beyond Roethlisberger, was undoubtedly a foul according to the rules of the game. However, I think that Crennel makes a great point: If Roethlisberger was "removing himself from the play", then why was he getting back up? So that he could get a better view of Holly scoring?
The NFL should prescribe QBs some sort of fair-catch-signal-like manuever that will clearly define when they are taking themselves out of the play. After they make this signal, no one is allowed to hit the QB, but the QB isn't allowed to do anything that will involve him in the play. Until something like that is put in, its always going to be a judgement call and QBs will always have the advantage. Of course, if the NFL were to create such a signal they would be explicitly acknowledging what they now only leave to implication: QBs get special treatment, and they're more interested in having super-star pretty-boys ala Peyton Manning than blue-collar tough guys ala Simon Fraser.
> It sounds like Chad Johnson has a little bit of a mancrush on Leigh Bodden. Johnson always seems to have nice things to say about Bodden, except for sometime earlier this year (Bodden must have forgetten to invite Chad to his birthday party, or something).
> There has been alot of hot air swirling about Simon Fraser's hit(s) on Roethlisberger during the Daven Holly interception return. First Romeo comes out and defends Fraser, then TMQ, invoking yours truly, says that Fraser should be suspended, and then the NFL gives Fraser a $5,000 fine. I searched the various video sites, but I couldn't find a clip of the play (I did, however, find this awesome clip of Winslow PWNING Joey Porter).
Without reviewing the video, I have to go off how I remember the play. Holly gets a (very lucky) interception and makes a wild, criss-crossing return to the 3 yard line. While Holly is running through the area of Roethlisberger, Simon Fraser blocks Ben to the ground. Ben gets back up, and this time with Holly beyond the vicinity of Roethlisberger, Fraser knocks Ben down once more. (TMQ claims there were three hits, but I don't remember a third one).
A) The first hit, when Holly was in the vicinity, was perfectly fine. After all, if a Colt had given Rothlisberger a block like that during last year's playoffs, Nick Harper would've scored a TD off the Bettis fumble and we'd all have been spared the Steeler's Super Bowl. While Ben wasn't making any overt moves towards the ball carrier, he also wasn't making any overt moves away from the play. Now, I understand that the NFL will give the benefit of the doubt to the QB, but I disagree with that. I would give Fraser the benefit of the doubt, and would only call a penalty if Roethlisberger was clearly removing himself from the play.
B) The second hit, once the play had moved beyond Roethlisberger, was undoubtedly a foul according to the rules of the game. However, I think that Crennel makes a great point: If Roethlisberger was "removing himself from the play", then why was he getting back up? So that he could get a better view of Holly scoring?
The NFL should prescribe QBs some sort of fair-catch-signal-like manuever that will clearly define when they are taking themselves out of the play. After they make this signal, no one is allowed to hit the QB, but the QB isn't allowed to do anything that will involve him in the play. Until something like that is put in, its always going to be a judgement call and QBs will always have the advantage. Of course, if the NFL were to create such a signal they would be explicitly acknowledging what they now only leave to implication: QBs get special treatment, and they're more interested in having super-star pretty-boys ala Peyton Manning than blue-collar tough guys ala Simon Fraser.
> It sounds like Chad Johnson has a little bit of a mancrush on Leigh Bodden. Johnson always seems to have nice things to say about Bodden, except for sometime earlier this year (Bodden must have forgetten to invite Chad to his birthday party, or something).
"He's one of the best cover corners I've been able to go against," Johnson said. "He ranks right up there with Champ, D'Angelo, Nate Clements and those guys. Because of his ability to cover small areas of the field with no help."
In three meetings against Johnson, Bodden has two interceptions and one forced fumble. Johnson has 17 catches in the three games, but only one touchdown.
"He has a technique that he plays with that I've never seen before that he used the first game," Johnson said. "He was able to throw myself and Carson's timing off, our rhythm. It was something new that I never saw before and he's been very successful with."
Unfortunately, it looks like Bodden won't be able to play because of a sprained ankle. So Johnson is going to have to see how he likes Daven Holly.
Which reminds me of one of the comments one of the Steelers fans left (this is all sic): "The difference between a championship caliber team and a perenial basemnet dweller is depth, and the Browns have none, as eveidenced by the poor play of the corners in the fourth quarter." Buddy, NO team has enough depth to be able to field 2 to 4 shut-down corners after their top three cornerbacks go down with injuries. The Browns have one of the deepest secondaries in the league, and they are plumbing the depths of it this season because of injuries.
> Braylon Edwards' big mouth is developing alot faster than his playing ability. He's already apologized for calling out his own teammate for a dirty hit, but that doesn't really clear things up in my book. It should be a wake-up call to Braylon: No matter how innocuous your intentions, when you make comments to the media things can get portrayed differently than how you mean.
I have no problems with Edwards complaining about the play-calling, because it needs to be complained about. But don't ever throw your teammate under the bus.
> It looks like all the Grantham to MSU talk was premature, at best. I haven't heard peep about it since someone claimed that Grantham would be named MSU head coach this past monday (which, obviously, never happened). Since they were so wrong about that, maybe they were wrong about Grantham being the favorite, too.
> Game against the Bengals. If our offense can't get SOMETHING moving this Sunday, then they're officially done. The run defense has another chance to prove themselves. We've never been able to stop Rudy Johnson, so if we can pull it off this week we might be ableto say that the run defense is fixed. The pass defense will probably get embarassed, but I guess thats just because we "have no depth".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
