Cleveland Browns Mini-Camp Recap (Day 2) - Who is Johnathan Haggerty?
It was the second day of Cleveland Browns Mini-Camp on Friday, and the good news is that the offense reportedly looked much smoother than it did the first day, as the number of bad throws or dropped passes were reduced significantly, following more of the trend that was set in offseason training activities.
CLEVELAND BROWNS MINI-CAMP NOTES (JUNE 11 - DAY 2)
- Haggerty Makes an Impression: Thus far, there have been two rookie receivers who have made some noise in team practices -- draft pick Carlton Mitchell, and undrafted free agent Johnathan Haggerty. It's always fun to watch out for that one "steal" who might just turn out to be a legitimate NFL player, but oftentimes (at least with the Browns) they are hard to come by, minus Joshua Cribbs. The Plain Dealer notes that Haggerty was catching everything that came his way, including three touchdown passes in the red zone of 7-on-7's and a few nice snags in the two-minute drill.
- Don't Leave Out Robiskie: It's hard to get a gauge of just how many offensive sets the Browns run, but the OBR reports than Brian Robiskie had either 5 or 6 touchdowns in the morning session alone. Robiskie continues his tear, but Mohamed Massaquoi isn't staying completely quiet either -- he caught another bomb from Delhomme that went for about a 60-yard play.
- Defining Roles: Since the new quarterbacks have come on board, it almost seems as if the receivers have grown into their niches. Massaquoi is the home-run threat, Robiskie is the possession receiver, and Stuckey is the in-between man. Jake Delhomme might not be a quality starter anymore, but the chemistry he builds early on with these youngsters is important.
- $150,000 Extra Offered to RFA's: That's right...quite a nice chunk of change of extra money offered to the restricted free agents to sign on the dotted line, eh? At least the three holdouts -- Matt Roth, D'Qwell Jackson, and Abram Elam -- declined. The reason? In order to get the $150,000 incentive, not only would the Browns have to win ten games or make the playoffs, but the players would have to reach individual milestones as well.
- Steinbach's New Role: Inspired by the creativity of mooncamping, the Browns ran a play down near the red zone in which Eric Steinbach came out as an eligible receiver. The ball didn't go his way, however, so no highlight-reel catch for Mr. Steinbach.
- Starting Defense: According to the Akron Beacon Journal, here is how the team's starting first-unit looked:
------Robaire Smith (DE), Ahtyba Rubin (DT), Kenyon Coleman (DE)
------Scott Fujita (OLB), David Veikune (ILB), Chris Gocong (ILB), David Bowens (OLB)
------Sheldon Brown (CB), Ray Ventrone (S), Mike Adams (S) and Joe Haden (CB)
Considering the team's injuries (Eric Wright, Shaun Rogers, T.J. Ward, Larry Asante), holdouts (D'Qwell Jackson, Abram Elam, Matt Roth), the depth chart really can't be evaluated too much. - Field Goal Competition? I still think Phil Dawson will be the guy, but both he and Shaun Suisham went 2-of-3 in kicks to end practice.
- A Sign of Things to Come? With rookie running back Montario Hardesty on board, he and Jerome Harrison continue splitting reps with the first team. I still think Harrison should be the starter, but there's no reason we can't adopt the two running back system that so many other teams in the league have made effective at times.
- Friday's Raw Practice Footage: Here is is, a minute and a half in length.
NEWS SOURCES FOR MINICAMP REPORTS:
- Cleveland Browns' rookie Johnathan Haggerty catching coaches' attention (Plain Dealer, Cabot)
- Observations from Friday's first mini-camp session (Akron Beacon Journal, Ulrich)
- Observations from Friday's second mini-camp session (Akron Beacon Journal, Ulrich)
- Receiver: So far, so good (The OBR, Greetham)
53 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Steinbach’s New Role: Inspired by the creativity of mooncamping, the Browns ran a play down near the red zone in which Eric Steinbach came out as an eligible receiver. The ball didn’t go his way, however, so no highlight-reel catch for Mr. Steinbach.
Why wasn’t he on defense?
Art Modell gives me a hard one
mooncamping has claimed he is the center since he first saw him. Nice he would be featured as a foolish looking receiver though, puts emphasis to how underregarded he is.
by mooncamping on Jun 12, 2010 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Mooncamping is a big fan of the 3rd person, NCFlea doesn’t get it.
For the love of Joe Thomas.....
by North Coast Flea on Jun 12, 2010 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Hate to sound smart here, but if I´m talking to more than one person, I am the third person. LOL.
by mooncamping on Jun 13, 2010 6:36 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Divide 150.000$ by the rest of their lives, and you might get an understanding of how the cheap skates have come on already in Cleveland for next year.
Well without a CBA can you blame teams playing it close to the chest? It’s easy to spend other people’s money just ask a politician. Is 150k a low ball figure yeah but that’s on top of million dollar tenders per. I am going to wait and see what happens before I start pointing fingers of blame.
Ya must have rocks in ya head to work in Iraq?
Yeah but at least mine are shiny!
Shaun Rogers looks like Rick Ross
"Young men, I have no doubt that you're gonna do well today. But I have 1 favor to ask of you... SAVE JIMMY JOHNSON'S ASS FOR ME!" Lou Holtz
by TheRealSlimShady on Jun 12, 2010 2:15 PM EDT reply actions
5-6 TDs a game would be pretty nice.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Jun 12, 2010 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions
5-6 plays a game would be an improvement over last year.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
He actually played a fair amount. I think a lot of the problem was our WRs were often running deeper vertical routes that take time to develop and 1. we couldn’t protect and 2. Neither QB was throwing accurately downfield.
Obviously, due to the terrible camera angle, you can’t tell what was going on in terms of route running/open or not open, but Robiskie was on the field quite a bit.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
What’s wrong with Delhomme? He is and was a lot of things but do you think by hating on him you will be protected if he fails? Just so you can say well I knew he was going to bust or sumthing like that? Maybe he will have another bad year and maybe he will be comeback player of the year. Maybe we should not throw in the towel and start washing our hands of the guy till at least preseason.
Ya must have rocks in ya head to work in Iraq?
Yeah but at least mine are shiny!
Are you saying its irrational to say he’s bad?
"Young men, I have no doubt that you're gonna do well today. But I have 1 favor to ask of you... SAVE JIMMY JOHNSON'S ASS FOR ME!" Lou Holtz
by TheRealSlimShady on Jun 14, 2010 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe the Browns jumped the gun by signing Delhomme, but who knew Jamarcus Russell was going to be cut? /sarc
I know people are going to say I am crazy, but I would rather have Russell over Delhomme.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 14, 2010 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions
You are crazy.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Jun 15, 2010 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Russell has the tools.
Russell has 13 games with a QB rating over 80.
Matt Ryan has 17 games with a QB rating over 80.
JaMarcus Russell has started 25 games with a garbage supporting cast.
Matt Ryan has started 30 games with an All-Pro RB and All-Pro WR.
Russell has some major questions to answer about his conditioning and preparation, but the kid can be a damn good QB in this league.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 15, 2010 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t understand your comparison… at all.
Usually your comparisons are perfect. You shanked this one dude.
JRus sucks.
"Spartans never die Jorge. They're just missing in action."
by SpecialBrownie on Jun 15, 2010 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
JaMarcus Russell is not hopeless. He has actually been better than most people think.
He is far from a finished product and would require a TON of work. His upside is massive though.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 16, 2010 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions
His upside is massive though.
his every side is getting massive
A lot of people are afraid of heights. Not me, I'm afraid of widths --- Steven Wright
by Kimble_79 on Jun 16, 2010 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ha.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Jun 16, 2010 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
As soon as I hit post, I knew someone would jump on that.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 16, 2010 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
The history of the NFL seems littered with QBs who “had the tools” and ended up going nowhere. Could Jamarcus still make it? Sure, but if I had to put money on it, I’d say he’ll end up in the scrapheap with the rest of them.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Jun 15, 2010 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Who was that JasonV/Buffalo QB who had all the intangibles but just sucked sucked sucked.?
"Spartans never die Jorge. They're just missing in action."
by SpecialBrownie on Jun 15, 2010 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions
If I had to guess, I would agree with you.
But if I had to choose between a 24 YO QB with an upside coming off a horrible season over a 35 YO QB coming off a horrible season, it would be a pretty easy choice to me.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 16, 2010 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Russell vs. Delhomme?
Maybe if you look at 2009 and upside solely, but its not like a player’s history is erased after 2 years. The stats from 2008 and 2007 and previously have not been expunged. If you look at CAREERS, Russell has never produced anything significant, while Delhomme was a Super Bowl and Pro Bowl QB and a solid starter before his collapse in 2005.
In 2004, who would you have taken, Tim Couch coming off a poor season or Kurt Warner coming off of a couple injury plagued and mediocre seasons in St. Louis? I would take Warner all the way, because Couch PROVED he sucked and Warner had a fairly long history of success before his collapse. To collapse, you have to once be good…
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Maybe if you look at 2009 and upside solely, but its not like a player’s history is erased after 2 years.
Again, name me one QB at Delhomme’s age that has had a poor of a season as him to bounce back. It doesn’t happen. I hope I am wrong, but history shows that if you are expecting Delhomme to be anything other than horrible, you will be disappointed.
That is not even considering his surrounding cast is much worse and the division he just arrived in was the best defensive division in the NFL last year.
Russell has never produced anything significant, while Delhomme was a Super Bowl and Pro Bowl QB and a solid starter before his collapse in 2005.
Who cares if he went to the Super Bowl? Trent Dilfer was a Super Bowl QB and he did diddle for us.
As for the Pro Bowl part of the comment, Delhomme was an okay QB at his best. His best season was ’05.
60 CMP%, 24-16 ratio, and 7.9 YPA
Guess who this is?
57 CMP%, 29-19 ratio, and 7.2 YPA
That would be the ’07 season of Derek Anderson who we just ran out of town on a rail, and rightfully so.
We need to temper this idea that Jake Delhomme is a reincarnate of Kurt Warner post Rams. When it comes down to it, Delhomme is an average QB that played in a great system that was built around a run game. He was never, and will never, be a great QB.
Maybe he can hold down the fort, but if he has a plus TD-INT ratio we should be jumping for joy.
In 2004, who would you have taken, Tim Couch coming off a poor season or Kurt Warner coming off of a couple injury plagued and mediocre seasons in St. Louis?
Again, Warner is a horrendous comparison for Delhomme. It is like comparing Barry Sanders to DeShaun Foster. Warner is a Hall of Fame QB. Delhomme is average.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 16, 2010 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, name me one QB at Delhomme’s age that has had a poor of a season as him to bounce back. It doesn’t happen.
Jeff Garcia. 2005. He was 35 and had a bad half of a season too. Then the next year he bounced back and had 3 more good seasons.
Doug Flutie in 1998 when he was 36
Vinnie Testaverde at age 32, 35, and 40.
It is not the rule but it is definitely not the exception.
I know that Delhomme is average and I don’t pretend he is that much better. In his prime, he was above average, but I would kill for an average QB here.
I also believe that Delhomme has a better chance at being average because at one point he was average. Jamarcus has never shown me anything to believe he could ever be average.
yeah, that is a bad comparison. A better one would be Jeff Garcia vs. Joey Harrington circa 2005.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
A better one would be Jeff Garcia vs. Joey Harrington circa 2005.
Jeff Garcia is a quitter. He quit on the Browns. He quit on the Lions. F him.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 17, 2010 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions
When it comes down to it, Delhomme is an average QB that played in a great system that was built around a run game. He was never, and will never, be a great QB.
I would imagine this would be our prototype.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
I understand, as a big daddy come and take my spot type of demeanor?
by mooncamping on May 14, 2010 7:24 AM EDT
If I had to choose between
“years of being led on and dissappointed by the young, tantalizing QB only to have to fire everyone and rebuild in 3 years”
and
“stalling until we can draft the future with a guy who knows his role and will help develop the young players”
I’d take the stalling.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I can understand this thinking, but who is to say that Russell wouldn’t be the future?
The chances that McCoy is actually a top flight NFL starting QB is minimal. Why not buy a lotto ticket in Russell?
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 16, 2010 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I can understand that. As a stopgap QB though, I’ll take the 35 year old who has been good and then sucked, over the 24 year old who’s never demonstrated the ability to be good at all….
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Jun 16, 2010 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Like I said above, I can understand that.
But I said if I had my choice going forward from today, I would take Russell over Delhomme.
by Bernie19Kosar on Jun 16, 2010 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Respect, B19K. I hope (as I imagine many of us do) that in few months, we’re so happy with Delhomme that this conversation will seem funny in retrospect!
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Jun 16, 2010 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions
for the future, if we are looking past 2010, definitely. However I see his chances at future success being minimal at best. I wouldn’t waste much of a roster spot on him at this point…maybe give him a shot in camp, but no guaranteed spot at all.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
I think we’re taking the gamble that we can have a productive season without starting a QB with upside. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that our starting QB 2-3 years from now is not on the roster.
I think the FO made the conscious decision to go with a player who has proven he can last in the league. At the very least they can go into games telling Delhomme to throw the ball away and rely on the defense and the running game for production.
I think bringing in a young project QB like Russell would distract and and prohibit the improvement we are seeking in other areas. In Delhomme, we have a player the FO can count on to understand his role.
Unlike the end of his time in Carolina, Delhomme will most likely not feel like he has to win games.
If that makes any sense.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
I understand, as a big daddy come and take my spot type of demeanor?
by mooncamping on May 14, 2010 7:24 AM EDT
Your ability to reply blows.
"Spartans never die Jorge. They're just missing in action."
by SpecialBrownie on Jun 14, 2010 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs

by 
















