Randy Cross on today's game

[Guest]

Perfect
He stated that if the Browns don't get blocking for their promising talented young QB they will ruin another career.
How fitting it was.

[furls]

The Browns desperately need to COMPLETELY rebuild both lines. Only keeper on either line is Bentley. Roye has about one or two more seasons in him.

This team is a couple of years a way from mediocrity. I feel so stupid for picking 8 wins 5 months ago.

[dpdad]

Savage will have his work cut out for him in the off-season. Building the o-line has to be the top priority.

It was remarkable to look at the 2/3 empty stands at the start of the third quarter in today's game. I hope Randy Lerner got the message loud and clear.

This team has about eight players that I would consider as keepers. The rest are disposable.

Champ Bailey was the guy I wanted the Browns to take in '99. I wanted them to trade the #1 pick and move down a few places. Bailey was the best athlete in that draft.

[consigliere]

Savage will have his work cut out for him in the off-season. Building the o-line has to be the top priority.

And do we trust him to do this?

Seriously.

In his two years as GM, he has gone out and signed 5 o-lineman: Hallan, Bentley, Andruzzi, Coleman, and Shaffer. 4 of the 5 guys on the line would have been FA signings from Savage had Bentley not gone down.

Bentley was the only good pickup, but was also a no-brainer. You or I could have made that signing. The others look foolish now.

This team, whether under Policy, Clark, Butch, Savage, or whoever continues to blow money year after year on over-rated FAs. When are they going to get it in their heads they need to spend a few 1st day picks on o-lineman? I believe in 7 years, out of 30+ first day picks we have only taken an o-lineman twice (Faine and Fowler)? Correct?

That's bad.

I'm not sure there is a sure flight o-lineman to nab with our likely top 3 pick this year.....but we better go o-line in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

If the losing keeps up, Crennel and/or Savage have to be held accountable. I expect one to lose their job at the end of the season. Probably will be Crennel, which I hope to fuck it is. This guy is Bud Fucking Carson. A career d-coordinator who was always passed up for a head coaching gig or not considered for obvious reasons.

[yogi]

Are there any decent OL that are from the Ohio area and will be FA next year?

It seems the best way to attract talent to Cleveland is for them them to grow up being a Brown's fan.

Less and less of them as the losing continues.

[consigliere]

It seems the best way to attract talent to Cleveland is for them them to grow up being a Brown's fan.

Less and less of them as the losing continues.

Sadly, this numbher is dwindling rapidly. Right now, a HUGE part of the fan base is the folks who were around in the 70s and 80s. Also, some who are kids of those people.

But, all the kids nowadays, like born since the Browns came back.....I have a feeling unless things change quickly that in a not too distant future the "best fans in football" landscape it going to change. A gentlemen on another forum said it best: this is a dying franchise.

[dpdad]

I have a feeling unless things change quickly that in a not too distant future the "best fans in football" landscape it going to change.

I have thought about this too. Anyone under the age of 20 has no memory of the Browns as a consistently good playoff caliber team. Just two brief playoff appearances in 16 years, and poor teams or no team for the rest of the time. If I was working in the Browns front office, I would be getting concerned about this. I see a lot of kids with either Steelers or Ohio State jerseys, but not many with Browns jerseys on.

The empty seats right after halftime were shocking to see. The lower section filled up later in the game, no doubt from people moving down from the higher sections. With the Cavs starting up in nine days, the lions share of fan interest and dollars will be flowing to Gund Arena. What a shame that the cradle of pro football has such incompentent ownership and coaching. Thank God we've got the Buckeyes and some great high school games for my autumn football fix.

[swerb]

Thank God we've got the Buckeyes and some great high school games for my autumn football fix.

Amen to that dpdad.

It's just so sad what has happened with this team. So sad.

Between the team moving in 1996, being gone for three years, and then sucking for the last eight ... an entire generation is on the brink of passing with people knowing nothing but embarrassment and losing.

dpdad and Consig make great points. Anyone under the age of 20 knows only the product we saw yesterday.

[dpdad]

Not to get too far off topic, but who is responsible for the selection of Crennel as HC? If memory serves, both he and Savage were hired at about the same time. Did Savage have any input into the decision to hire RC, or was it a Lerner/Collins decision?

Even if Savage did have input into the head coaching decision, there is no way he should have allowed RC to hire an inexperienced Carthon as OC. Savage should have insisted that RC get an experienced OC onboard. Even when Carthon was OC at Dallas, it was Parcells who kept the playcalling duties to himself. Now we know why.

[mark]

Crennel got the job as some sort of "life time achievement" award. Savage was "hired" first---but the coaching interviews had already happened. Savage watched Crennel's interview on tape.

[consigliere]

an entire generation is on the brink of passing with people knowing nothing but embarrassment and losing.

And that is the key.

I'm in my early 30's, and probably the last generation to witness truly good Browns football (the 80s). Back then, a huge majority of local people gravitated to the Browns....it was part of our culture. Our life. The only ones who didn't love the Browns were the transplants from other cities. Browns football was all that was on the TV, radio, and newspapers in the fall.

Nowadays though, with the advent of technology and fantasy football and other things, kids grow up able to follow just about any team, anytime. With that, you get tons of localites who learn to follow other teams at a kid's age. The losing is just the cherry on top of it all if you ask me when it comes to young Browns fans leaving this team in droves.

As a kid, there were certain moments you attached yourself to that MADE you a fan. Aside from my dad instilling it as part of my life, what made me a diehard Browns fan was the season of the Drive. Moments like those, the good times and bad times, and intensity of the playoffs from 86-89.

I used to simulate Browns games in my room with paper footballs or with Super Jock. If no friends were around, it didn't stop me from going outside and throwing the football in the air and running under and catching it to re-create games/moments. I used to pretend I was Kevin Mack and pile over snowdrifts into the driveway for touchdowns.

But, these days....instead, the kids go on the Internet and follow the Chiefs or the Colts. Sickening.

[furls]

Crennel got the job as some sort of "life time achievement" award.

Some people are coordinators. Nothing wrong with them, that is just their ability type. In the Marines, you will see some officers who are never in command; they are staff officers, again, nothing wrong with them, that is their skill set.

When I see a guy who has never been a HC (at a meaningful level) and has been interviewed rather extensively, I get concerned. When that guy is "Defensive Coordinator" it is scary, but workable as long as he has a competent OC. I am not sure that Carthon was ideal (sarcastic understatement).

The blame is not RC's, I am not sure that Bill Walsh or Vince Lombardi could have won with this team, but he is definetly part of the problem.

[mark]

He certainly isn't the problem. This team lacks talent in a big, big way. As I wrote in my piece this week on Mo, you can't win with this offensive line. You just can't.

[consigliere]

He certainly isn't the problem. This team lacks talent in a big, big way. As I wrote in my piece this week on Mo, you can't win with this offensive line. You just can't.

If this is true, then you have to fire Savage.

WHo is responsible for the talent on the field? The GM.

[mark]

Well---I don't think it is time to fire anyone quite yet. I felt uncomfortable with how Crennel got the job---even at the time. I guess this is the case for Savage too---it seemed public opinion had selected these two even before the interview process. I didn't like how easy the select turned out to be.

In any event---I think fans expectations were out of whack this season. Being 1-5 is unacceptable, of course. But---this team isn't good. Signing a couple of old free agents and flipping the calander isn't enough. I do believe, though, if this team had an offensive line, the team would be approaching mediocre. There are skill players here---and the defense is playing okay. I don't know what the realistic turnover time of this roster should have been---but it is longer than two offseasons.

[The Score]

He certainly isn't the problem. This team lacks talent in a big, big way. As I wrote in my piece this week on Mo, you can't win with this offensive line. You just can't.

A halfway competent OC would notice the poor OL and attempt to scheme around it. Not Mo, he just shoves the offense down the players throats, regardless of the personnel.

He's trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, that is on him.

[mark]

A halfway competent OC would notice the poor OL and attempt to scheme around it. Not Mo, he just shoves the offense down the players throats, regardless of the personnel.

Really? Is that the answer---or just the way to twist it to blame Carthon again?

Listen---this line cannot block under any circumstances. There are not magically plays that work for bad offensive linemen. If so, we would have probably used them at some point over the last 7 years.

Could Carthon do a better job? I am sure he could. However, the fact of the matter is there are not plays that exist that would be effective in the year 2006 with a starting offensive line of Shaffer, Andruzzi, Fraley, Coleman, and Tucker.

[The Score]

A halfway competent OC would notice the poor OL and attempt to scheme around it. Not Mo, he just shoves the offense down the players throats, regardless of the personnel.

Really? Is that the answer---or just the way to twist it to blame Carthon again?

Listen---this line cannot block under any circumstances. There are not magically plays that work for bad offensive linemen. If so, we would have probably used them at some point over the last 7 years.

Could Carthon do a better job? I am sure he could. However, the fact of the matter is there are not plays that exist that would be effective in the year 2006 with a starting offensive line of Shaffer, Andruzzi, Fraley, Coleman, and Tucker.

Notice. I used the word "attempt"

How many times did they roll Frye out yesterday to help buy time and make use of his athleticism?

2? 3 if you count the time they rolled him to his left which is just stupid. Guess what kind of play they scored their only TD on?

[furls]

Gotta agree with score there, if your QB is not getting any time in the pocket and he has some athleticism than you move your pocket and use bootlegs and sprintouts (unless playing against Julius Peppers, then you just put in your 2nd string QB so Frye does not get hurt).

The line sucks, that is common sense. The offense sucks, that is common sense. The gameplan sucks. Explain to me why if Carthon is competent, how he can justify not having KWII on the field when he is possibly the best TE in the league and one of the best players on the team during critical situations.

Even if you don't throw to him, having him out there affects the way a defense plays and ties up tacklers as he commands the attention of a linebacker or more likely a safety.

[The Score]

Has Winslow lined up as a slot receiver at all this season?

How about this quote from after the Carolina game:

"I didn't think it was that bad until I got back out there and there was a sharp pain in my leg," Cribbs said. "We were in the two-minute and in three receivers [formation] and I was like, Coach, I can't run,' and he's like, We have nobody else,' so I had to suck it up. It hurt. You should've seen my face. I was grabbing [my hip] while I was running."

You're telling me that the Browns are better off with Cribbs in the slot (while he can't run) as opposed to Winslow at the slot and Heiden at TE?

I thought the great thing about Winslow was his athleticism and the match up problems that it created. Too big to be covered by a DB and too athletic to be covered by a LB.

The only moving around the field they do with Winslow is lining him up at FB.

[yogi]

Some people are coordinators. Nothing wrong with them, that is just their ability type. In the Marines, you will see some officers who are never in command; they are staff officers, again, nothing wrong with them, that is their skill set.

You know, I realize sticking up for RAC at this point is not a popular position, but come on.

Do you want to go through a list of successful coordinators, that had very poor records in their first 20 games and went on to win a World Championship?

Parcells and Bellichick just in this line of coaches.

Would you see the low-keyed Bellichick in the Marines?

You can't generalize the point you're trying to make.

[yogi]

Gotta agree with score there, if your QB is not getting any time in the pocket and he has some athleticism than you move your pocket and use bootlegs and sprintouts (unless playing against Julius Peppers, then you just put in your 2nd string QB so Frye does not get hurt).

Yes and No.

Rolling out more than a few times in a game starts working against you in a big way. First of all, only half of the field needs to be covered (unless you ask Charlie to make those ugly across the body and late across the middle throws) and offense options become severly limited. Its a good play down by the goal line, because Charlie can always run for a TD.

[pup]

Parcells and Bellichick just in this line of coaches

Bill Bellichick was 6-10, 7-9, 7-9 and 11-5 in his first 4 years.

Not exactly 1-15 anywhere in there.

Parcells took over a Giants team that had 1 winning season in 10 years and after going 3-12-1 his first year won 9,10,14,10,12,13 with 2 Super Bowls over the next 6 seasons.

Coaches show improvement in their first couple of seasons, or they are finished. Players have very short attention spans and if you don't get through to them by now, it is over.

RIP, RAC

[mark]

They seem to run roll outs a fair amount. Anyway, you can't base a passing game on roll out passes---especially if you can't establish the run.

I am not saying Carthon is great at his job---but we have a habit, as fans, of blaming the "easiest" of the issues. Firing Carthon is easy. He is just one person. I don't think there is a scenario where this offense would perform well with a new coach. It comes down to that offensive line. Is there a good or even mediocre team that is as weak at group position as we are at o-line? I can't imagine that being the case. So--while there may be a strategic call here and there that could yield in a few more first downs---the reality is we can't beat a team straight up on talent. Talent---That is actually what wins games. This offense line needs at least 3 new starters before it would even be average. All the other stuff, roll outs, screens, etc are just band aid suggestions on an enormous problem.

[The Score]

They seem to run roll outs a fair amount. Anyway, you can't base a passing game on roll out passes---especially if you can't establish the run.

I am not saying Carthon is great at his job---but we have a habit, as fans, of blaming the "easiest" of the issues. Firing Carthon is easy. He is just one person. I don't think there is a scenario where this offense would perform well with a new coach. It comes down to that offensive line. Is there a good or even mediocre team that is as weak at group position as we are at o-line? I can't imagine that being the case. So--while there may be a strategic call here and there that could yield in a few more first downs---the reality is we can't beat a team straight up on talent. Talent---That is actually what wins games. This offense line needs at least 3 new starters before it would even be average. All the other stuff, roll outs, screens, etc are just band aid suggestions on an enormous problem.

Firstly, they ran (by my count) 3 roll outs yesterday, and one was to his left.

Secondly, I don't think anyone is of the opinion that if you fire Carthon that this team immediately becomes the Indianapolis Colts. There are definitely a myriad of problems with the Browns offense. The line is bad, the WR corps are thin, Droughns is aging rapidly, and Frye may be in over his head. Also, Maurice Carthon seems to be lost. The offensive play calling is atrocious. The use of personnel is bad. Opposing defenses admit that the Brown's O is predictable and that they knew what is coming.

For almost all of these problems, the Browns will have to wait until the offseason to work on them. The one that they can remedy right now is to dump Carthon.

It is possible to separate out Mo's performance and evaluate him. He is bad.

[mark]

Welll---that is where we will disagree. Because if you can say this:

There are definitely a myriad of problems with the Browns offense. The line is bad, the WR corps are thin, Droughns is aging rapidly, and Frye may be in over his head.

I don't know how we can say this:

It is possible to separate out Mo's performance and evaluate him. He is bad.

If ever part of your offense not named Winslow or Edwards is deficient, I don't know how you can evaluate the play calling.

I just think play calling is overrated. You have to make good decisions about balance and such---a lot of that is common sense though. The reality is that talent matches up with talent. Good players will succeed. Bad ones will fail. I think if Carthon was calling plays in Philly or Indy, those teams would still be scoring a lot of points. A coordinator is usually as good as the players he has to work with. Right Carthon doesn't have much to work with. I am not saying he is a great---but with a bad offensive line, a weak armed quarterback, a slow tail back, a shitty blocking fullback, etc, etc...well---no number of screens, draws, and roll outs will fix that.

[The Score]

Welll---that is where we will disagree. Because if you can say this:

There are definitely a myriad of problems with the Browns offense. The line is bad, the WR corps are thin, Droughns is aging rapidly, and Frye may be in over his head.

I don't know how we can say this:

It is possible to separate out Mo's performance and evaluate him. He is bad.

Easy, play selection. Use of personnel. etc.

FB toss pass on 3rd and inches, never a good call.

FB toss sweep on 3rd and inches. (twice)

Taking Winslow out on 3rd and long only to run a TE screen to Heiden.

Absolutely nothing, but short passes.

How many times has Winslow ran a seam right down the middle of the field?

Two weeks to prepare for a defense that may not give up points but does give up 300 yards per game, only to barely put up 160 yards.

If ever part of your offense not named Winslow or Edwards is deficient, I don't know how you can evaluate the play calling.

Can you envision Braylon ever putting up 12 catches 150+ yards in this style of offense? Well I can't.

I just think play calling is overrated. You have to make good decisions about balance and such---a lot of that is common sense though. The reality is that talent matches up with talent. Good players will succeed. Bad ones will fail. I think if Carthon was calling plays in Philly or Indy, those teams would still be scoring a lot of points. A coordinator is usually as good as the players he has to work with. Right Carthon doesn't have much to work with. I am not saying he is a great---but with a bad offensive line, a weak armed quarterback, a slow tail back, a shitty blocking fullback, etc, etc...well---no number of screens, draws, and roll outs will fix that.

So I guess you're in that Crennel camp. "If it works it is a good call, if it doesn't work it is a bad call"? Wrong. If Vickers to Winslow goes for a TD it is still a horrible call on 3rd and inches.

If what you are saying is the case, then why do coordinators ever get promoted? Weis isn't good at coaching at all, the development of Tom Brady and the stats put up by Quinn were actually done in spite of Charlie Weis.

Norv Turner? His impact on Alex Smith and the 49ers this year is minimal, would've happened with anyone in there.

Why did Lovie Smith fire his OC after his first season? The Bears would be in the same position had he just kept that guy.

[mark]

There are bad play calls. Pitch plays on an "and short" is one of them. I am not a big fan of taking Winslow out of passing plays either. However---these are individual incidents that I think every team in the NFL has. I mean, Shannhan was throwing the 4th quarterback for a mentally challenged quarterback. The only why the Browns score is if Plummer hands us points---and Shannhan was happy to help try by letting Plummer throw. Every team has head scratchers. These individual plays for the Browns, though distract from the bigger problem of a lack of talent.

My point is that overall, the success of the play is because of superior talent, not the call itself. You mention Norv Turner---which is funny since he is a genius with good teams---and a bum with a bad teams. Alex Smith, BTW, was the top pick in his draft---so I would be careful giving Turner too much credit. The player has a ton of talent.

Same with Weis. I live in Boston and got to see that playcalling---he would do cute stuff all the time---reverses on 3rd and short and stuff like that. Weis would have looked like a jackass in Cleveland playing with guys like Frye and this crappy offensive line.

Coordinators should get promoted I guess---since someone has to be the HC. However, it is funny how the coordinators on the best teams get those jobs. Ron Rivera will get a HC job because of the Bears defense. However---if you switched him and Grantham, you'd probably be seeing the same stuff from both teams.

I would argue the players are making the coordinator---not the other way around. I mean, Chris Palmer was such a great coordinator, he got a head coaching job---but got fired after two weeks last year in Houston. Did he suddenly get incapable of calling plays? Of course, not---in Houston he was playing with a misjudged talent at QB and a TERRIBLE offensive line. A lot of good firing Palmer did that offense too, right!?!

A system matters---coaches matter. The plays called though and the results on the field are mainly determined by player performance. There are probably two or three calls a game that are about the coordinator. Deciding to run instead of pass or whatever---but those aren't the real reasons this team doesn't score. It is like a team of midgets playing a professional basketball team and saying you are losing by 60 points because there isn't enough ball movement. Well---I guess that could be true---but the issue is you don't have the talent to honestly compete.

[pup]

Of course, not---in Houston he was playing with a misjudged talent at QB and a TERRIBLE offensive line. A lot of good firing Palmer did that offense too, right!?!

Isn't David Carr in the top 3 in passer rating right now? Didn't they just beat a pretty good team in Jacksonville?

[furls]

I just think play calling is overrated. You have to make good decisions about balance and such---a lot of that is common sense though. The reality is that talent matches up with talent. Good players will succeed.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

History is littered with fantastically talented teams that could not win because of poor coaching and poor play calling. Actually, I would have thought that given the recent state of the NFL that was common sense.

Look at the Patriots, Steelers, Panthers... etc. These teams are not the Colts or the other supremely talented teams, but they beat them with game planning coaching and play calling.

The talent is so fairly level in the NFL right now that coaching is more important than it has EVER been.[/quote]

[mark]

I don't know if the Colts are supremely talented relative to the Pats, Steelers, and Panthers---but exaggerating to make a point is a great way to make an argument.

It is amazing how we discount the talent of teams like the Pats and Steelers. These teams are in the mix every years and sends tons of people to the Pro Bowl. Moreover---even with the Colts example, they are a Super Bowl contender every year.

The parity lie is something fans of bad teams like to tell themselves to help them sleep at night. There are some examples of bad teams rising up---but it is rare...which is what makes it memorable. The majority of contenders in the NFL are repeat good teams---like the Pats, Eagles, Steelers, Colts, Seahawks, Panthers.

The Browns are not remotely close to those team in talent. Not even remotely. Coaching and scheming doesn't make this team a winner---unless we were playing in the MAC.

In all of this---I might be fine with coaching changes in the offseason. However---fans need to start accepting that the issue is the players. We have been bad for all these years because we don't have good players. The coaches were at fault, for that to point----but different play calling and scheming doesn't make this team one ounce better.

[mark]

I realized my last post makes it sound like I may be discounting the role of coaching overall. That wasn't my point. There are "good coaches"---guys who wins consistently. There is obviously something to that---but I think talent evaluation is probably the biggest part of that.

Regardless---my point on playcalling being "overrated" is that run or pass, what type of run, what type of pass--I don't think that is really determining winners and losers on Sundays. It does to an extent---but I think superior teams execute plays. Lesser teams do not. While you can't call ridiculous plays and expect to win, I think you give a team like the Colts any set of plays and they will do well---because you have the players to do it. As for the Browns, you can give them any set of plays and I think they will not do well---because they don't have the players to execute good plays.

You could have traded coaches staffs before that game Sunday and the Broncos still win...and I don't think the Browns score more than 10 points. I think, as fans, we remember a couple of individual calls and point to those as being big deals (like the Vickers pitch plays). While these aren't great calls---I think the reality is that the outcomes have much more to do with the down in and down out matchup. There aren't plays that exist that this offense will successfully execute because the players are not good. This is in no way to absolve Carthon---but I don't see how anyone can think Carthon is holding this offense back more than the players are.

[furls]

hmmmm... nothing like some "hyperbole" to make an argument:

Code: Select all

Listen---this line cannot block under any circumstances.

People in glass houses should not do something, i forget the rest of that.

In all of this---I might be fine with coaching changes in the offseason. However---fans need to start accepting that the issue is the players.

I agree with you, most of this issue is personnel, but Carthon is not helping his cause.

[yogi]

Quote:
Parcells and Bellichick just in this line of coaches


Bill Bellichick was 6-10, 7-9, 7-9 and 11-5 in his first 4 years.

Not exactly 1-15 anywhere in there.

Parcells took over a Giants team that had 1 winning season in 10 years and after going 3-12-1 his first year won 9,10,14,10,12,13 with 2 Super Bowls over the next 6 seasons.

Coaches show improvement in their first couple of seasons, or they are finished. Players have very short attention spans and if you don't get through to them by now, it is over.

Bellichick had a decent O line and Testeverde running the O. Charlie is learning the game wih little or no time.

Parcells took over a Ray Perkins team that had made the playoffs the year before. They had the start of a nucleus of great players. Harry Carson, Brad Van Pelt to name a few. When George Young (oh, BTW, Young is the REAL reason things turned around in NY) drafted LT, that help put the Giants over the top.

Parcells had down years and sat Simms when he wasn't quite ready for Scott Bruner.

Young stayed the course with Parcells and won.

fArt could have stayed the course with Bellichick and would've won.

All I'm saying is I'd stay a while longer with RAC. We've got problems with the O, but I think 90% of it is with the OL.

I like what I'm seeing with the D. I think within a couple of years we'll be a top 10 D. I don't want to start over.[/quote]

[consigliere]

Our piss poor offense makes the defense look WAY better than it really is. I see some bright spots, but we have no d-line or secondary....how can anyone think this team is close to a top 10 D anytime soon?

If the problem is the o-line.....then fire Savage. He is the one that acquired all of these guys except Tucker.

Someone is to blame. If it is not the coach, then surely is it the guy who provides the coach with the players/talent. Two years is more than enough time to gauge that....especially consider how we look to have REGRESSED from last season.

[yogi]

Our piss poor offense makes the defense look WAY better than it really is. I see some bright spots, but we have no d-line or secondary....how can anyone think this team is close to a top 10 D anytime soon?

No secondary? Sean Jones? Bodden? Pool is looking like he's getting it. Russel is playing pretty good. We need another starting corner and draft another DB or 2.

DL needs an upgrade, not an overhaul. I think Roye and Washington can play another year. McKinley is OK as a back-up. We need a Stud DT and we'll be fine.

If the problem is the o-line.....then fire Savage. He is the one that acquired all of these guys except Tucker.

Serious question. How much better is this unit with Bentley? He got Fraley for a song. I agree with need help here.

Someone is to blame. If it is not the coach, then surely is it the guy who provides the coach with the players/talent. Two years is more than enough time to gauge that....especially consider how we look to have REGRESSED from last season.

It's NOT 2 years! I don't think we've regressed. We're playing tougher teams.[/i]