An Updated Look at the Browns' Receiver Situation
by Chris Pokorny on Oct 7, 2009 8:52 PM EDT
in General News
126 comments
There is no doubt that WR Braylon Edwards was a solid wide receiver. He probably won't ever reproduce the type of season he had in 2007 with the Browns, but you don't have that type of season unless you're capable of being one of the league's top receivers. Unfortunately, Edwards suffered from a severe case of the dropsies in 2008, causing him to get under the skin of almost every Browns fan. He might have felt unappreciated, but the way he conducted himself on and off the field grew tiresome.
After Mangini decided to trade TE Kellen Winslow, he made it clear that he was willing to trade high potential players if they had character flaws. Now, the two players -- Winslow and Edwards -- that many of us once thought could become legendary members of the Browns are elsewhere. The moves have paved the way for some new talent though, as we'll take a look at how this affects the team's wide receiver position starting this week.
- After the first three weeks, I got real sick of Eric Mangini because some of his methods were just like Romeo Crennel's -- don't make adjustments and don't play the rookies. Over a week and a half span though, Mangini has taken action. Derek Anderson is the starting quarterback, some players on the defensive side of the ball have been moved around, and Mohamed Massaquoi was promoted to the starting lineup.
- Massaquoi's league-leading 148-yard game this past Sunday might have contributed to the removal of Edwards. When you look back at the type of game Massaquoi had, it wasn't one of those "he got lucky" type of performances. His routes were crisp, he was defended very well, and he still came away with tough catches at crunch time. He was aided by the Bengals double-teaming Edwards all of last Sunday, but that is your job as the No. 2 receiver -- take advantage of the (lack of) coverage being thrown at you.
- Mangini was already quoted as saying that this should finally give Brian Robiskie a crack at some playing time. It's about time too, because for being a second-round pick who was supposed to be the most NFL-ready receiver coming out of the draft, it sure seemed odd to have him exclusively on special teams or the inactive list. Robiskie can be a good possession receiver, although we haven't had much of a look to see what his chemistry with Anderson is like.
- Mike Furrey doubled up and played both offense and defense last week, something I think we'll be seeing more of as the season progresses. Overall, Furrey's regular season production has been somewhat of a letdown. There have been multiple instances in which he has not been getting to the open area as quickly as he should be in third down situations. I think it's time for Furrey to step back to the fourth-receiver role, where he can still contribute in four-receiver sets and select third-down situations.
- I think Eric Mangini got it right by giving Joshua Cribbs sort of a "demotion" at receiver. I still feel that many of his struggles over the first few weeks had to do with improper utilization of his strengths, and if that's the case, we might as well go back to using him "here and there". That means that Cribbs doesn't have an assigned position on the depth chart. He might not be in for five straight plays, but then for two straight plays he might come in once as the No. 2 receiver and the other time as the No. 3 receiver. Cribbs is supposed to keep the defense guessing -- leave the tough routes over the middle of the field to the other guys.
- That leaves one other receiver -- the newly acquired Chansi Stuckey. With Anderson under center, I like the fact that Stuckey was at one point Brett Favre's favorite receiver with the Jets. Granted, the comparisons between Anderson and Favre might seem like a stretch, but it tells me that he didn't shy away from rockets being thrown his direction. Jets fans will miss him too, and I don't imagine it being a piece of cake to fall into the good graces of the New York faithful. Considering the lack of playing time Robiskie has received this season, Stuckey might be the team's No. 2 receiver this Sunday. Either way, by the end of the year, Stuckey and Robiskie will probably be battling it out for the No. 2 and No. 3 receiver positions.
Don't get the wrong idea -- the Browns aren't a "better team" without Edwards. Looking at the bright side of things though, this should improve the development side of the team for the remainder of the 2009 campaign. We have three young receivers -- Massaquoi, Robiskie, and Stuckey -- who could one day combine to be a solid receiving corp. With Anderson's willingness to take shots down the field, I'm more confident that each of the three of them will receive a fair opportunity to prove their worth in the NFL.
0 recs |
126 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
We Will Own the 5th Round This Year! 3 Picks! WOOHOO!
Who Needs K2 and Braylon…
sigh
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 7, 2009 9:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Great post. We might just have the start of something solid at receiver. I like the idea. Mangini gets to grow his team the rest of the season without much pressure or Braylon-ness in the locker room. Look at the first year Jets under Mangini (or as someone at cleveland.com referred to as Eric Cartmangini) they were horrendous for half a season. Now where are they in the 4th season? No stars, just solid contributors in all phases of the game. Give it time…
Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic. - Robert S. Wieder
by jerseywahoo on Oct 7, 2009 9:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Food For Thought
We used 2 top 10 picks on 2 studs, KWII and Braylon. We turned that into a dominant offense for a year, and now, all we got from that investment is one playoflless good season, a 2nd, 3rd, and 2 5th rounders.
Right now, it truly sucks to be a Browns Fan
"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.
by rose_11 on Oct 7, 2009 9:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So if Massaqoui becomes good, do we trade him too?
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 7, 2009 9:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the Jets are running low on 2nd and 3rd stringers so they have to sign some people off the street first
by Rocland on Oct 7, 2009 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
all right, you have made this lame joke in a couple threads now. It’s fine to not like the trade or not think we got enough, but let’s admit there are valid reasons for trading BE.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 7, 2009 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The point is I am against the idea of trading players for draft picks once they get good, because then you will just end up trading those players for more draft picks.
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 7, 2009 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, you won’t.
Please stop this nonsense. It’s not funny.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 7, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And please note, I didn’t chime in to say that Edwards also had a case of the dropsies (as Chris put it) in 2007 as well.
by Cols714 on Oct 7, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is a very poorly constructed viewpoint.
The point is I am against the idea of A, because then you will just end up doing A.
Huh?
by danvail on Oct 8, 2009 8:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Come on really. Edwards had issues, and to not see that you are being blind. His off the field issues are well documented. Some people look at dropped passes as not a valid statistic, well I do. How many did he drop on 3rd down to keep a drive alive? How many long balls did he drop that would of put the Browns in the redzone or better? I don’t know but even he had 8 of the 30 he had dropped since 2007( tied with Marshall) that would of or could led to a score, it is to many for me. He had to move on, and to get 4 players essentially I feel was a good trade.
Winslow had numerous injuries and wanted a new contract. I think the Browns made the right move. Why give a multi year deal to a guy that is more than a just a injury risk.
Jeez I here some say 07 was an aberration due to the soft schedule. So the Browns go 10-6 with Winslow and Edwards on a soft schedule, now all of sudden these two are the backbone of the team, can’t win without them? They both needed to go, I just wish the deal with the Giants would of been made before the season and got Hixson, but that is way it goes.
And what other players have the Browns traded that were good and got draft picks for? Who am I missing?
by Grockcubs on Oct 8, 2009 9:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last year was Braylon’s worst year for drops percentage and he finished 13th. Let’s not make it sound like he can’t catch at all, because he can. Getting rid of he and Winslow (the majority of our offensive talent) is akin to the Indians unloading Bradley and Phillips.
by fwembt on Oct 8, 2009 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Phillips never had a good season for the Tribe and Bradley was good but a locker room cancer, Winslow was good for the browns and locker room cancer and BE was good one year and always a threat but a locker room cancer too. Bad Comparison
by Sizemorgasim on Oct 8, 2009 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We didn't
We didn’t trade players “once they get good.” We traded them once they started to show that they were struggling to live up to their potential and started to cause other problems. Edwards and Winslow were not performing like Pro Bowlers when traded, Winslow hated the organization and Edwards was going around punching kindergartners.
"Do you want a bunch of duds walking around with their shoulders slumped and having no emotions, no feelings?" Bradley said. "I don’t think the fans want that. I think they want a guy who’s going to get into the game and feel a little bit. I’ve always said, ‘I don’t really play baseball, I feel it.’ "
by Villeslgr on Oct 9, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In this move
I think the Browns made out like bandits, It seems they have the depth to milk the worth left from Edwards and they could come out in a year or two with a really solid young receiver core.
by tkiller314 on Oct 7, 2009 10:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Edwards was young, and gave us a solid receiving core. Thats a step backwards
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 7, 2009 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You do realize his contract expires after this season right? The only way he was extending with the Browns long-term is if we held a gun to his head.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 7, 2009 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only way he was extending with the Browns long-term is if we held a gun to his head.
If only Tennessee had thought of that, perhaps they could have kept Albert Haynesworth.
by Simmsinns on Oct 7, 2009 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a strange feeling that I’ve seen this all before…
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 8, 2009 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree it was good to get some worth for BE while we still had the chance even though his presence helped us. But besides a whole lot of optimism and hope, I have no other reasons to believe this receiving corp will will be very solid down the line. Individually I don’t feel any of them have the tools for one of them to stand out as a top NFL WR. And I do feel one of them has to become a force in order for the others to develop. Like I said, I have to reason to feel this has a chance to come true
by Rocland on Oct 7, 2009 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Massaquoi’s most recent game was lucky? Flash in the pan? Not a reason for optimism?
I am just curious because I have read a lot of “experts” that were very impressed by his performance.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 7, 2009 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was Mass with BE on the other side. It was a good performance, but I would honestly like to see him play with all the focus on him.
by Rocland on Oct 7, 2009 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am curious to see how it works as well, but he did play well.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 7, 2009 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that BE did attract a lot of attention and the opponents did focus more on him than Massaquoi, but I disagree that all the focus will be on Mass. More than likely defenses will just focus equally on him and whoever’s on the other side…Stuckey, Robiskie, or Cribbs. I think Massaquoi will still have room to make plays.
by roar888 on Oct 7, 2009 11:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The run game was actually going also against Cincy so that definitely helped MoMass. Hopefully Harrison will continue to make a statement
by Rocland on Oct 7, 2009 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. I think that’ll have more of an impact on the entire passing game than BE by himself ever could, inconsistent as he was.
by roar888 on Oct 7, 2009 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that if you put MoMass in Braylon’s exact circumstances in the Bengals game he walks away with one catch for around 8 yards.
by danvail on Oct 8, 2009 8:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
come on 1 catch 8 yards please. How do you come up with this?
by Grockcubs on Oct 8, 2009 9:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m guessing- the one that Edwards dropped.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 8, 2009 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting, ClevelandBrowns.com shows our depth chart as follows:
WR: 16 Joshua Cribbs, – 87 Mike Furrey, – 80 Brian Robiskie
WR: 11 Mohamed Massaquoi, – ?? Chansi Stuckey
by Simmsinns on Oct 7, 2009 11:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Haha probably because even Mangini hasn’t figured out what the depth chart’s going to look like yet. In any case i think Robiskie should at least be #2 or slot. No way should he be #5.
by roar888 on Oct 7, 2009 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also interesting, Yahoo! Sports and ESPN.com as of Thursday, October 8th:
by Simmsinns on Oct 8, 2009 1:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With Yahoo, my guess is they are in need of a database update. Stuckey was probably listed as the WR2 for the Jets, so when they changed his team, he kept that same position. When Edwards was removed from the Browns page, there wasn’t a setting to bump anyone up.
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Oct 8, 2009 1:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yahoo has it set up like this right now.
Wide Receiver 1 Chansi Stuckey Joshua Cribbs
Wide Receiver 2 Mohamed Massaquoi Mike Furrey Brian Robiskie
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Oct 8, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt Stuckey starts. He needs to learn the playbook first.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just reporting a different source.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Oct 8, 2009 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stinkin’ Mangini!!! Trading away our two top offensive weapons is costing us (what) two, maybe three wins! And for what ?!?! Future draft picks! They do nothing to help us now. Mangini is trying to make this team lose. But he sucks so bad, I don’t even think this is what he is really trying to do. Hell! I have no idea what he is trying to do except that he doesn’t know and if he did know, he would fail!
/sarc
Y’know, that felt strangely good. Maybe these Mangini bashers are on to some new therapeutic method for better emotional health…
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Oct 8, 2009 12:53 AM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Man every time I read one of your posts I get high blood pressure until I get to /sarc…. lol, keep it up.
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 8, 2009 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Glad to hear I sound convincing…
It’s very frustrating to hear the complaints about Mangini. When looking at the additions (draft and trades) and subtractions, the media seems to grade his performance well. (The draft received good grades and the Winslow & Edwards trades are considered smart decisions). Yet, the Mangini bashing sees no end.
I don’t know if Mangini is going to succeed or not, but that is impossible at this point – and the negative hype can’t be helping his situation.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Oct 8, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The story the media will tell will be largely based on wins and losses.
by rufio on Oct 8, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yup. The media didn’t pile on Mangini until after the Jets’ collapse.
by golanbatrac on Oct 8, 2009 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like that Massaquoi did his job on Sunday. He couldn’t control what kind of coverage was coming his way, but he ran his routes and caught the ball. Just do your job. I have liked the kid and continue to like him. I hope Robiskie can follow suit soon.
by rufio on Oct 8, 2009 2:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The guy sure went out with a bang. Too bad the bang was on that small guys face.
We didn´t get anything spectacular in return. And I´m not enthused, that they could not settle on whether he´s worth a 2nd or 3rd rounder probably based on his performance, makes us seem less certain about his value. I know they call that incentive, I call it uncertainty. Why should I take such a responsibility towards a guys future performance, with a new organisation?
Also, how does a former overall number three pick, with no detractors to his skill, become so cheap?
I think Stuckey is just good enough to bench players that aren´t performing.
And Trusnik represents the cheap alternative, to supposed hybrid DE/OLBs Bowens, Wimbley, Hall and Vaikune. Who could then also be benched and traded with backup status. All I see is another 4-3 scheme behemoth coming our way with a cozy resume´ for the Ohio faithful.
by mooncamping on Oct 8, 2009 6:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i typically hate responding to you, but to say that there are “no detractors to [Edwards’] skill” is wildly inaccurate.
by DontCallMeJoey on Oct 8, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I laughed for a few minutes at that one.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 8, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
how does a former overall number three pick, with no detractors to his skill, become so cheap?
Well, let’s see..
His attitude, behavior, and lack of production. Other than that…I have no idea.
by johnnyphoenix on Oct 8, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Out of curiousity, does anyone know who we released to make room for this new ST/LB from the Jets?
by Uriah33 on Oct 8, 2009 8:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Just saw it this morning: OL Phil Trautwein
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Oct 8, 2009 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just saw it this morning: OL Phil Trautwein
Oh God…no please no…. NOT TRAUTWEIN!!!
by johnnyphoenix on Oct 8, 2009 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hello
sorry i’ve been gone a while but i’ve been busy. i want to preface this by saying that i’m not a Mangini guy yet (i’ll give him a chance but want to see some improvement in December). However i think he’s spent the 1st quarter of the year evaluating the roster and seeing just what he & the coaching staff have to work with. its pretty clear that edwards wasnt going to be here at any length as he would repeatedly tell reporters “hey i just signed a 5 year contract & i’m in year 5”. he was just going thru the motions & trying to stay healthy for free agency. its going to be a very rough year for the team so i’d have a “mistress team” to root for on the side here. still if anderson continues to improve i wouldnt be surprised to see CLE send Quinn to SEA for a 2nd RD pick in 2010. i’m not saying it’ll happen but it wouldnt surprise.
by sleepy042 on Oct 8, 2009 10:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the Braylon trade was inevitable for several reasons:
1. For whatever reason, Braylon had ceased to produce for the Browns:
- Last year he was number one in drops (including RB drops which is amazing) and #1 in drop percentage (based upon number of attempts) among receivers.
- I remember on at least one occasion, a drop cost the Browns the game based upon the final score and what a catch would have done. I think there were other very key drops.
- Last year Braylon was one of the top receivers for being intercepted against which could mean his routes were bad or he wasn’t fighting for the ball. There are other factors but this is not a good statistic.
2. Behavior issues, always a hallmark of Braylon, were on the rise. Rather than sum that up myself I’ll just let the Cleveland Plain Dealer’s Mary Kay Cabot do it:
3. Braylon was looking for a change himself. I think this is evident from his news conference. Coach Mangini would have been foolish to keep a player here who did not want to be here.
We can discuss if the Browns got fair value until the cows come home but without knowing two key facts we will not know this value. First: how well Braylon produces for the Jets. We don’t know this and can’t know this now. Second, what we end up getting in the draft from the picks we picked up from the Jets. This is impossible to know either as we don’t even know what pick. I understand that depending on how Braylon plays, we could end up with the Jets second pick next year (if Braylon meets certain targets). Then we’ll have to see how those players pan out. There is no doubt that good players—even franchise players can be picked up in the 2nd and 3rd rounds; or they could be busts. This we don’t know.
Regardless of the value the Browns received in return, Braylon had to go and wanted to go. In my ideal world, Braylon has a good year (giving us the Jets 2nd pick) but the rest of the team is abysmal and they don’t win another game all year (giving the Browns a high 2nd round pick). I remember the amazing catches that Braylon had at times—really jaw-dropping stuff but his drops were just as jaw-dropping at times. In the end I wish the man well and hope he is in a dropping mood the next time the Browns face the Jets.
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 8, 2009 10:35 AM EDT reply actions 4 recs
Mr. Dorn
This is where I point out he led the league in drops in 2007. It’s almost never mentioned. Like he just started dropping the ball in 2008.
But yes, I agree with the rec.
by Cols714 on Oct 8, 2009 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We’ve discussed this many times, but I will mention again. I do not think drops are a huge deal if you are productive. That said, I do not think Braylon is an upper echelon receiver.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know I know
It was sort of a joke and sort of showing you why I continue to mention this fact as almost no analysis of Edwards points out that he drops lots of balls and always has. He didn’t just start dropping them last year. Whether you think that matters or not is up to the person reading it.
by Cols714 on Oct 8, 2009 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do think it matters, don’t get me wrong. I just think it is something that can be overlooked when the guy is producing a ton. Terrell Owens in his prime was always one of the league leaders in drops, and I think he was maybe the best WR in football at the time.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we agree on all of these points and I’m pretty sure that your opinion and my opinion of Braylon Edwards is close to the same. At least we won’t have to discuss this again.
by Cols714 on Oct 8, 2009 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is good discussion and one of the reasons I listed drop percentage as number of drops can also be dependent upon getting more passes thrown your way. Still, there are top receivers who get lots of balls thrown their way who are not at the top of either list—that is the ideal. The number one thing a receiver has to do is catch the ball.
But I will concede that if a receiver is productive but has drops, that is a better than a receiver who is unproductive and has drops—your point is well-taken that you can be a top receiver and have drops.
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 8, 2009 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have brought that up several times. I also thought he was 2nd in the league in drops in 2007, but can’t find drops as a statistic anywhere.
by rufio on Oct 8, 2009 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I heard somewhere that the condition for it to be a 2nd rounder is pretty much impossible for him to achieve this year.
by Rocland on Oct 8, 2009 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post here Brownsyup! I like the historical summary on BE. Personally, I think he did not live up to his potential. He dropped key balls throughout his stint here.Nobody seems to mention that he probably will be suspended for at least 4 games
by psch811 on Oct 8, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’ll probably get one game, if any. Four is absurd.
by fwembt on Oct 8, 2009 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
God post. I dont agree with some of it but you made some good points.
Never heard that stat about the INT’s. Part of that could be our QB just tossing it his way and hoping for a play.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Part of that could be our QB just tossing it his way and hoping for a play.
This is quite possible and fair to point out.
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 8, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
First: how well Braylon produces for the Jets. We don’t know this and can’t know this
True, and regardless, whatever Braylon does with the Jets is immaterial. If he ends up having a good year that in NO way indicates he would have done the same in Cleveland. Different team, different dynamic all around.
I’m hoping people understand this so if he starts to perform well we don’t have to hear the ‘We never should have traded BE Look at how well he’s doing..’ crap.
by johnnyphoenix on Oct 8, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i happen to think he’ll put up great numbers for the next 12 games for the jets.
i also happen to think (as you say) that his numbers over the next 12 games are completely irrelevant as it relates to the trade.
by DontCallMeJoey on Oct 8, 2009 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know what you are saying, but actually his numbers over the next 12 games is directly relevant to the trade- if he is great, we get a 2nd rounder instead of a 3rd.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 8, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well spoken! I think we’re all inclined to declare instant authoritative opinions on deals like these, but the fact is that a lot depends on how the players involved represent over time….
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Oct 9, 2009 11:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t get the wrong idea — the Browns aren’t a “better team” without Edwards.
I’m not even sure this statement is correct. The Browns clearly aren’t a more “talented team” after this trade, and the players lining up along the line of scrimmage are as a whole going to be less talented this Sunday as opposed to last. But I’m not sure the Browns aren’t actually a better team with Braylon gone.
by APV on Oct 8, 2009 11:02 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree — the point I was trying to get across was more along the lines of “talent”.
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Oct 8, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This was my thinking too. It’s fine – and accurate – to say that Edwards brought more talent to the team than his replacements. However, you really need to judge whether the Browns would be better based on production. So, will the players who replace Braylon be able to produce at a similar or higher level than he would have done? It’s conjecture to say either way, but based on his play in the first 4 games, I think there’s a real possibility that they will. At this pace, he was heading for 40-50 catches. Can the other guys match a pro-rated portion of that – say 35 catches for the rest of the year, with similar yardage numbers? I think it’s possible.
by drjeo on Oct 8, 2009 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But your glossing over the fact that we are going to struggleto run the ball.
Jerome Harrison has done well the last two weeks. Heis now going to be facing 8 man fronts. Every down. Look at what Steven Jackson (a much, much better RB) has done in St. Louis. They have no one who scares the Defense on the outside (unless you call Donnie Avery scary). This offense lost its best weapon. That effects everything.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
anderson’s arm strength, alone, will keep teams from stacking the box w/ 8 guys.
by DontCallMeJoey on Oct 8, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Watch on Sunday. The Bills will stack the box and dare the young WR’s to beat us deep.
The issue isn’t with Andersons arm, its just that we no longer have a WR to worry about. Let’s hope that MoMass can fix that.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree. If he starts completing balls over 15 yards downfield, maybe. They’ll have to be complete, not just thrown.
by rufio on Oct 8, 2009 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Cribbs is the #1 or #2, they’ll certainly play up.
by golanbatrac on Oct 8, 2009 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If they put 8 in the box
it will be hard for them to double or shade coverage to Mass’s side and he showed last week he has the ability to get open and make catches.
"Do you want a bunch of duds walking around with their shoulders slumped and having no emotions, no feelings?" Bradley said. "I don’t think the fans want that. I think they want a guy who’s going to get into the game and feel a little bit. I’ve always said, ‘I don’t really play baseball, I feel it.’ "
by Villeslgr on Oct 9, 2009 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really, it would be pretty easy to shade a deep safety to Mass’ side in a cover 1, or to have the CB play off and look out for deep routes while the in the box safety or a linebacker plays a zone to cover him underneath.
What the defense does before the snap doesn’t necessarily dictate what they will do after it.
If they pay more attention to the run, it will be easier for Mass (and anyone else) to get open, yes.
by rufio on Oct 9, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess
I was thinking more along the lines of actually keeping the extra defenders in to stop the run and not just showing it.
"Do you want a bunch of duds walking around with their shoulders slumped and having no emotions, no feelings?" Bradley said. "I don’t think the fans want that. I think they want a guy who’s going to get into the game and feel a little bit. I’ve always said, ‘I don’t really play baseball, I feel it.’ "
by Villeslgr on Oct 10, 2009 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a hard time getting on board that this team is better with Mike Furrey starting than Edwards. In any capacity.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. I don’t really see how that’s an improvement, no matter how Braylon’s other issues affected our team. I think this trade will benefit the Browns in the long run, but I don’t think you can say we’re a better team now without him.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 8, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that’s a stretch. Edwards dropped two catches that came his way and MoMass held onto everything. Who do you think DA is going to target?
I don’t know what could be seen on TV but from my view in the upper deck of the dawg pound, Edwards was open on more than a few plays and the ball went elsewhere.
by Monsters of the Midway on Oct 8, 2009 11:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The above reply was meant for danvail’s comment. Internet > Me
“I think that if you put MoMass in Braylon’s exact circumstances in the Bengals game he walks away with one catch for around 8 yards.”
by Monsters of the Midway on Oct 8, 2009 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Note for BQIB/RSS: Even if you don’t like the trade, going to other team’s sites and telling them they killed us in the trade/Mangini likes their table scraps is a weak move.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 12:00 PM EDT reply actions 5 recs
I agree. I noticed some of our guys last week on the Bengal’s site posting about how much we suck and that it’s going to be a blowout. I’m not gunna name names because these kids know who they are. It’s embarrassing and disrespectful to us, really . They go as if they are representing Browns fans. And I hope they don’t think that they are speaking for me. That’s for damn sure.
If you're at the table and you don't see a sucker..... you're it.
by Brownie's Year on Oct 8, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was on the Bengals site. I told them it was going to be a blowout. Based on three weeks through the season, only a fool would have expected anything else. Whats the problem with that? The Browns played better than I ever expected. I was happy with it.
Just because I am a Browns fan, doesn’t mean that I can’t trash them when they play poorly. That is what being a fan is.
If your one of those rah, rah guys who thinks that every move the Browns make is the right one, that’s fine. But that sure as hell isn’t me. That isn’t being disrespectful or embarrasing. That is being a fan.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This being said, I don’t make a habit of it. It was the first or second time I have ever been on another teams website.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it doesn’t sound like anyone’s angry, I know i’m not. it just doesn’t seem like something any of us should do. It’s kind of like family, you can fight like hell with each other, but if someone else starts a fight with you, they better look out.
its okay to come on our own site and say we suck, but to go into enemy territory and do it seems wrong somehow. just my thoughts though.
by Dawg Nuts on Oct 8, 2009 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea, it feels a bit like undermining everyone. Speaking for the community.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They sound like Madonna bashing America to Europeans.
I may not agree with everything Mangini has done, but at least my Orange and Brown colors don’t run…
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Oct 8, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One of my favorite Crennel quotes given, ironically, in response to Braylon’s comments about Brian Russel’s hard hit on Cincy’s Chad Johnson (aka OCHOCINQO)…
“You don’t air family laundry.”
Which is sort of a cross between “don’t air your dirty laundry” and “keep it in the family”. Ah how I miss those days…
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 8, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s the other saying that came to mind.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Oct 8, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand that. But I didn’t say anything there that I don’t say here.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasnt on the Bengals sites.
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 8, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still have the right to do it and I see no problem with it.
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 8, 2009 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am not going to pretend I can prevent you from doing it, I am just letting you know that it feels like you are undermining everyone else on this site and other Browns fans.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 9, 2009 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have the right to do it, and we have the right to ridicule you for doing it.
by bbstirrd on Oct 9, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And we have the right to call you a bad Browns fan.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 9, 2009 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s an interesting headline on espn.com from Adam Schefter that says MoMass could become a bigger star than Edwards Scissorhands (I can’t read the article because it’s for “insiders”: I refuse to monetarily support ESPN’s self-righteousness…).
by bbstirrd on Oct 8, 2009 12:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s a mailbag. Schefter basically says that he watched the game and that Massaquoi looked more impressive, and that he already picked him up in fantasy football.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
(I subscribe to the magazine which comes with Insider, otherwise I would be with you)
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I like Insider because some of the articles and info they have is really good. And it’s not too expensive, considering how much I read it. I bought it years ago when Rob Neyer went to Insider (he’s now free again) and have kept it ever since. I like it now for John Hollinger, their NBA stats guy, and all the draft coverage they have.
I don’t think the money supports ESPN’s “self-righteousness”. I’m paying for reading their conent just like you’d pay for reading a newspaper or magazine. They have a good deal of content with Insider and I think it’s worth the money if you’re a sports fan.
And I don’t even want their magazine so I had it sent to my brother instead. You can also have it sent to troops overseas if you don’t want to read it, which is nice.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 8, 2009 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s probably too broad of a stroke to describe all of ESPN as “self-righteous”. Undoubtedly they do have some good writers, but others are very aggravating. Mainly I use that phrase to refer to the ESPN ‘brand’. It seems in the last five years or so they have shifted to the Entertainment angle at the expense of the Sports side. IMO Sportscenter is unwatchable these days. It is painful to watch/read these ‘experts’ pontificating about Favre’s “childlike enthusiasm for the game” or Romo’s latest celebrity girlfriend (Sportsnation poll: is it a distraction?!?) or TO’s latest Twitter. Barf.
Maybe it’s just me.
by bbstirrd on Oct 8, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, you’re right, ESPN has way too much of that. Pretty much every hard-core sports fan will tell you that. And a lot of their analysis is just plain stupid (see: anything from Joe Morgan or Steve Phillips). I understand what you’re saying completely.
But they do have a lot of quality writing on their website, especially guys like Neyer and Law and Hollinger. And, to their credit, they’ve brought in good people from the outside to work for them, too. ESPN does many things wrong, but too many times they get criticized for everything they do and that’s just not fair. They do some things very well and should get the credit for that. As with everything in life, when one entity is dominant in an area they are going to get criticized from someone no matter what they do (see: Wal-Mart) and the good things often go ignored.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 8, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Insider for a few writers mainly Keith Law and a few of the football guys. The rest I could do without.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, ESPN thinks they are above some things.
I still think it is insane that they sat on the Big Ben story.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good ridence
I think Mangini had to get rid of him. He was clearly underachieving in Cleveland. He will most likely be suspended for 4 games as well..A lot of good that would do us, huh? He was a cancer on this team, and I think let the new guys play who may not have as much raw talent as BE, but will be hungry for the ball! We’re in rebuilding mode anyway. I"m still not giving up on Quinn either…
by psch811 on Oct 8, 2009 2:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
sorry to bust your bubble
But i believe the Quinn ship has sanked and there are no survivors. In the mean time is there any info on Stuckey that i could probably read about and get a good understanding about what kind of reciever he is (possesion/burner)?
by siejecy on Oct 8, 2009 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stuckey, who many consider to be holding the No. 2 receiving position until the Jets can sign a veteran, laid his claim to the job with four catches for 69 yards and a touchdown in a 27-25 preseason victory over the Giants on Saturday night at Giants Stadium.
‘’I think he wanted me to know something,’’ Ryan said after the game. ‘’He was outstanding. He really was.’’
Stuckey’s Kodak moment was a 31-yard touchdown grab from rookie quarterback Mark Sanchez in which he raced across the field, caught the ball from a scrambling Sanchez at the 12-yard line, stopped on a dime near the sideline and juked four Giants defenders as he tight-roped his way into the end zone.
‘’I just wanted to make plays,’’ said Stuckey, a third-year pro from Clemson. ‘’I wanted to show I was capable of making plays. My preseason has been pretty quiet so far and I got some opportunities (Saturday night) and I think I made the most of them.’’
Stuckey, who had 32 catches for 359 yards and three touchdowns last season, is among a group of young receivers trying to earn the No. 2 spot behind Jerricho Cotchery. That group includes David Clowney, who was held without a catch or a ball thrown to him against the Giants.
At 6-foot, 196 pounds, Stuckey has been designated as a ‘’slot,’’ or inside receiver. He’s more quick than fast, more possession receiver than game-breaker.
2009 NY Jets 11 for 120 yds. y/p 30 Avg10.9 Lng30 YAC5.8 TD1
by johnnyphoenix on Oct 8, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Jets really do speak of him in glowing terms, bit as a player and teammate. IMO he will be a valuable addition to this team.
by johnnyphoenix on Oct 8, 2009 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He will most likely be suspended for 4 games as well
Only way he is getting suspended for 4 games is if he is busted for PED. Do you have a scoop or aare you just wildly misinformed on the assult charge?
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
fantasy advice
so, aaron rodgers has a bye-week which means i need a backup qb. i have mark sanchez, but idk if starting him when he plays miami on mnf is a good idea. i tried to drop him for matt cassel, but someone got him before me. the only good option left is DA. should i pick him up or stick with sanchez?
also… jerome harrison vs. ronnie brown. brown’s going up against the jets defense, while harrison is up against the crappy bills D.
by emily522 on Oct 8, 2009 2:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
you are better off with Sanchez or Anderson than Cassel, consider yourself lucky.
Brown has been dynamite this year, but the Jets run D has been great. Tough call.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 8, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i decided to go with DA. i don’t think that starting a rookie on mnf against miami’s defense is a good idea.
by emily522 on Oct 8, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you have an extra roster spot, David Carr might be a good pick up. The Giants are playing Oakland and Manning is hurt. Manning still may play, but if he doesn’t, Carr looks pretty good given the matchup.
by golanbatrac on Oct 8, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cassel is a decent start vs. the Cowboys. They will be down most of the game and the Boys can be thrown on.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 8, 2009 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I personally don’t like starting players on teams with lots of losses and that leaves out DA and Cassel. Sanchez is a rookie which doesn’t help but is playing against the wobbly Fins who are 1-3. Being that the game is also divisional that tips my decision to Sanchez. But all three are pretty Chansi…
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 8, 2009 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adios, Braylon
…this was a necessary move. He became a head case who forgot how to catch the ball, and blamed everyone/everything else, down to his college team loyalties, to rationalize himself. Throw in an assault on top of that, I think they did the best thing. It’s not like the current Browns quarterbacks are going to get the ball to him that much anyway, and even if they could he’s been dropping about a quarter of the passes thrown at him for the past season-plus. Reason #2,123 to despise modern NFL wide receivers. Part of me wishes they could go back to the way it was in the ’70s, when these motormouths would face a beheading from a Jack Tatum. You never saw Stallworth, Pearson, et al, act the way Braylon, TO, Chad OcincodemayoClinic-whatever-his-name-is do during and after games.
by tonywf on Oct 10, 2009 1:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Browns Links
Browns News/Information
Pro Football Critics
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Blogs
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities
The Watercooler
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
Waiting for Next Year
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
