Curry: One of the Browns' Players Tipped Hand of Run vs. Pass

by Chris Pokorny on Oct 27, 2011 9:06 PM EDT

As the Cleveland Browns get ready to take on the San Francisco 49ers, you don't expect to hear one of our opponents from two weeks ago still talking about the team. In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle though, Oakland Raiders linebacker Aaron Curry was talking about how his new role in the AFC allows him to do less thinking for focus more on the "little things." The example he gave? One of the Browns' offensive linemen would tip their hand as to what type of play was going to be run.

"One of the O-linemen from Cleveland, they gave it up every play, most of the time, I'd say about 70 percent of the time, whether it was run or pass. They had no clue they were doing it, but I figured it out from just watching the film."

There are a few things to consider here. First, you have to imagine that Curry is referring to one of our guards, since there is too much experience at the tackle positions and center for something like this to happen. Second, it's hard to say whether this would be a big deal or not. While I'm not going to sit here and say I can predict every play the Browns are going to run, I'd venture to guess my prediction rate on some Sundays would be around 60%+. That takes into account the formation, personnel in the game, and the situation though, not just one particular offensive lineman.

Tweet Comment 47 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I'd guess Pinkston..

He’s a rookie.

by homerun21 on Oct 27, 2011 9:20 PM EDT reply actions

rufio, what did we do wrong?

With or Without the H

by johnf34 on Oct 27, 2011 9:57 PM EDT reply actions

Too busy, haven’t rewatched. Tackles sometimes do this with their feet, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a guard because they are so young.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Oct 28, 2011 3:03 AM EDT up reply actions

“they gave it up every play, most of the time, I’d say about 70 percent of the time”

That makes so much sense, Aaron.

With or Without the H

by johnf34 on Oct 27, 2011 9:58 PM EDT reply actions

I’ll just leave this here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjvQFtlNQ-M&feature=related

by Off-the-Chain on Oct 27, 2011 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

60% of the time, it works EVERY time.

(i assume this is the link you posted)

Smile big, hug bigger. Talk big, act bigger. Stop judging do something, shut the fck up do something.

by pwndabear on Oct 28, 2011 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

It absolutely is.

by Off-the-Chain on Oct 28, 2011 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions

It’s quite pungent.

Resident Tim Couch Apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on Oct 28, 2011 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions

stings the nostrils

"You are the worst villains in football, your evil plan never ceases."-Mooncamping

by discoinferno083 on Oct 29, 2011 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions

I’m gonna be honest with you discoinferno083, this smells like pure gasoline.

Resident Tim Couch Apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on Oct 29, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions

This, again points to some poor coaching.

"You are the worst villains in football, your evil plan never ceases."-Mooncamping

by discoinferno083 on Oct 27, 2011 10:03 PM EDT reply actions

Yeah this should be easily identifiable in practice.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2011 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Unfortunately agree.

by Roger Dorn on Oct 28, 2011 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions

It might have been Pashos. Offensive tackles are usually the easiest to read, because the some of the less athletic ones line up further off the line of scrimmage on pass plays (I remember seeing Patriots’ Matt Light and Giants’ David Diehl doing this a lot).

by Bumblyjack on Oct 27, 2011 10:13 PM EDT reply actions

I believe I’ve seen Pashos flagged for this before, but wouldn’t swear to it. Not that I’m above swearing, mind you. It’s just that this $h!t doesn’t warrant it.

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
— Winston S. Churchill

by JustBob on Oct 28, 2011 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions

wouldn’t it be great if fixing this fixed our offense

by SBP on Oct 27, 2011 10:18 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

And it would show that there is something that Curry is good at.

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
— Winston S. Churchill

by JustBob on Oct 28, 2011 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions

I don’t know anywhere close to enough about football to know if this particular instance is a big deal, but I do wonder, if said player is tipping in this instance what is he doing on other plays?

Mangini apologist by default.

I’m speaking about his innate accuracy, not how well that innate accuracy is translating on the field.

by Villeslgr on Oct 27, 2011 10:29 PM EDT reply actions

You can tell a lot by a 3 point stance.
One example. The free arm could be placed differently on certain plays.
If the free arm isn’t touching his leg, his weight could be forward signaling run blocking. All weight is on arm touching the ground. His first step will be forward.
If his weight is going back, the arm could be resting on his leg for balance while being in the stance. Which means his first step will be backwards for pass protection.

I say all our linemen do the Frog Stance anyways. No giveaways there.

My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
Why does the internet have political prisoners?

by Brownie's Year on Oct 27, 2011 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Agreed. Frog stance for everyone.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2011 8:33 AM EDT up reply actions

There are two schools of thought on this. Mangini never would have let it happen; he would want to make every play look exactly the same in every way and to the degree that is humanly possible. Have no tendencies so the defense doesn’t know where to cheat.

Shurmur subscribes to a different school of thought (or at least coaches like he does). He’d rather allow the tendencies to happen, allow the backs and receivers “cheat” in the formation based on their assignments, allow the linemen to “cheat” in their stances like this. Once the defense starts to cheat based on your tendencies, then you burn ’em.

To this point, we haven’t done a good enough job at burning the defense once they adjust.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Oct 28, 2011 3:09 AM EDT reply actions

Mangini never would have let it happen; he would want to make every play look exactly the same in every way and to the degree that is humanly possible. Have no tendencies so the defense doesn’t know where to cheat.

This is ideal for most coaches and spot on.

Shurmur subscribes to a different school of thought (or at least coaches like he does). He’d rather allow the tendencies to happen, allow the backs and receivers "cheat" in the formation based on their assignments, allow the linemen to "cheat" in their stances like this. Once the defense starts to cheat based on your tendencies, then you burn ’em.

What the hell are you talking about? You drunk? This might be the farthest reach I’ve ever seen you attempt. If you don’t know the answer, don’t make stuff up.

My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
Why does the internet have political prisoners?

by Brownie's Year on Oct 28, 2011 6:56 AM EDT up reply actions

(to the second point…)

It is hard for me to believe that this “strategy” (“school of thought” as rufio puts it) is a viable one.
(granted I won’t claim to have half the Xs and Os savvy of rufio and a few others around here…)

rufio, correct me if I’m wrong but it sounds almost like saying “we’ll be predictable 85% of our plays, but we’ll surprise them on the other 15%, and we’ll burn them badly enough on those plays to win the game”. Am I mis-interpreting?

Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.

by burntorangeandbrown on Oct 28, 2011 8:26 AM EDT up reply actions

I don’t think that’s what he’s saying at all. It’s pre-snap play action. Give the opponent all the appearances of a pass play, then run a draw. Show run at the line, the play action. It’s just one more way of selling the play fakes.

The idea is to set up the defense early in the game by being a little predictable based on stance, formation, etc. Later in the game, show the exact same look, and run a different play.

I’m sure we are not trying to telegraph 70% of the time. If we do that, I agree that it’s a mistake.

by rebuilding year on Oct 28, 2011 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions

It’s a legitimate strategy, but you have to be a talented team to do it. Basically, it shouldn’t matter if the defense knows what you are doing, you should still be able to do it to some degree. If you aren’t very talented, this isn’t the case, and this strategy breaks down.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2011 8:35 AM EDT up reply actions

It’s not that they can know what’s going to happen, it’s that you let them think they know what is going to happen.

If we are playing pickup basketball, it’s like me saying “hey, I am going to cross you over and blow by you to your left.” Do you believe me? Do you sell out to your left? Does it matter? All it takes is one fake crossover to your left and me blowing by you to the rim on your right, and you are right back at square one as a defender; you have to respect both sides.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Oct 28, 2011 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions

it’s that you let them think they know what is going to happen.

But it doesn’t work unless they’re right some of the time.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2011 9:18 PM EDT up reply actions

It works every time when done correctly. The goal is to keep the defense guessing or to make them play honest and be constrained by multiple responsibilities (i.e. run/pass). They don’t have to be right some of the time to think they are right and take the bait, or to ignore the bait and play honest.

Even if they guess right, they are still guessing and what you are doing is working. And if you make a defense guess enough, they’ll be wrong and you’ll get a big play. If they don’t guess and they play honest, the game is functioning as though you had no tendencies at all.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Oct 29, 2011 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions

We give a lot away by personnel, formation, motions, and small adjustments to things like WR splits, RB splits/depth, etc. How many times have you seen Evan Moore block this year? How many times have you seen us run the FB give on 4th and short with Hillis as the FB and Hardesty deep? How obvious was it that we were running the pitch off of that play when Smith came in the game?

All that matters is that the defense doesn’t know what’s coming. It only takes one complete deep PA pass with Pashos’ feet set like a pass for Curry to think twice about leaving the seam and coming into his run fit right off the snap. And we’ve been terrible at this.

Walsh operated this way, Holmgren operated this way, a lot of people operate this way. I can get you historical quotes if you really don’t believe me. The game where TO caught the winning TD from Steve Young against Green Bay, for example, featured two WCO teams. They each knew one another’s language so well that SF installed a fake audible. They audibled, GB thought they knew what was coming, SF burned them for a TD. GB didn’t try to key off of SF’s audibles again. That’s all it takes.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Oct 28, 2011 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions

Yes I agree with that. but it has nothing really to do with the article. It’s about small things that players do that inadvertently give away what they are going to do during the play. What you said sounded like Shurmur coaches his players to that which seemed bogus to me. You’re talking about game plan when no one else was. Hence the confusion.

My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
Why does the internet have political prisoners?

by Brownie's Year on Oct 29, 2011 12:54 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

It has everything to do with the article. Shurmur wouldn’t coach his players to do it as much as he might (attempt to) notice that it was happening and roll with it instead of trying to correct/hide it. You might coach the one player who is supposedly giving it away to do something different on the constraint play, to make sure he still “gives away” that it is a run despite it being a pass.

Whether it’s tactics or strategy, it’s the same idea. The “tendency’ could be that we run 70% of the time on 2nd and 6+, or it could be that we pass 70% of the time when Pashos’ right leg is more than 6” behind his left. It’s the same philosophical approach to “giving away” what we are doing.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Oct 29, 2011 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Rufio, I understand what you’re saying. I know all about "illusion". But I’m talking about habits. Players do things without really knowing they are doing them.
And where is your proof that Shurmur coaches "habit telling illusions"? It’s not as common as you claim it to be.

My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
Why does the internet have political prisoners?

by Brownie's Year on Oct 30, 2011 4:33 AM EDT up reply actions

I have no proof that he does it, aside from the obvious things that are happening on the field that he and the staff aren’t bothering to “correct” and the semi-predictability of our playcalls based on alignments, formations, and personnel. Also this “proof” from Curry (for whatever it’s worth) that our players are doing things on a personal level that I can’t see on a computer screen.

I do have insight to his philosophy, which is all I am trying to talk about. Whether it’s formationing or “habits”, the philosophy still applies/needs to apply. I am talking about “habits” too and I have been this whole time. The distinction between “habits” and other, “larger” forms that offensive tendencies can take (formations/personnel, down/distance, field position, etc.) does not matter to the philosophy, which is why I have tried to tell you I understand what you are talking about while still trying to avoid it.

I am talking about the information that you do or do not allow your opponent access to, which takes many forms. In this case, it’s coaching points for individual players and trying to/not trying to break their habits. But you can see an application of this philosophy to everything from this to larger on-field things like formationing and playcalling, and even to injury reports and dealing with the media. What I am trying to talk about applies to all of that, to everything top-to-bottom in the organization.

Whatever the philosophy, we’ve got to implement it thoroughly or we’re screwed. For example, if Shurmur isn’t coaching Pashos to cheat his weight forward on play action passes so that he can manipulate the opponent’s knowledge of his players’ habits, we’ve got a huge problem.

But regardless of what we are trying to do, we aren’t doing a good job of it: our offense stinks right now.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by rufio on Oct 31, 2011 2:14 AM EDT up reply actions

To this point, we haven’t done a good enough job at burning the defense once they adjust.

Burn nothing. We’ve hardly taken the chill off them.

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
— Winston S. Churchill

by JustBob on Oct 28, 2011 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions

Focus

That guy should have focused on last week. The Raiders got smacked 28-0. What was his run/pass breakdown there?

by sean222 on Oct 28, 2011 9:00 AM EDT reply actions

seems to me like they could read his poker face

Smile big, hug bigger. Talk big, act bigger. Stop judging do something, shut the fck up do something.

by pwndabear on Oct 28, 2011 9:59 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs

LARRY GAGA!?!? BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

"That’s the reality of it and I live in that reality." Shurmur

by LocalMan on Oct 28, 2011 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Curry is a loudmouthed idot.

“Thomas laughed when told of Curry’s comments Thursday.

“He must be a wizard because after being there one day, he figured it out?” Thomas said. “He must be really smart. . . . I’m sure if a guy was leaning really far back or really far forward, maybe [he could see it]. But for one day? That is very impressive.”

Thomas scoffed at the idea that Oakland’s singular linebacker might have seen something in film that the Browns’ legions of coaches and players who self-scout might have missed this season. The Browns, however, have played with a patchwork offensive line at times this season, with rookie Jason Pinkston filling in at left guard for injured Eric Steinbach, and right tackle Tony Pashos missing the first three games of the season with injury.

“If I would have noticed something, we would have taken care of it,” Thomas said."

Call: This Is The Word Of Joe
Reply: Thanks Be To Joe

What does that MEAN - TO PLAY US OUT?!!?!?

by DaveDawg09 on Oct 28, 2011 10:08 AM EDT reply actions 13 recs

In fairness, our offense has sucked so there may be something to it.

by Roger Dorn on Oct 28, 2011 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions

in fairness to that, Curry spent very little time preparing for the game and the criticism I think they had in seattle was he was talented, but not an intelligent player out there.

I teach good life choices. That's why I almost didn't graduate high school.
Follow @BRoss2013

by bross09 on Oct 28, 2011 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions

In fairness to both of you, if Joe Thomas thinks it’s bullshit, it’s bullshit.

Resident Tim Couch Apologist.

by Dawg Nuts on Oct 28, 2011 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs

Hahahahah.

Sammy Watkins for Heisman

by emily522 on Oct 30, 2011 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions

So…. Aaron Curry’s seen “Invincible” too?

Mark Walburgh was boss in that movie.

"You are the worst villains in football, your evil plan never ceases."-Mooncamping

by discoinferno083 on Oct 28, 2011 11:05 AM EDT reply actions

Marky Mark is boss in every movie.

"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway

by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2011 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions

Anyone getting good vibrations?

The Alot is better than Brian Robiskie at everything..

by Clevsports on Oct 29, 2011 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions

I remember Bernie Kosar would do something similar. He would position his feet in a way that would allow him to pull out from center a little quicker if he were passing and different again if it were a run…just my opinion…

by WilliamL on Oct 28, 2011 3:31 PM EDT reply actions

Half the time at least teams don’t even try to disguise what they’re going to do, they tip their hand and just do it. Curry is an idiot. I’m not surprised he’s been a huge bust.

by HenryDawg on Oct 28, 2011 8:46 PM EDT reply actions