Run game

by chitown browns fan on Sep 25, 2009 2:46 PM EDT

The Browns are widely considered to have one of the best left sides of an offensive line in the NFL, but I don't see us running left. Has anyone else noticed this? I see us running up the middle for 2 yards repeatedly and ineffectively with Lewis and Harrison, though Harrison should not be a between-the-tackles staple. Does anyone have any thoughts as to why we are not using Harrison or Davis or Cribbs to run left either by pitching the ball and running the sweep or by handing the ball off to that side or (novel idea) running a screen play? We have two plays: run it up the gut for 2 yards or the 5-yard slant that falls incomplete or gets batted down. It's no wonder DCs have no problem stacking 8 in the box on passing AND running downs; in fact, DCs don't even have to worry about out-patterns or the Browns running toward either sideline - DCs can just stack the box and focus all efforts on the middle. If we run, they stuff Jamal while he's still stutter-stepping; if we pass, there's pressure on Quinn almost immediately, and since he is or is made to be conservative with the ball, we can't punish defenses . . . yet.

Living in Chicago, our acquisition of St. Clair on the right side is especially disappointing because the guy jumped offsides on what seemed to be a good 1/4 of the plays on offense while he was with the Bears, and he can't pass block. I'm pleased he hasn't done the former so far with the Browns, but sadly, the latter - especially after this past week against Denver - is still apparently a part of his game. Tough to break old habits, I guess. I really can't believe that guy makes $3M per and starts in the NFL. Point being, our strength is the left side of that line, and we are underutilizing it and simultaneously not stretching out the field in the run or pass game.

I've been reading posts suggesting that the run game must produce in order for the passing game to have a chance and others claiming the opposite. (Brady Quinn thinks the former). Personally, I believe that's a chicken or egg sort of question. If - and this is a big if - the passing game (running game) starts to take hold, even marginally so that we convert , for example 33% of our third downs instead of our stunning and league-low 23%, the running game (passing game) won't face 8 in the box on every play, assuming we stretch the field sideline to sideline.

We're not as bad as this past week, especially defensively, but we cannot have our defense playing greater than half the game, as we've done in both of the first two games. The establishment of the run game means not just the marginal first down and the obvious continuation of a series; it means we rest our D lineman. Whether that begins with some effective passing or with some sideline to sideline running plays does not matter.

What I do know right now is that our 2 offensive plays and all variations thereof are currently not working, so some creativity would be welcome and probably more effective.

This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.

Tweet Comment 27 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

i agree, and think the following:

1. running up the middle is exhausting when used over and over and not working.
2. mangini seems stubborn and apt to stick to his gameplan regardless.
3. it’s easy to blame the right side of the line, but probably more accurate to say it’s a combo of them sucking, quinn holding the ball too long, and jamal stutter-stepping to a painful degree.

BUT

1. i don’t know much about running an NFL offense.
2. i don’t know ANYTHING about the internal workings of this team.
3. we might need more than 2 games to know anything for sure.

by Dawg Nuts on Sep 25, 2009 6:13 PM EDT reply actions

We have run to the left. I can’t tell if your hyperbole is intentional or not. We should run left more often, but we should also play-action bootleg off of runs to the left and have Cribbs or Massaquoi sneak out to the right with Quinn.

There are a lot of things I think we should try that we haven’t tried yet.

by rufio on Sep 25, 2009 6:24 PM EDT reply actions

Screens, bootlegs, playing MoMass, running left, and most importantly THROW THE DAMN BALL INTO THE END ZONE ONCE

by Roger Dorn on Sep 25, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions

We play not to lose; we do not play to win. I chalk it up to one of 2 things: fear of error or overly conservative play calling. Neither wins games. If Quinn’s going to make mistakes by putting the ball in a position to be caught by Edwards in the endzone when we’re inside the opponent’s 20, I’m fine with that because it also keeps the opposing defense honest the next time around. The coaching staff needs to allow Quinn to open up the offense and take shots, red zone or not.

by chitown browns fan on Sep 26, 2009 12:38 AM EDT up reply actions

You know that just because Quinn threw to an underneath receiver doesn’t mean the play isn’t designed to go a lot further, right?

by rufio on Sep 26, 2009 2:10 AM EDT up reply actions

It seems Quinn’s always throwing to an underneath receiver, and of course we’d like to see most plays, especially the underneath routes, go further than they have with some nice YAC, but they haven’t. Braylon, for one, is just as likely, if not more likely, to catch a ball thrown high and behind him than he is to catch a nice slant pattern underneath and in the numbers, for example. And since he’s our best receiver . . .

by chitown browns fan on Sep 26, 2009 2:47 AM EDT up reply actions

sooo, you aren’t going to address what I was talking about?

by rufio on Sep 26, 2009 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions

I get that the underneath route was supposed to go much further, yes.

by chitown browns fan on Sep 26, 2009 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Every running play which doesn’t go anywhere is considered a “run up the middle” by the fans. Then they can complain that we run up the middle too much (unless it work, when they say it was a great call).

by Buckeye Brad on Sep 25, 2009 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions

yeah, it was a generalization, and an oversimplification. but you know what i mean. the running game is frustrating when the RB is constantly getting stuffed on traditional “handoffs”.

by Dawg Nuts on Sep 27, 2009 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't disagree

The fact is that the Browns offense is not creative, especially when one considers the fact that we have a weapon like Cribbs, who could potentially be used to divert defenses’ attentions away during play action or during a run directed toward the opposite side of the field than the direction in which he is moving, e.g., when he goes in motion. Even if he got the ball only once every 5 snaps when we used him in motion, DCs have to respect that he is there and will use an otherwise blitzing linebacker to shadow his movement. To me, that’s almost the same as having an extra body on the OL because it causes the shadowing LB to at least hesitate for a moment or at best be out of position. I’m not sure how his blocking skills are, but the man can tackle, so I’m assuming he can be a blocker in run plays designed to follow his motion out of the backfield if we chose to run to the side onto which he is motioning.

You guys remember how the Steelers used to use Randle El. I would argue Cribbs is a much more potent and capable weapon in the backfield. On the other hand, I don’t buy into the Cribbs-as-number-2-receiver hype just like I don’t buy into Hester in that role. Maybe a number 3 or 4 receiver; any receiver generally takes about 3 years to learn the position in the pros, so our number 2 should be Furrey with Mass or Cribbs at 3.

by chitown browns fan on Sep 26, 2009 12:24 AM EDT up reply actions

Cribbs has been playing WR for a while now. The difference is that Mangini actually puts him on the field, while Romeo didn’t want to tire him out and refused to play him on offense. He should have been learning how to play WR for several years already.

by rufio on Sep 26, 2009 2:12 AM EDT up reply actions

Lewis really can’t get to the holes either IMO. I want to see Harrison and Davis when healthy get the majority of the reps.

by Grockcubs on Sep 25, 2009 7:29 PM EDT reply actions

I wish Lewis were finding holes with a burst, but he isn’t. I can’t say I’m surprised, though. He didn’t find holes or burst through them last year, either. I don’t know if it’s age or not, but it seems like he is slow back there and/or taking too many steps before committing to his path. He’s quickly turning into the dreaded elder statesman who can teach the younger guys in his position how the game is played and work ethic without having the ability to perform himself, a la McGinest. We have to upgrade at the primary RB position.

by chitown browns fan on Sep 26, 2009 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions

He looked really fast (for being a 30 year old Jamal Lewis) in the Minnesota game. I am guessing the hamstring has been slowing him down significantly. The question is; can a 30 year old Lewis get and stay healthy enough to be as fast as he was in week 1? I wouldn’t bet money that he can.

It looks like we’ll see what Harrison and Davis can do this week.

by rufio on Sep 26, 2009 2:14 AM EDT up reply actions

Let’s review: BQ needs to throw the ball downfield to receivers who aren’t open because they run sloppy routes and Lewis needs to run through holes that the line hasn’t created. The offense needs to stay on the field so the defense doesn’t get so tired of chasing the other team’s players into the end zone.

by elsandito on Sep 25, 2009 9:07 PM EDT reply actions

Is it Sunday yet? :)

by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Sep 25, 2009 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions

So you’re saying it’s actually everyone’s fault BUT Brady and Jamal?

"Quote goes here."

by Adrock2099 on Sep 26, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions

What I’m implying is that BQ and JL get an inordinate degree of being dumped upon by fans for failure, considering there are 11 men on the field when the offense plays. BQ needs time and an open receiver to complete a pass downfield. JL needs a hole to gain yardage.

by elsandito on Sep 26, 2009 7:39 PM EDT up reply actions

It is truly a team game, sure. Those two can still play better (and I know you aren’t contending they have been perfect so far), and as a QB or RB you know you are going to take a lot of the blame when things go poorly and get a lot of the praise when things go smoothly.

It isn’t justified, but “it is what it is”, as they say.

by rufio on Sep 28, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Oh no, rufio’s here. I was wondering what your reaction would be…

www.lowbrowsophisticate.com

by kwoog on Sep 28, 2009 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions

i agree it is a team game, and i’m still waiting for the day the saints have a great day passing and we see their offensive line doing an interview after the game to talk about what worked so well instead of Drew Brees. With that being said the QB will always take the majority of the blame. Thats why we always hear Tom Brady and Peyton Manning say after a loss, “I have to play better and make better passes and better decisions. Thats my job for this team, to put my team in position to win the game”.

by BornInThePound on Sep 29, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions

More running plays

Fourteen to Twenty running attempts per -game isn’t enough especially when J.Lewis is getting the mojarity of carries. Also some screens passes would help; and B.Quinn can’t be holding the ball for five plus seconds on passing plays. There is no O-Line that can protect a quarterback that long.

by Nuts4359 on Sep 26, 2009 1:10 AM EDT reply actions

They’ve tried screen passes, they have been sniffed out before they could develop.

by rufio on Sep 26, 2009 2:17 AM EDT up reply actions

I was going to dispute your last sentence, but I haven’t actually timed the Browns pass rush attempts.

by JustBob on Sep 26, 2009 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions

I have heard fans say that the Browns don’t have enough rushing attempts and other fans say that the Browns don’t have enough passing attempts. The fact is, we never get any first downs, so we don’t have enough plays period. That’s the problem.

by Chemo on Sep 27, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Football is the most complex of team sports. So many things have to go right in order for a play to be successful. We lack talent in most if not all areas of the game. You need talent my friends bottom line. We don’t have a quarerback controversy because we dont have a quarterback. In a nutshell we’ve seen ten years of crappy football in this town. Four head coaches, wasted draft picks, millions of dollars wasted on marginal talent and when its all said and done, here we are three games into the 2009 season and we’re already headed for the Colt McCoy-Tim Tebow derby. Its pretty pathetic when I have to watch other games on TV to see real football being played. I’m no expert just an older and wiser frustrated Brows fan.

by RiverDoc56 on Sep 30, 2009 10:42 AM EDT reply actions