Instant Recap: Browns Lose 24-14 to Eagles
by Chris Pokorny on Aug 26, 2011 12:10 AM EDT
Email
PrintI wish I could sugar coat the way the Cleveland Browns played against the Philadelphia Eagles on Thursday in their 24-14 loss, but you really can't. You can blame the players, the weather, the coaches, the officials, etc, but the fact is that neither team looked very sharp in what is considered the best dress rehearsal for the regular season.
Things appeared to get off to a good start for the Browns. They completed a first down run away on a tough run by Peyton Hillis, but later failed to convert on a third-down and were forced to punt. On the Eagles' first third-down situation, Phil Taylor bulldozed through Michael Vick right up the middle, forcing a fumble that Jayme Mitchell fell on top of to give Cleveland great field position.
That's where things really started to go downhill. We had...
- A catchable pass to the end zone that Peyton Hillis couldn't come down with.
- A blocked 33-yard field goal attempt by Phil Dawson.
- Sheldon Brown accidentally tripping punt returner Jordan Norwood as he was calling for a fair catch, resulting in a muff and recovery by Philly.
- A nice pass to Evan Moore down the sideline being dropped that could have gone for six.
- An offensive pass interference penalty called on Brian Robiskie on a nice diving catch near the end zone.
- Asante Samuel jumping a route to intercept Colt McCoy to begin the second quarter.
- An absurd roughing the passer penalty on D'Qwell Jackson that allowed Philly to sustain a long touchdown drive.
- Penalties and breakdown in offensive line protection preventing the offense from moving the ball.
And, I forgot to mention: it started pouring rain, which is the last thing you want your team to practice in. Most teams don't play in a rainstorm all season; I'd rather see them practice in weather elements they are more likely to see.
The Browns were losing 17-0 at halftime, and were down 24-0 in the second half. They ended up scoring 14 unanswered in the fourth quarter after a fluke touchdown throw by Seneca Wallace, and a decent drive by third-stringer Jarrett Brown to close out the game.
This was not a fun game to watch, but it's also the one I throw away for the most parts. I know it sounds unfair to pick and choose what to take away from this game, but I saw good playcalling in the first half and good throws from McCoy. We had an opportunity for two plays early on that would've led to points, and arguably our two best receivers, Hillis and Moore, dropped the ball. The defensive pressure was very good, led by the likes of Phil Taylor, D'Qwell Jackson, and Scott Fujita. I really liked what I saw out of the front seven today, and I'm even more optimistic about what we can do when our starting safeties return to action.
One more note: the bad play kind of overshadowed the return of running back Montario Hardesty, who finished with 5 carries for 15 yards. The part that matters isn't his performance -- for now -- but the fact that he came away healthy, even with the elements the way they were.
Hopefully we see better results against the Bears next week.
340 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Dropped Passes!?!
Hillis and Moore dropped the passes? Seriously? Watch the tape again. Both were clearly blocked by the defender.
Welcome to DBN. We don’t really use the subject line here. Most see it as an eyesore.
cautiously realistic
by North Coast Flea on Aug 26, 2011 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Moore makes a living off of catching passes with a defender on him like that. Sure, the defender distracted him probably, but the ball was still right at his hip. I didn’t phrase it by saying Hillis dropped the pass, but that it was catchable. Tough play, but they run that in practice enough that it should be more routine than not.
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Aug 26, 2011 12:32 AM EDT up reply actions
The ball landed in Moore’s lap..
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
the defender did not touch the ball that moore missed.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Nope, he didn’t – just watched that again a couple of times to be sure. If Moore catches that one it was almost certainly a TD.
It was right on the money too. Page (safety) leapt for it – fully extended but it sailed about a foot over the tips of his fingers of his oustretched arm. I think Moore just got distracted by Page and lost concentration at the last second.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I am very encouraged by those types of throws from McCoy.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
yep. with more experience playing together and gelling with his WRs, those should turn into completions more often than not.
Resident Tim Couch Apologist.
Those are the kinds of throws he will have to complete. The one to Cribbs, the one that got called back from Robi, the long TD to Moore in the other game, his consistency on those throws is what will determine his ceiling as a starting QB.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I tuned in at:
Sheldon Brown accidentally tripping punt returner Jordan Norwood as he was calling for a fair catch, resulting in a muff and recovery by Philly.
I turned the game off after:
An absurd roughing the passer penalty on D’Qwell Jackson that allowed Philly to sustain a long touchdown drive.
I think that’s only the third or so game I’ve ever turned off in my entire life. I did end up “trying” to watch some of the replay on NFLNet, that didn’t last long. One thing I did notice in the little bit of the game I watched was that Colt gign’t look very comfortable in the pocket and seemed allergic to the wide open checkdown, instead usually opting for the tightly covered deep route. This could e Shurmur’s doing though, possibly telling him to go for the deep ball more often so he can evaluate his long game. Who knows?
cautiously realistic
by North Coast Flea on Aug 26, 2011 12:27 AM EDT reply actions
Gign’t = didn’t. That’s what I get for typing in the dark.
cautiously realistic
by North Coast Flea on Aug 26, 2011 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes, some of those deep throws seemed forced, over open receivers underneath.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Aug 26, 2011 6:57 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Which I guess is the way I would prefer it over forcing underneath throws when the deep ones are open. It’s good to be reading the direction he is. It’s harder to coach a guy to look deep longer than it is to get him to check down.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions
I’d rather have mccoy who forces the deep throw than BQ who forced the checkdown
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
When he was lucky. Usually, he just stood in the pocket and looked completely lost.
2010 Official DBN League Fantasy Football Champion
by TheDriveStillHurts on Aug 26, 2011 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Be careful, BQ could take a hit….why am i so worried that Colt is gonna get destroyed, he looked shaken after one of the linemen helped him up last nite, and in the other games he was rocked a bit….he goes then its off to the QB merrygo round…
"There's a gleam men, there's a gleam!" Marty
by Red-Right-88 on Aug 26, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Positives:
-We got defensive pressure against Philly, a team that is loaded with talent.
-We didn’t let DeSean Jackson get loose for a big score, and we forced them to check down to McCoy and we tackled him well with one or two exceptions
-Phil Taylor looked good, against a fellow 1st round pick.
-Dockery continues to impress me with his versatility and ability to find the ball in coverage.
-DQJ is making plays behind the line of scrimmage, and our coaches are turning him loose
-Jauron is showing some new looks in passing situations which I’ll hopefully talk about later
-Our defense stopped the Eagles a couple of times even with Ventrone out there.
Negatives:
-Ventrone is still out there on defense
-We look extremely sloppy right now. Penalties, snap counts, run fits, and defensive communication are all very, very far off of where we need to be. This area was borderline embarassing.
-We don’t look tough, physical, or like we are finishing plays the way we need to be. This could be a symptom of it being the preseason, but we need to step this up particularly on the lines. Joe Haden jogging on Vick’s TD also frustrated me.
-Again, I don’t know how much of this is a product of the preseason, but Philly looked like they knew what we were doing on offense. Given that this is the most serious preseason game and the connections between front office people/coaches, this is no surprise. I was disappointed in our playcalling in that we didn’t seem to have any/many counter-moves planned. Hopefully saving those for the season. Specifically, they were playing lots of 5 under zone and taking away our shallow series and we didn’t go deep enough on them vs. C2.
-Our WRs weren’t separating like they have been the past few weeks, though I thought they got open enough. What really killed our passing game was…
-…their secondary was definitely able to confuse Colt. He missed wide-open checkdowns because he thought he would have something downfield based on the pre-snap read. The Eagles shifted post-snap, and the concepts never developed.
-We cannot run Cover 2 man under against Vick, especially not near the endzone. 5 OL blocking 4 DL means Vick always has at least 2 holes to run though, and when everyone’s heads are turned, that’s bad for us. We can’t run it against Young either.
-Get Cribbs back on the field for ST.
-Our Young DEs are getting burned on runs to the outside. They are taking the wrong gaps, or our LBs are completely lost (nowhere close to the right gaps). I am willing to bet the DEs are too eager to rush the passer and losing contain.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Also I cannot complain enough about how awful those calls were against Robi and DQJ. Two big plays taken away from us—though we definitely did our part to legitimately kill ourselves.
Robi definitely pushed off, but if you are going to let Nnamdi jam and hold him 20 yards down the field, you have to let the WR get physical too. I can’t even explain Jackson’s penalty, that was a textbook tackle. Get low, put your facemask on his numbers, wrap, squeeze, drive, and take the guy to the ground. Nothing wrong with that.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Agree completely about the tackle. I thought Bernie made the right comment about if you are going to leave a guy untouched he is definitely going to play it that way… and that is what results in a big play in the NFL. An INT or a fumble are pretty common in a play like that but not if the untouched rusher has to pull up and play pattie-cake.
Brownsyup
The roughing passer was joke. You’ll get no argument from me there.
But the offensive pass interference was textbook. It was an easy flag. Obvious push was the only reason he got seperation. That was no question at all.
Follow Bleeding Green Nation on Twitter & Facebook. Did you get your copy of the 2011 Eagles Annual yet?
Robi-pushed, but that’s hardly a textbook OPI call. Nnamdi was mugging him down the field the whole way. If you are going to call the offense for being too physical, you have to call the defense for it too. He is grabbing onto Robi as the pushoff is happening.
I don’t know if that’s a double-foul or a no-call, but you can’t let one guy get away with something on the play and call the other guy for it.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
That push off was way too obvious to ignore. That was an easy call.
Follow Bleeding Green Nation on Twitter & Facebook. Did you get your copy of the 2011 Eagles Annual yet?
So was the hold.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree there. Well not even because you agree that it was a push off, you just think he was held also. Doesn’t really matter I suppose, considering the game doesn’t count…
I do agree on the roughing the passer though. That was comical. I have no clue what they thought they saw there. So was the flag on Andy Reid. We got a kick out of that one.
Follow Bleeding Green Nation on Twitter & Facebook. Did you get your copy of the 2011 Eagles Annual yet?
Reid will get that flag every time if he tries to challenge a scoring play. That’s the new rule. Every scoring play is reviewed automatically, and coaches cannot challenge them. If they do, the play is no longer reviewable, and it’s 15 yards on the kickoff. It’s a bit silly, but it’s automatic.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Don't you think it was a simple mistake?
I mean, the challenge flag has been use for years. It might just be out of habit that he threw it. Calling “unsportsmanlike conduct” resulting in a 15 yd penalty and no review?? That’s overdoing it.
I also don’t know how “clearly stated” that rule is. It is clearly stated that all scoring plays are automatically reviewed. It seems more assumed or implied that you can’t challenge the TD due to the rule. What doesn’t make sense is the extent of the penalty. It makes sense for the refs to simply say “pick up the flag, it’s being reviewed already” OR, at worst, call a delay of game penalty. That can still be reviewed, right? To not review makes the whole point of automatic reviews counterproductive.
Also, that flag for the hit on Vick was BS. Should have been an int. He did fall violently but it was legal. Sorry bout that one.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
It was clearly a mistake, but that has been the rule ever since they’ve written it this offseason. It’s written as clearly as it can be: challenge flag on a scoring play = no review and 15 yards on the kickoff. Every time. Reid knows that and I am sure that’s the last time he’ll do it.
It’s kind of a stupid rule to have, IMO, but it’s even dumber to break it since it is completely under your control and there’s a big punishment.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
It seems more assumed or implied that you can’t challenge the TD due to the rule.
It does to us, but I’m sure each team gets clear explanations presented to them of any new rules during training camp, likely by NFL rules officials. They may forget, but I’m sure they have had them explained in great detail.
Resident Tim Couch Apologist.
It’s not assumed or implied at all. It’s explicitly stated in the rule that if you throw the challenge flag, you get the 15 yard penalty and the play is un-reviewable.
I am not sure it matters since all NFL kickoffs are touchbacks anyway, and the Smith wasn’t the first guy to touch the pass after coming in from OB.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
and the Smith wasn’t the first guy to touch the pass after coming in from OB.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but yes, he was. While the ball was in the air (deflected) he stepped out of bounds and then came back in, meaning he can’t be the first person to touch it. If he had stepped out of bounds, came back in, then the ball was deflected and he caught it, that would be fine. However, he stepped out of bounds while the ball was free and then came back in and was the first to touch it. For example, if a ball is fumbled, you can’t run out of bounds and the the first guy to pick it up no matter how many times the ball is touched before that. It’s the same concept.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
Uh I don’t think that’s the way the rule is written. You can’t go out of bounds, then come in bounds and catch a pass straight from the QB. The rule is so that pass routes don’t go behind bench players and coaches and then come back onto the playing field.
You can catch that pass if you go out of bounds, come back in bounds, and aren’t the first one to touch the ball after the QB.
In other words, I do not believe that the sequence of the ball being tipped and re-entering the playing field matters. It must simply be tipped before you make contact with the ball.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Rule 8, section 1, article 8:
It is a foul for illegal touching if a forward pass (legal or illegal), thrown from behind the line of scrimmage:
(a) is first touched intentionally or is caught by an ineligible offensive player; or
(b) first touches or is caught by an eligible receiver who has gone out of bounds, either of his own volition or by being legally forced out of bounds, and has re-established himself inbounds.
A.R. 8.14
Third-and-10 on B40. On a legal forward pass, eligible end A1 is legally blocked out of
bounds on the B20. He returns to the field of play and catches a pass after a defensive
player touched it. He scores.
Ruling: Touchdown. Legal play as all ineligible receivers become eligible after the
defense touches the ball.
When the ball was thrown, it was caught by an eligible receiver who went out of bounds then came back in.
When the first touch is by the defense, it nullifies the fact that any receiver went out of bounds. When the first touch is by your own player, you aren’t eligible to catch the ball if you went out of bounds. That’s why the “or” is there. If the player who had tipped it was out of bounds first, that would be an illegal touch as well.
Am I interpreting that correctly? It took me forever to find an online NFL rulebook.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
It is a foul for illegal touching if a forward pass (legal or illegal), thrown from behind the line of scrimmage:
(a) is first touched intentionally or is caught by an ineligible offensive player; or
(b) first touches or is caught by an eligible receiver who has gone out of bounds, either of his own volition or by being legally forced out of bounds, and has re-established himself inbounds.
I am not positive, but I believe the “or” is there because “first touches” and “is caught by” are not synonymous. As in “first touches or is first caught by”. I think this is supported by the scenario you presented:
Third-and-10 on B40. On a legal forward pass, eligible end A1 is legally blocked out of
bounds on the B20. He returns to the field of play and catches a pass after a defensive
player touched it. He scores.
Ruling: Touchdown. Legal play as all ineligible receivers become eligible after the
defense touches the ball.
The ball “is caught by an eligible receiver who has gone out of bounds, either of his own volition or by being legally forced out of bounds, and has re-established himself inbounds.” Yet the play is legal. This is why I believe the “or” is misleading above. Of course we would probably need the rule about defensive/offensive touching/live ball to contextualize and be sure.
In this scenario and explanation, no distinction is made between a defender and an eligible offensive receiver. I.e. it reinforces the fact that Smith’s catch would have been legal had it been a defender with the first touch, but does not rule out that it also could have been legal as the play happened (offender as first touch).
Basically, it’s a confusing rule and the wording is unclear. Either of us could be correct.
I have had much less trouble finding NCAA rulebooks online, where did you get the NFL one?
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
This is where I found it. Download the PDF file. It’s from 2009 but I can’t imagine it’s that much different cough:kickoffs:cough.
But, man, you are being so disagreeable today (not that I know how you are on other days). This is a good debate, though, so I’ll entertain it.
The only reason the play was legal in the second scenario given above is because the defense touched it first. That changes everything and has nothing to do with what happened last night. I included it because the rules clearly suggest that the defense touching it makes every receiver eligible. If the same worked with an offensive deflection, they would have specified that as well. But they didn’t. Which makes me believe it isn’t true.
It is a foul for illegal touching if a forward pass (legal or illegal), thrown from behind the line of scrimmage:
(a) is first touched intentionally or is caught by an ineligible offensive player; or
(b) first touches or is caught by an eligible receiver who has gone out of bounds, either of his own volition or by being legally forced out of bounds, and has re-established himself inbounds.
You are looking at it in the way you want to see it not the way it is.
I agree the rule is not synonymous, hence the “or”. Since I used to use CFR’s and law books in my previous jobs, you have to put together the "and"s and "or"s.
So this is how I would legally interpret it: The ball was thrown from behind the line of scrimmage. Was it first touched by an ineligible offensive player? Well, no. The player was an eligible receiver. Was is first touched by an eligible receiver who went out of bounds then came back in? No. Was it first caught by an eligible receiver who went out of bounds then came back in? Yes.
You said it yourself:
I am not positive, but I believe the "or" is there because "first touches" and "is caught by" are not synonymous. As in "first touches or is first caught by".
THAT’S what happened. It was first caught by that receiver, therefore it was illegal. The “or” is a HUGE difference between an “and” because it makes you treat those two scenarios independently. The ball wasn’t first touched, but caught by an eligible receiver who has gone out of bounds, either of his own volition or by being legally forced out of bounds, and has re-established himself inbounds.
There is no doubt about it and in a court of law, this would be how they would probably rule.
Also, (and I don’t give the Walrus a ton of challenge-flag-throwing credibility) I doubt Andy would have thrown the flag if he didn’t know that rule.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
The only reason the play was legal in the second scenario given above is because the defense touched it first. That changes everything
It would change everything, if true. I am not convinced it is, that’s all.
The rules say that the defense touching it made it live, but they don’t restrict to ONLY the defense. It is not an “if and only if” scenario by the rules you have listed.
If the same worked with an offensive deflection, they would have specified that as well.
This is exactly where we disagree. And I don’t know how you don’t understand that/won’t leave it alone.
THAT’S what happened. It was first caught by that receiver
No, it was first touched by another eligible receiver, then caught. “First caught” was probably unclear BUT THE BALL WAS NOT SIMPLY CAUGHT BY THE OB RECEIVER.
The rules still leave open the possibility that the play was legal depending on what two things the “or” separates. And under that specific rule, the defensive touch/OB receiver catch is still illegal, meaning there is at least one rule elsewhere that supersedes that rule.
Also, (and I don’t give the Walrus a ton of challenge-flag-throwing credibility) I doubt Andy would have thrown the flag if he didn’t know that rule.
Well, you shouldn’t because he clearly didn’t know the rule about challenging scoring plays.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
No, it was first touched by another eligible receiver, then caught. "First caught" was probably unclear BUT THE BALL WAS NOT SIMPLY CAUGHT BY THE OB RECEIVER.
He was still out of bounds when the ball was first touched.
Mangini apologist by default.
That order is irrelevant in the defensive player example.
It doesn’t matter where he is at the time of the tip, only at the time of the catch.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
speaking of defensive players tipping the ball … this was absolutely amazing.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions
There are things I agree with you on and things I don’t.
Well, you shouldn’t because he clearly didn’t know the rule about challenging scoring plays.
Funny and I agree.
The rules say that the defense touching it made it live, but they don’t restrict to ONLY the defense. It is not an "if and only if" scenario by the rules you have listed.
This is true too and a valid point. But “live” is the wrong word. It just nullifies the restriction of a WR that stepped out of bounds. The ball and play is still “live” either way. I included that because it strengthens my point, which it does. If there were another scenario where contact would nullify the restrictions of the WR, I think it’s safe to say it would be mentioned. Granted, it’s an assumption, but a strong assumption.
No, it was first touched by another eligible receiver, then caught. "First caught" was probably unclear BUT THE BALL WAS NOT SIMPLY CAUGHT BY THE OB RECEIVER.
“First caught” is not unclear at all. It can’t be first touched OR first caught by a receiver who was just out of bounds. The rule is there. Staring at you. It says it. And that’s what happened.
The rules still leave open the possibility that the play was legal depending on what two things the "or" separates. And under that specific rule, the defensive touch/OB receiver catch is still illegal, meaning there is at least one rule elsewhere that supersedes that rule.
There isn’t “at least” one rule, there is one rule that supersedes that. And that is if the defense touches the ball. Not offense.
The rule is obvious why it’s said that way. When a ball is tipped by your own teammate, you can’t expand the size of the field to get to it. When the defense touches it, it’s by their own volition. Since they clearly aren’t intentionally helping the offense in any way, it can be played by anyone.
It’s starting to seem like you are a person who just can’t admit when you’re wrong. You just have to keep arguing until I just give up. Keep at it, you’re getting close cuz we are arguing in circles. I’m telling you what the rule says, and you are twisting it into what your original point was before you did any research.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
There isn’t "at least" one rule, there is one rule that supersedes that. And that is if the defense touches the ball. Not offense.
Nothing you have proven or cited says this. I’ll look through the rulebook you linked to.
It’s starting to seem like you are a person who just can’t admit when you’re wrong.
Because I might not be wrong.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
So I was looking to find that rule about the ball being OK to catch if a defender tips it. I found it:
Article 5 Eligible Receivers. The following players are eligible to catch a forward pass that is thrown from behind the line of scrimmage.
…
(d) All other offensive players after the ball has been touched by any defensive player…
And look what is at the end of it!:
(d) All other offensive players after the ball has been touched by any defensive player or any eligible offensive player.
Were you saying something about admitting when I was wrong or something like that? Something about twisting things around so I could be right?
That’s Rule 8, Section 1, Article 5, by the way. It’s page 51 of the rulebook, and page 59 of the PDF.
Eagerly awaiting your reply,
Rufio
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Dear Rufio,
Wait no more. Sorry for the length of time it took me to respond. I went to a Mexican joint called Enchiladas y Mas. I ordered three margaritas (which is the limit) and continued to get relatively hammered in that quaint little Mexican joint. The food was sub par, but I was distracted from the mediocre flavor by the drunken argument I got into with my girlfriend over my insecurities and her somewhat condescending tone (she is attractive and successful and I’m only attractive… albeit very attractive).
Half the reason my food was so mediocre was because I ordered a dish call “Cuervo Enchiladas”. Assuming it contained tequila, I excitedly sat to enjoy my feast. Two margaritas in, I began to lose flavor while my intoxicated taste buds and spirit was being sanded down like a once square pinewood derby car. Turns out “cuervo” was Mexican for crow, which I now realized I ate lots of.
Well done. I concede my argument and crown you the victor. Granted, it took my sources to win; however, you used them better than I did. Also, I was pretty confident I was right (even though if I wasn’t right I would have argued the same until you proved me wrong). So I will say it. Ahem. You were right, I was wrong. My verbose response can only be attributed to the person whose website I will grant as a prize for your victory.
Read this website. It will change your life. Honestly/ Not a rick roll or a virus. Well done.
If I find out you’re wrong in the future, I will hunt you down.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
by David_K on Aug 27, 2011 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
The prequel was top notch.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 27, 2011 2:24 AM EDT up reply actions
this deserves a rec for all the irrelevant awesomeness.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
Did you guys get viruses from that link?
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I checke it out – looks harmless. Bizarre site but kind of funny.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 27, 2011 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions
What? No. Why would I send a virus to someone on a blog that I frequent regularly?
It’s a website by David Thorne- a graphic designer and probably the funniest person on the internet. He posts his funny e-mail correspondences and such because he’s a gigantic a-hole. He usually gives really long, verbose, seemingly irrelevant stories that somehow tie loosely into what he’s trying to say.
Read his first article. Or the pie chart one. You’ll understand.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
I agree with Rufio on this one. I don;t think the push off was that defined. There hands were getting tangled and he was separating. Robi moved inside a little and then took one step back out when he went for the grab. The refs have to let some of this go. This could be Nmandi reputation carrying too far.
I agree completely. I said in the game thread last night that I thought the call on Robi was worse than the one on DQ. After seeing them again, I now think DQs was worse and is inexcusable for NFL caliber refs, but the Robi call was still terrible and bogus when looking at the entire play.
Resident Tim Couch Apologist.
The exact reason you don’t call the penalty.
by Bernie19Kosar on Aug 27, 2011 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
agreed- did you see the td catch by Plaxico Burress against the Bengals last weekend? Same push off, DB lobbying for a call and didn’t get it. Media ignored that aspect as they creamed all over each other about how great Plax is! Bottom line, if that was a big name receiver instead of Robo, no call.
The snozberries taste like snozberries!
Thank you! The last time I checked, players are supposed put their facemask on the numbers when tackling. Total BS on the call.
Even Doug Dieken admits Joe Thomas is the real #73
I said it below and it bears repeating. Laughable call, great play by DQJ. In fact, it was so good I think its worth another look.
Michael, meet D’Qwell Jackson.
Well hello Mr. Vick! The pleasure is all mine! Are you ok – I hope I didn’t hurt you too bad. Can I have your autograph Mr. Vick?
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions 12 recs
The last pic is the only time Vick’s helmet got touched, and if that’s why he got flagged that ref should be fired… out of a cannon into the sun.
cautiously realistic
by North Coast Flea on Aug 26, 2011 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
I’ve watched it about five times and you are exactly right. The only time Vick’s helmet was touched was a slight incidental brushing of facemasks right here when DQJ was lifting himself off of Vick.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
It was a leading with the helmet call. NOT a helmet to helmet call.
Bad call anyways. It was all shoulder.
My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
by Brownie's Year on Aug 26, 2011 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
No, it was a blow to the head call.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I heard contact to the head clear as day.
cautiously realistic
by North Coast Flea on Aug 26, 2011 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions
OT: A little extra “Tide” will get rid of those grass stains on Vick’s ass!
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice there is. -- Yogi Berra
by JustPlainBrowns on Aug 26, 2011 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Not OT at all. Grass stains on opposing QBs asses are entirely on topic and in fact might be worth an entire FanPost at some point if not a feature article.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Can someone please tell me how you cannot lead with your head? No matter what, your head HAS to make contact before the shoulder unless your neck is a 2 feet long and made of rubber.
It’s an on the spot, judge viewing call. With the speed of the game, it’s hard to make a close call in this situation. Only replay showed it wasn’t a violation.
your head HAS to make contact before the shoulder
That’s completely false. I can go on forever with this, but I don’t want to make a fanpost of it.
My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
by Brownie's Year on Aug 26, 2011 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions
If it’s hard to determine then they shouldn’t be calling it on the field. Just give fines later.
You’re supposed to keep your head up when you tackle, If you tackle with your shoulder and you wrap up your head is going to contact the other player.
The head doesn’t hit first if you hit with your shoulder.
My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
by Brownie's Year on Aug 26, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Your head doesn’t always hit the other player…. damn, this is hard to explain.
My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
by Brownie's Year on Aug 26, 2011 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions
The worst part about it is you’re looking at a 14 point swing on those two plays. They scored a touchdown they never should have as a result of the DQJ play, and the Robo catch would have put us at around the 5, where Hardesty or Hillis could have easily punched it in.
Come on Marecic, get in front of the damn ball! Don't give me this "olé" bullsht!
I agree, but as a team you are going to have to overcome calls that you think are bad. We had an opportunity to do just that, but instead we kept killing ourselves with dumb penalties and mistakes. Starting 1st and 25 at our own 5 yard line flat out sucks.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Considering Colt faced the best secondary he’s going to see all year, the officials appeared to be blindfolded, and the playing conditions were less than optimal, I’m going to chuck this game out the window and start looking forward to wiping the floor with the Bungles.
Come on Marecic, get in front of the damn ball! Don't give me this "olé" bullsht!
The irony is that there was helmet contact on the Taylor sack that wasn’t called. The officials just need to keep flags in their pockets if they aren’t 100% sure.
and it was direct, facemask-to-facemask pounding. it wasn’t some glancing blow. i noticed the same thing … was glad they didn’t call it, but maybe that evens out the terrible call on DQ.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know how they view it but I don’t think a facemask should be a part of the helmet to helmet stuff. It’s not as “weapony” as the crown of the helmet.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
by rufio on Aug 26, 2011 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
i tend to agree with you, but that seems like asking too much of the refs. as evidenced by the DQ call, they clearly have enough trouble judging helmet to helmet contact, asking them to differentiate b/w facemask contact and not is asking for trouble.
overall, though, i think this is an example of calls evening out, quite frankly. taylor’s hit on vick was a penalty (by the letter of the law), but it wasn’t called and we recovered a fumble. too bad we sucked ass and couldn’t convert. DQ’s hit on vick was not a penalty, but it kept their drive alive (in the same way as taylor’s hit created a drive for us) and they were good enough to capitalize.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I still don’t have to like it. Call it right both times.
I just think DQ’s hit was a textbook tackle. That’s the film you put on to teach someone how to tackle the right way. Head up, see what you hit, facemask in the numbers, wrap, squeeze, drive, take him to the ground.
If refs don’t know that’s what a textbook tackle looks like and if defensive players can’t do that and make some incidental facemask to facemask contact if they slide up the guy’s body, this league is seriously boned.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Has this been added to our glossary? If not it should be.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
i don’t think you’re wrong, and i don’t like it, either. i’m just saying that you win some and you lose some.
if the refs can’t recognize DQ’s hit as the perfect example of a tackle then there’s really no helping them.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
BS- that’s the kind of reasoning you live with in little league baseball and pop warner football and the NBA. Call the game right with no agendas, and you won’t have to worry about a string of makeup calls!
The snozberries taste like snozberries!
no one said anything about make up calls (which i don’t believe exist in the nfl, really, but that’s a different story). my point is that most games will include several missed calls, that’s human nature, but the missed calls very often even out. hard to get too worked up about a single missed call that we lose out on (DQ), when we got a big benefit from another missed call (Taylor).
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, there will always be human error and that error will probably even out.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
as you said, doesn’t mean we have to like it, but it is the reality.
now, if you’ve read scorecasting (which is pretty good … not quite great), you’d know that there is, in fact, a home team bias amongst referees. over the course of a season, though, every team plays the same number of home games, so presumably that bias evens out for everyone.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions
If they aren’t sure, they should just leave the flag in their pocket. The problem is the NFL is telling them to err the other way. Sucks for us, the fans.
i think on most calls the official would tell you that, at the moment, he (or she) was sure. or as close to sure as he (or she) could have been.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I concur with this likely being the best secondary we’ll see. The d-line pressure from the eagles has alot to do with the secondary coverage.
Best secondary in the league by far.
2010 Official DBN League Fantasy Football Champion
by TheDriveStillHurts on Aug 26, 2011 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Or at least best set of corners; don’t know enough about how their safeties stack up.
2010 Official DBN League Fantasy Football Champion
by TheDriveStillHurts on Aug 26, 2011 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. I am an OSU man, but Coleman isn’t the kind of physical freak others will have at S, and a few of their 2nd round picks still haven’t grown into the players they can be. Best 3 CB combo out there though.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
About that roughing the passer call. . . Is this how it’s going to be from now on? The official thinks he sees something that didn’t occur (in this case helmet-to-helmet contact) and throws a flag? Honestly, they might as well declare that guys are not allowed to hit the quarterback at all. This is going to get very tedious very fast.
I agree. I do not think there was helmet to helmet at all though… it was more helmet to chest. I watched this a few times and I couldn’t see the helmet vs helmet in this play at all.
Brownsyup
Was that what they said it was?
Follow Bleeding Green Nation on Twitter & Facebook. Did you get your copy of the 2011 Eagles Annual yet?
Yes.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Well that’s obviously ridiculous.
Follow Bleeding Green Nation on Twitter & Facebook. Did you get your copy of the 2011 Eagles Annual yet?
Side note: how are you guys feeling about Watkins? The RT who played with the 1s is also a rookie, correct?
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
It was a penalty for leading with his helmet. Not helmet to helmet contact. Still a BS call in my opinion though. Thats about as flush as it gets
by THEbrownsfan on Aug 26, 2011 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
this is how it’s been in every sport that has ever had humans playing and humans officiating.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions
One of my big concerns from this game and the other in which he played was it doesn’t seem like Hillis is very involved with the offense. They should be throwing to him more out of the backfield. I saw him open a few times after squeezing through the first defensive front but McCoy seemed to be looking more down field. The Browns need to involve Hillis more. Hopefully they were saving up his carries and catches for the regular season.
Brownsyup
I saw him open a few times after squeezing through the first defensive front but McCoy seemed to be looking more down field.
This was what I was referring to above. McCoy was looking for (and not finding) open receivers because he didn’t know where to look. Philly did a good job of confusing him with their coverages and instead of coming off of the deep receivers and checking down early (when the check-down has time to make a play) he came down late, and Philly was already moving to the check down.
They’ve shown a little bit of what they plan to do with Hillis, but I wonder how much they are trying to save him from wear and tear in the preseason. SJax still got a lot of carries last year, so I am not that worried. We’ve also had a few nice calls to Peyton where he runs an Arrow route, faking to the flat and coming back to the middle. Not a lot of LBs will be able to hang with him on that.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I think we’re mostly just saving Hillis. He’s a known quantity, and I think our coaches think our running game is a known quantity at this point. They think it will be good, and I’m inclined to agree. It’s also a lot simpler to teach those plays than the pass concepts I bet, so they’re spending more time on the passing game.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I hope so. Like I said, SJax got his, so there is good precedent. But the ZB system takes time to teach and perfect. I know we’ve run those plays in previous years, but if we are really only running IS/OS zone and some draws and maybe the occasional trap or power play, we’d better be damn near perfect in our execution.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Based on practice, Hillis’ involvement in the offense won’t be a concern.
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Aug 26, 2011 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions
I can’t believe we held Vick to 5.4 YPA this game, and I can’t believe Colt completed 50% of his passes. Both stats seemed a lot worse for us.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
It seemed to me that the only passes that Vick was completing were short screens or dump-off passes to his last read (usually McCoy.) I really found it hard to believe they weren’t trying to air it out against Ventrone and Adams. But, we got good pressure up front, so that might have made it hard.
We have met the enemy, and they are ours. - O H Perry
Pashos must be the second fastest lineman in the league. In pass blocking mode before most snaps and the refs never saw him.
A false start then giving up a sack shortly after? Joe Thomas planned that. He needs to act human once in a while to throw us off.
My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
Yeah, there were several times it looked like Pashos jumped back to block well before any of our other linemen did. It must have been timing the snaps to within a fraction of a second.
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Aug 26, 2011 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions
If you listen, Pashos is going off of the count most of the time, and the snap is happening a fraction of a second after Colt finishes the snap count, so Pashos gets moving a little early.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
It’s an old OT trick. Sit a little bit off the line and move a fraction of a second before the call to get leverage.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
you mean like cocaine?
Smile big, hug bigger. Talk big, act bigger. Stop judging do something, shut the fck up do something.
by pwndabear on Aug 26, 2011 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah, like tennis teachers do. This is you on film, you suck. Do it this way.
by mooncamping on Aug 27, 2011 5:30 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I would hope in a real game that Shurmur would go to the run more against a team like Philly. No point trying to pass on the best secondary in the league when you can just run over them.
I think we would have went more to the run also if it wasn’t raining. Easy to get injured there.
2010 Official DBN League Fantasy Football Champion
by TheDriveStillHurts on Aug 26, 2011 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
My guess is that the coaching staff wants to work on the passing game more than the running game.
by Bernie19Kosar on Aug 27, 2011 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m pretty sure this is the case as well. We always run the ball a few times at the beginning just to make sure we know how, and then pretty much abandon it to work on what I assume are more complicated pass plays.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 27, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Overall I think there were more pluses than minuses. Jarret Brown and Quinn Porter look like good depth. We were two bad penalties and two dropped passes (by usually reliable catchers) from beating the “dream team” on the road. There were mistakes, but they will make mistakes from time to time, especially being so young. Talent wise I think we can hang with most teams.
Sheldon Brown accidentally tripping punt returner Jordan Norwood as he was calling for a fair catch
What a bone headed f!#NG play. I had to replay it to make sure I had actually seen what I just saw. WTF Sheldon!!!
It almost seemed like that play threw the whole damn game into a downward spiral for the Browns.
We gave Philly their first touchdown with that play. The officials gave them their second touchdown with the laughable roughing the passer call (with an assist from our linebacker / safety group as Vick and McCoy proceeded to take full advantage of the gift). Hats off to D’Qwell Jackson for a great play and a nice clean hit on Vick.
Our overall strength and depth at linebacker and safety is tantamount to an achilles heel for our team right now. We had no answer for the tandem of Vick and LeSean McCoy. If our d-line hadn’t stepped up nicely last night the Eagles probably would have scored about 59 points in the first half. Thank God Phil Taylor is looking like a worthy #1 pick (and we at least have DQJ backing them up).
I don’t know what to think about what our offense did (er… didn’t do) last night. Can someone tell me what we were trying to do on offense last night? I agree with HenryDawg above – I don’t understand why Hillis only got 3 touches last night. Colt… I’ll give him a C minus. He only escapes a D grade because of the secondary he was facing and because of what seemed to be a discombobulated offensive game plan and because his receivers weren’t much help. On second thought, I give Colt a D. He needs to do better, period. Our o-line didn’t exactly look stellar last night either. And I’m still a little worried about how our right side will hold up this season.
Well, its just preseason though right? Right?
Ok chin up, optimism check. I guess it was Philly’s turn last week, our turn this week, and lets just say it will be the Bears turn next week.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 8:41 AM EDT reply actions
I’d say the blocked FG started the spiral before the botched punt return.
I’ve already commented about Jackson’s clean hit above.
Agreed on Taylor.
I don’t want to comment about the offense. I’m in denial.
I can’t wait to see how our D-line does against the Bears. They let Cutler get hit a lot last year, so we should be able to get good pressure on the QB even once the subs go in.
Even Doug Dieken admits Joe Thomas is the real #73
I just wonder… How much of the offense is due to the game plan for the night? Colt just looked a little like his hands were tied, almost like he didn’t feel as free to do work as he normally has so far this year. I mean, he sat there and picked apart GB in the first game, and they have a pretty good defense too. He just looked really unnatural to me. I wonder if Shurmer really wanted to evaluate that specific part of the passing game, maybe see how our receivers can do against such a solid secondary. But for whatever reason, it just seemed like Colt was a little out of character last night.
by shep615 on Aug 26, 2011 10:19 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
The bottom line is Colt has got to be able to be completely calm back there even if he’s facing the best defense in the NFL and getting constant pressure. He just wasn’t able to settle down – except maybe on the last series / 2 minute drill. Sometimes Colt seems like a paradox. If the line starts collapsing early he has trouble settling in, until the situational pressure hits an extreme point and the offense kicks into hurry up mode, then he starts executing like a machine. I’m probably imagining this but that’s what it seems like sometimes.
Hopefully its just a matter of getting more experience and getting more comfortable and overall thoroughly familiar with the new offense.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
He was pretty good in the 2-minute last year, even in Daboll’s offense.
I just want to see him get better at coming off the first and second read. I think last night we saw him hit his back foot, hitch, hitch again, and then everyone felt the pressure of the ball still being in his hands.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
on his twitter Titus said that he can’t talk about the injury. ugh.
by Les Fleurs Du Mal on Aug 26, 2011 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions
I was upset with the ST play. We can’t afford that kind of self-inflicted game changing screw up. Especially against a team as good as the Eagles, we can’t beat ourselves.
This is one area where I am concerned about the transition from Mangini to Shumur.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
ST and penalties, two “low hanging fruit” areas of the game, are going to take a major hit as a result of this coaching switch AND the lockout delays in practice.
as mangini evidenced, when you’re at a talent deficit in virtually all cases, you have to do the little things right in order to keep things close and win. that’s one of my big fears about this year.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Mangini was very good at making us “hard to beat”.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
he really was. hard to know how good he would have been at making us “winners”, but he sure did make this team fundamentally sound and largely mistake free.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions
With the passing game, it looked like a lot of our usual stuff, but we didn’t seem to respond well to their adaptions. With a lot of our passing game, we are essentially looking to flood the underneath areas and put one guy in a bind where it’s 2 receivers on 1 defender. This works tremendously against Cover-3 and depending on the route and matchup, man-to-man. The Eagles seemed to be flooding the underneath zones a lot either by playing C2, or Man-free with a short zone defender, or by having Nnamdi on an island and rolling coverage the other way.
A lot of the time when we saw Colt try to force the ball short, they just had too many guys in there. Normally if it’s one on one, Colt “throws him open”. When there are two defenders squeezing one guy, you can’t do that.
The normal strategy against C2 would be to attack the safeties and make their MLB try to drop (“Tampa 2”) to cover the deep seam. A vertical stretch on him would be a good idea. Another idea is to go to longer, deeper breaking routes vs. man (corner, deep cross, dig, comeback, etc.) We just need to hit a few big plays (Robiskie, Moore) and they either have to back off or we keep hitting big plays and scoring.
Also, running and making them bring 8 in the box vs. normal people or 7 in the box vs 3-wide limits their coverages.
Credit the Eagles, they made Colt hold onto the ball far too long by either covering extremely well and/or confusing his reads (pre-snap look vs. post-snap movement) and/or by picking one off and breaking his concentration/confidence in what he was seeing.
Anyway, without the benefit of tape and with the emotion of the moment clouding my vision, that’s what I saw.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Also, double moves vs. Asante Samuel. You have to know that guy is going to squat on breaks at about 12 yards, and he did it to get that INT. Well, let him try to do it again and then burn him.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I was a little worried that overconfidence might be a problem after this last week with media across the country stroking the Browns collective egos (well, especially Colt’s). Getting punched in the face (by the Eagles and the zebras) might not be the worst thing. The next two weeks should be all about getting angry and ready to beat the piss out of the Bungles.
by Les Fleurs Du Mal on Aug 26, 2011 10:29 AM EDT reply actions
i think you may be onto something. they needed a little bit of a come back to earth week.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I completely agree with this.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Eagles are not a great football team
In fact they looked awful. The Browns were worse, but if I were an Eagle fan, I would not be happy with what I saw. DO THEY HAVE AN OFFENSIVE LINE? Michael Vick still looks clueless.
This was a step back though for the Browns. But they are young and we can’t expect much. The receivers for the Browns did not seem to be open. I thought the D-Line made some progress.
D’Qwell NICE TACKLE! Note to the Ref, go referee Flag Football.
By the way Robiskie was ripped off too.
I didn’t make it past the subject line on this one.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
DO THEY HAVE AN OFFENSIVE LINE?
I had the same question.
2010 Official DBN League Fantasy Football Champion
by TheDriveStillHurts on Aug 26, 2011 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Eagles fan here-
The Eagles did not look good, you are right. The Eagles don’t normally turn it up until week 4ish as they often get off to slow starts. Let’s keep in mind this is just preseason. This is the time to experiment with back-ups. No one is going all out unless they are on the bubble because no one wants to get hurt. Remember that the Lions went 4-0 in preseason right before they went 0-16 for the regular season. The only thing that matters is individual effort.
Also, terrible call by the ref on the roughing the passer penalty. Good call on the pass interference. That was textbook.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
If by textbook, you mean refs ignore holding by star players and prefer to call penalties on no-names, then you would be correct. If by textbook, the NFL pampers its media darlings for the benefit of the networks, you would again be correct.
That’s a bit much. Corners and receivers get away with holding all the time. If they are both doing it, there’s rarely a call. If one person commits pass interference, that will and should be called every time.
Also, you can’t say pass interference didn’t happen just because Nnamdi held him earlier.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
I’m just saying that it looked like the only reason there was PI was because he was being held and couldn’t separate – should have been a non-call.
I’ll tell you what, the NFL is killing their own product with all these penalties, it really kills the flow of a game.
the nfl has never been more popular … they’re not killing much of anything.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s true. I just hope it doesn’t go in the direction of the NBA where refs insert themselves so much that they start to seem narcissistic. I also hate, hate the new kick off rules.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
“I just hope it doesn’t go in the direction of the NBA where refs insert themselves so much that they start to seem narcissistic.” – TOTALLY agreed.
by Les Fleurs Du Mal on Aug 26, 2011 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
you can’t say pass interference didn’t happen just because Nnamdi held him earlier.
If they are both doing it, there’s rarely a call.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Sigh.
I am confident that you understand but are just being difficult.
There weren’t both doing “it” in this case (it = pass interference). If they both committed P.I., it’s either a no call or a double foul, if they are both holding, it’s either a no call or a double foul. Just because you think you saw Nnamdi hold earlier, doesn’t mean pass interference didn’t exist or shouldn’t have been called. Maybe your idea of “holding” wasn’t aggressive enough to justify a call. The pass interference was. You just can’t say that pass interference wasn’t pass interference because Nnamdi might have held earlier. Am I not being clear?
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
Nnamdi was mugging him all the way down the field. That’s defensive holding, DPI, or illegal contact, take your pick. They were both absolutely "doing ‘it’ " in this case.
The push-off happened, but if you are pushing off of a guy who has a hold of your jersey, the refs should keep the flags in their pockets, IMO.
I don’t know what you don’t understand about this: I am claiming it was a bad/one-sided call because Nnamdi’s coverage warranted a flag too. If the refs want to let em play, then that’s a big completion for us. If they want to call both penalties, we get the play back.
This happened:
If they both committed P.I.
This didn’t:
it’s either a no call or a double foul
Which is why it’s a bad call.
Maybe your idea of "holding" wasn’t aggressive enough to justify a call. The pass interference was.
This ^ is why they made a mistake.
You just can’t say that pass interference wasn’t pass interference because Nnamdi might have held earlier.
Yes I can because this is what should have happened:
it’s either a no call or a double foul
Am I not being clear?
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Yes, you’re being clear. Clearly wrong. (Ha, sorry, I couldn’t help that line).
That’s defensive holding, DPI, or illegal contact, take your pick
Those are three completely different penalties.
Consider this scenario (which is pretty much what happened, but flipped): QB snaps the ball, receiver and corner are holding each other, pushing off, playing physically on a route. That could be called but often times the refs let it play out. So no call yet. All of a sudden, the receiver breaks free, the ball is bombed to him, and the corner has no choice but to tackle the receiver before he touches it or else it will be a touchdown. The ref calls defensive pass interference.
This happens all the time and is perfectly legit. This is why the earlier holding should have no affect on the P.I. call because they are isolated incidents. One was a no-call because it was cancelled out, the other was a one-sided penalty on the corner (or your receiver in our debating purposes).
However, if you are arguing that Nnamdi was committing P.I. at the same time that your receiver pushed off, then ok, I see your point and we’re on the page. I just plain disagree because I didn’t see it.
Are we just complicating things?
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
Those are three completely different penalties.
And any of them could have been called on Nnamdi. He was creating contact 6+yds down the field before the ball was thrown, after the ball was thrown, and some of it was holding.
During the pushoff, Nnamdi was holding/DPIing. That’s why it isn’t like the scenario you present above.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I wish I didn’t have to stream the game online cuz I’d love to go back and review it. You may very well be right. However, those are a lot of penalties on one play not to call.
I’ll concede on this debate because neither of us have film or proof to justify our arguments. Besides, I’m too busy with our other debate above, haha.
"I don’t know whether I prefer Astroturf to grass. I never smoked Astroturf." - Joe Namath
(Nnamdi x reputation) + (ESPN eagles columns on front page) + (Nnamdi x getting burnt) = offensive pass interference on Robo
by Les Fleurs Du Mal on Aug 26, 2011 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 10 recs
+1
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
REC
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
nice to see your intelligence here again…
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
I up go some where where where your happy
"There is a small, but important difference between peeing in the pool and peeing into the pool." - Demitri Martin
by Browns town on Aug 26, 2011 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Eagles fan here-
While neither team played as well as they should have, I felt your defensive line starters did it’s job: Make your presence felt, get to the QB and force him off his game. Your D-line made some impressive hits on Vick(that Pass Interference call was BS). I was impressed with Phil Taylor’s ability as a rookie.
I don’t know what, as the Browns’ fanbase, your expectations are this year; I don’t think you should be expecting playoffs just yet, but I feel like your team showed promise.
"When life hands you lemons, make a profit." - Chet Cashley
Sorry, I meant to say that that Roughing the Passer call was BS
and that Pass Interference call was borderline; could have gone either way, and IMO both players were shoving and should have been a no-call.
"When life hands you lemons, make a profit." - Chet Cashley
by Ralf E Chubbs on Aug 26, 2011 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Appreciate the comments Ralf. I think most of us are expecting to be slightly under .500 this year or close to it. However, the optimistic side of us are hoping for the opposite, .500 or slightly over. I don’t think any of us are expecting playoffs this year.
"They kept throwing it at me. I don’t know why. They just kept trying, and I just kept knocking it down." -- Joe Haden
PLAYOFFS?!???
Smile big, hug bigger. Talk big, act bigger. Stop judging do something, shut the fck up do something.
Holy crap ESPN just said something positive about the Browns. I think I’m going to pass out.
by HenryDawg on Aug 26, 2011 12:15 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
what? That they have the best unis in the league?
by Les Fleurs Du Mal on Aug 26, 2011 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Bruskie said that. Not ESPN.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I believe he was on ESPN when he said that, and they guy standing next to him said it as well I think (no sound, just subtitles).
He was just overtoning what he said and it was Bruskie’s opinion on SC.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
And?
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions
And…positive things have been being said on ESPN by ESPN analysts and then reiterated by ESPN anchormen. Thus, making the statement, “ESPN just said something positive about the Browns” a valid statement.
And…your a condesending lil’___, that ‘gets off’ on antagonizing and instigating discontent. But as usual, I’m not saying anything you didn’t already know.
And…that is all, for now. lol Keep up the good work.
by DawgsNHawgs on Aug 27, 2011 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
As the resident Robiskie apologist I’d like to point out that he had a pretty good game this week.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 3:35 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
I agree.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah, especially that sweet 43 yard catch on Nmamdi. Oh, wait . . . .
by Les Fleurs Du Mal on Aug 26, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Being thrown to makes a good week?
My dog is a badass. His name is Kosar.
by Brownie's Year on Aug 26, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
They were all damn there screen passes. No deeper than 5 yards off the LOS
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions
3rd-5, CLE30 3:16 C. McCoy passed to B. Robiskie to the left for 11 yard gain
1st-10, CLE41 2:41 C. McCoy passed to B. Robiskie to the left for 7 yard gain
Back to back plays, both on routes deeper than five yards. Yes I remember each play.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Before you get snarky, yes they were both short routes. But they were not anything like screen passes.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I said his passes were 5 yards off the LOS which is obviously as approximate amount, but they were as shallow as a screen pass and he stumbled for YAC afterwards.
His YPC for all his passes were 7.7 which is bad. Even with those two you mentioned it was still only 9 ypc. Can’t give the man kudos for running 5 yards, catching a sideways pass and stumbling for whatever yac was available.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I can’t believe I’m asking this, because I’m sure you’re just pretending, but do you really not know what a screen pass is?
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
You know that just because the play went for 9 yards doesn’t mean that the actually pass was caught 9 yards from the LOS right?
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions
So if this is true and they were Screen passes, then that means that Robo did really well to get that yardage on consecutive screen plays then right? More than just stumbling for YAC.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I never said he didn’t get some YAC, and you can say they were all short routes if you want, because that’s true.
But they were nothing like screen passes, and you know that.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions
So are screen passes not shallow? I’m not saying they were screen screen passes by design, but they were shallow catches which got yac, like a darn screen pass.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions
So, you have no idea what a screen pass is.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
by rufio on Aug 26, 2011 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I said his passes were 5 yards off the LOS
as shallow as a screen pass
these are 2 completely contradictory statements. screen passes are generally throws where the pass was behind the LOS. This is billick diagrammng 2 different types of screens. This is a bubble screen. This is a Jailbreak screen. This is a screen to the TE. In all of these, the catch is behind the LOS. while you can’t see it on the last one, you can see the TE go in motion running behind where the offensive line lined up and then he is back on the screen with the ball.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
The distinction doesn’t matter. Yards gained is yards gained. Whether your job is to run a post or to catch the screen and run, the team is looking to gain yards through you as an eligible receiver.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I agree, but I was just pointing out to TLP that it seems like he has no idea what a screen pass is in the first place. If you throw a screen pass at the LOS and the guy gets 10 YAC or if its a 10 yard pass, its the same end result. the name of the game is moving the chains and both have an equal effect
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
7.7 YPC is making first downs, moving the ball, moving us into scoring position, and gaining “expected points”.
It’s also giving us a solid 2.5 yards of passing premium on our running game.
We run a WCO, and any way you stack the numbers that’s efficient offense that will move the chains.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
So if I was to look at every other team in the NFL that run a WCO, their WR’s would have YPC’s on average lower than everyone else, and round 7.7?
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions
1. SSS
2. Maybe not, but if they were in a ball-controll-passing offense making 3/4 catches at 7 yards a pop, they couldn’t complain about making first downs, getting in to scoring territory, gaining expected points, getting a good passing premium on the added risk of passing over their running game, etc.
If we score, do you really care what routes the WRs are running or whether or not they are “gamebreakers”? I don’t. If Philly wants to clog the deep stuff and force Colt to check down all night, I’ll take it as long as we are getting 7.7 yds/catch being efficient, and moving the ball.
Clearly that wasn’t the case for the entire offense, but it’s hard to look at Robi and single him out for the offense’s poor performance. He did his job—and he drew double/bracket coverage.
You are taking a stat with an extremely limited sample size and trying to make a case that a guy is a horrible receiver…well on those plays he did his job and he did it pretty well. No one is waiting for him to transform into Andre Johnson.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
by rufio on Aug 26, 2011 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
he is horrible, but not for the reasons TLP is putting forth here.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions
This is your opinion to have, but he had a solid game against the Eagles even without considering my thoughts on the penalty. Again, though, SSS.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
i just wasn’t sure if you guys had a handle on my opinion of robiskie and his fellow receivers. wanted to clarify…
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I believe “horrible, waste of picks, should be cut, not NFL caliber” is ballpark?
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
DCMJ correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the only one you left out was “sucks hard”.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 26, 2011 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions
you’ve both scratched the surface…
(by the way, little gets an “incomplete” for now … versus the “epic fail” that the rest of ’em get)
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions
You think our WR’s suck? I can’t believe I missed that.
by Bernie19Kosar on Aug 27, 2011 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
You are taking a stat with an extremely limited sample size and trying to make a case that a guy is a horrible receiver
When have I ever made that point throughout this entire debate? The original point was the fact that just because he had 3 catches doesn’t indicate a good performance for the fact that they were shallow passes where he barely ran a route.
And regardless, tbqh what you’re saying about a 7.7 ypc is simply not true. If Robo was the #2 WR and only got 7.7 ypc all of last year, he would be one of only 2 starting players in the entire NFL with a YPC under ten. Almost every WR, no matter how bad the team was or the type of offense, had YPC over 10 and the only position which didn’t is the RB. even #4-5 WR’s had at least 9
So even if I was debating the point in which you set forth in which I wasn’t, I don’t see how in the world 7.7ypc would be any less bad on a WCO than any other offense. It just doesn’t make sense, “getting yards and moving chains” is the same no matter the gameplan and 7.7 would be extremely sub-par
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions
tbqh
does this mean something in internet speak or is it a typo? i’m asking sincerely.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions
When have I ever made that point throughout this entire debate?
You’ve made it previously.
The original point was the fact that just because he had 3 catches doesn’t indicate a good performance for the fact that they were shallow passes where he barely ran a route.
Actually your original point was a little unclear:
They were all damn there screen passes. No deeper than 5 yards off the LOS
And really, what I am trying to say is that it doesn’t matter if he “barely runs a route” or only catches screens because he’s open and gaining yards.
I don’t see how in the world 7.7ypc would be any less bad on a WCO than any other offense.
It’s no less bad, it’s no less good, it’s still not all that important. It’s about efficiency: if we move the ball, gain yards and get first downs, we don’t have to be racking up high YPC totals.
Often teams with high YPC are taking shots downfield and throwing more incomplete passes. Teams can throw short and be just as efficient as long as they connect more often.
In other words, YPC doesn’t make Robi “sub par”, nor does it make him “good”. Contributing to the offense, gaining yards, getting first downs, and catching the ball when it’s thrown to him means he’s doing a good job in our offense. He did that.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
If Robo had a YPC of 7.7, it would be half the average of every other WR in the league. It would be the lowest in the entire NFL. So what you’re saying right now is that if Robo had the worst stats in the league, he would not be one of the worst WR’s in the league. Does that make any sense to you?
You’re speaking theoretically in order to save Robo, but theory doesn’t mean crap on the football field
If you’re starting RB only got 2.5 ypc, they would still get a first down if you give them the ball 4 straight down theoretically. And if he played for Cleveland you would probably say he’s solid the same way you’re defending Robo. But realistically he would be a bad RB.
The only way Robo could have done less than what he did yesterday would be if he dropped every pass that was thrown to him. I think it makes more sense to have higher standards for an NFL WR making a couple mill a year.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions
So what you’re saying right now is that if Robo had the worst stats in the league, he would not be one of the worst WR’s in the league. Does that make any sense to you?
If it’s an irrelevant stat, yes, it absolutely makes sense. Drew Brees had zero yards while passing in the state of Hawaii during the regular season.
You’re speaking theoretically in order to save Robo, but theory doesn’t mean crap on the football field
Catching balls does.
If you’re starting RB only got 2.5 ypc, they would still get a first down if you give them the ball 4 straight down theoretically. And if he played for Cleveland you would probably say he’s solid the same way you’re defending Robo. But realistically he would be a bad RB.
If he averages 2.5 yards on 3rd/4th down and < 2, I’d say that he has a pretty damn good success rate, actually. If he averaged 2.5 YPC between the 20s on 1st and 2nd down, yeah that’s not good.
And YPCarry ≠ YPCatch. You are comparing two completely different stats; one of them I think is borderline useless. The other can sometimes help tell the story of the game.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
If Robo was the #2 WR and only got 7.7 ypc all of last year, he would be one of only 2 starting players in the entire NFL with a YPC under ten
tbqh, Robi won’t have to face Nnamdi in every game he plays in
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
Actually, I heard that in the WCO there are a lot of short passes. Maybe the Browns will play a WCO this year.
"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 Aug 26, 2011 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I need some proof of this
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
now you’re trolling
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Intensive Purposes? I could care less...
your whole argument is a fallacy!
did we end up w/ a robiskie bet? i feel as confident as ever that he (and all the receivers) stinks.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I made one with somebody. I forget though.
Pittsburgh is just jealous. We got Cudi and they have Wiz.
by SpecialBrownie on Aug 26, 2011 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it was sixty catches, but I kind of wish I had set the bar slightly lower, like 45 or something. But a bet is a bet.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I think your problem will be that we’ll be spreading the ball around a lot more than teams like Texas who throw everything to one guy. Personally I prefer having a group of wide receivers and tight ends who can catch consistently over a beast receiver who can beat double teams. I just think it gives you more flexibility and options but I wouldn’t mind having Johnson either.
I think it will play out this way too. But you never know. Someone has to catch it. And win or lose I think we’ll be throwing a lot.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
This is basically what I’m banking on.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 27, 2011 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions
BJax’s turf toe is a more serious injury than most people think. It will keep him out a while and/or bother him all season. That puts a lot of pressure on Hardesty’s health.
Now Steinbach might have a herniated disc.
And apparently no one on the team has any hamstrings.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
i thought hardesty looked horrible. tentative, slow, non-explosive. i realize it’s his first game back in, like, a decade; and it’s only 3 or 4 carries, or whatever; but if his running style doesn’t change pretty quickly then we’ve waited a long time for nothing. his success last night was the o-line’s success.
hurry back, bjax.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
well that is shit.
injuries on a bad team are really not good news.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions
We are a 5-11 team until we prove otherwise.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
The last 2 years we were 5-11, but we were better last year than the year before right? I don’t think we were a bad team last year, just an improving team who lost a lot of close games to a lot of good teams.
All I am saying is we have to do it on the field. This year’s story hasn’t been written yet.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
There are a lot of teams who are better than they were last year. The only teams that have regressed or remained stagnant are Cincy, Ten and Seattle
by The Licensed Pessimist on Aug 26, 2011 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Tennessee got better, assuming CJ2K is in the line-up.
by Bernie19Kosar on Aug 27, 2011 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
mkc twitter:
Docs trying to determine if #Browns guard Eric Steinbach needs back surgery to repair a disc, source told PD. He’ll know more in few days.
that is terrible news.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions
He looked like James Davis. That’s not horrible by any stretch, but it also isn’t worth a second round pick.
I think you have to give him a break for a while, until he can be confident in his legs.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Typical of first year back from ACL injuries- you can usually tell that they are not confident in their own repaired joint. Wes Welker was not the same last year (although he ended up with a lot of Tds). J Finley (GB TE) will probably play tentatively this year too. IF Hardesty (and apparently BJax too) can get healthy, maybe they can contribute second half of season. Lots of Hillis first 8 weeks or so.
The snozberries taste like snozberries!
He looked like James Davis. That’s not horrible by any stretch
come on, man. is james davis even on an nfl roster right now? he of the 28 career carries? james davis is terrible. you are right, unfortunately, that hardesty looked plenty like davis … and that’s bad.
i’m willing to be a little patient as hardesty gets his confidence back post-injury(s), but he’d better find that quick if we’re going to get anything out of him this year (or any year).
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions
wow … that’s BRUTAL, man. how you gonna play me like that?
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Like the other games there was good and bad, the bad was just worse this week. The injuries to our safeties worry me.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 26, 2011 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
well said. they need to get healthy, and they need to work on the details … ST, penalties, etc.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Anybody else scratching their head after the 4th down reverse by the Eagles? That was a bit of trickery I thought a team would save for the regular season.
All-in-all, it was a good PRE- season game. The Browns rotated through a lot of different plays and players. I get the sense that McCoy is registering and processing all of the looks and outcomes. And he coaches are giving him everything in the book. Really, did the Browns repeat any play in the first half?
Ten days from now Colt will have experienced a large part of the playbook and can focus on prepping to beat the Bengals.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Aug 26, 2011 6:26 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Anybody else scratching their head after the 4th down reverse by the Eagles? That was a bit of trickery I thought a team would save for the regular season.
They probably just wanted to see if it would work. I figured if they want to run that stuff in the preseason, let em. It’s a good coaching point for our DEs, who were getting abused because they were going after the passer so much.
If we are going to turn them loos (not a bad idea, IMO) we need to make up for it structurally elsewhere. We didn’t.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
That’s exactly what I was thinking. We’ve been burned by a reverse 2 weeks in a row. Jauron needs to fix that. In fact the areas that I guess you call “out in the flat” have been wide open for everyone – why is that?
It depends on our front and our run fit. Sometimes the player that is supposed to “contain” (actually called a “force” player) is an end, other times a LB, other times a DB.
On the reverse, I thought it was the DE and he simply was out of position. He thought he saw run left, he wasn’t disciplined so he crashed down the line instead of holding the edge on the backside. It wasn’t a run to the left, it was a reverse, so he got burned.
There were other plays where I saw DEs coming inside the OT (I believe both of the QB TD runs and maybe a McCoy run). I don’t know if they were simply trying to get to the passer too hard and not holding their gap (similar to the scenario above) or if there was supposed to be another player out there, sort of like a “switch” with the LB going outside while the DE goes inside (this is called a “scrape exchange”).
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Thanks that helps a lot. I was trying to figure out if when they went inside if the OLB was responsible for contain and it sounds like he probably would. So one of them, either the DE or the OLB is making a mistake most likely and that’s easier to fix than just a bad scheme.
Agreed on the point about a great learning opp for our D. Our DEs need to experience these plays to react better – and no better play than that.
I don’t buy it for the Eagles though. They know it will work, so why bother showing it in pre-season? Coaches don’t test trick plays in pre-season and I consider a reverse on 4th down a bit of trickery.
A good thing for the Browns to experience and let’s hope Jauron is using it to his advantage in the film room. Again, returning to my point, this was a great game for giving the team a lot to experience and prepare for. We really won’t know if any of this matters for another 15 days… The proof is in the pudding.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Aug 27, 2011 12:22 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Our contain was bad most of the game.
Showing a trick play in that situation gives opponents something to think about when they are studying film on the eagles. Then when they just dive Vick one way or another there will be less resistance.
The snozberries taste like snozberries!
I think our contain has been bad most of the preseason.
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
— Winston S. Churchill
so much of this is a function of the truncated pre-season. switching both offensive and defensive systems in such a compressed timeframe is really a recipe for ugliness.
i will say, though, that i’m glad they’re getting it all out of the way this year. i’m willing to suffer a year of pain in order to get things going the right direction all at once next season. i don’t know enough to know if i prefer a WCO, 3-4, 4-3, etc., but since they’ve made these decisions i’m glad they’re starting all at once.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 26, 2011 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Here's the thing
I didn’t rewatch the tape or anything but it looked like Robo fully extended his arm( i could be wrong). No matter what that’s going to get a flag from the offense as opposed to guys who don’t fully extend elbows..
eiter way we’re arguing about a pre season bad call, which is like arguing about if oprah or whoopie goldberg is hotter.
As far the eagles. sure they looked bad, but we hit the playoffs 8 out of the past 10 years, im betting we’ll be just fine..
But again i respect the browns fan base a)cause they cant stomach the steelers and b0 any fan base that sticks around to their team during the rough times. you guys would shit at all the so-called “hardcore phillies fans” we have around here
JoeD AKA The Voice Of Reason
And Nnamdi grabbed jersey, which usually gets a defensive penalty. If you don’t want to argue about the call, then don’t. No one is forcing you.
I don’t think anyone said the Eagles looked bad, and if they did they were wrong. Maybe you didn’t look great, but we looked a LOT worse. You wiped the floor with our 1s and we made it respectable with our 3s.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I just dont thin you can judge any team by preseason
guys are getting shuffled..calls are vanilla..etc
Fine I’ll give you that a call easily could’ve been made on nnamdi, it wasn’t a great call, but like i said, meaningless game, who cares…
JoeD AKA The Voice Of Reason
Only when she’s in her skinny phase.
cautiously realistic
by North Coast Flea on Aug 26, 2011 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions
you sure set the bar high on that one.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 27, 2011 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions
i want to go back to a positive (henrydawg just destroyed me up above…): phil taylor looked like shaun rogers of 2008 last night. the guy was occupying blockers, blowing single-teams up, scaring the people with the ball, and generally creating havoc. that was great to see, as it wasn’t clear to me that he was going to be able to pick up his 4-3 role that quickly.
I have to concur with this.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice there is. -- Yogi Berra
by JustPlainBrowns on Aug 26, 2011 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow, me being a dick actually had a positive influence?
by HenryDawg on Aug 26, 2011 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Here’s another thing to get excited about – Colt made three long throws that were absolutely pinpoint perfect. Two were dropped by guys who don’t usually drop and the third was a highly questionable PI call. If we convert those plays (and we have been more often than not) we’re up 21-7 with a minute left in the first quarter.
I think he may be starting to pacify some of those with serious concerns about his arm. But I hope gets to a point soon where he’s more calm in the pocket against elite defenses.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 27, 2011 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
I want to see him on a blitz standing there like robocop with feet planted, looking like he just took a xanax, surveying the field calmly while there is a guard pushing through a gap closing in and an end broken free flying toward him from his left, fire a pass on the money a quarter second before getting nailed, knowing he was going to get nailed. That’s Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady. They’re like robots with no fear standing in the pocket. I want to see that out of McCoy. I think he’ll get there one day. It may take a while, but I believe he has it in him.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 27, 2011 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
a guard pushing through a gap
a tackle pushing through a gap
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 27, 2011 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Eh it might be good for him to have a healthy respect for getting smashed. He’s not a fat blob like Rothlisberger so defenders aren’t going to bounce off one of this three chins. A little happy feet keeps QBs playing longer. Manning almost never gets sacked and he has a fairly average to bad OL.
Oh I think he’s got plenty of experience and plenty healthy respect for getting smashed. The robocop metaphor is probably a little over exaggeration, but lets just say I think there are times he needs to settle down a bit more. I don’t have a problem with him rolling out, scrambling, etc. because he is good at it. It just seems like he’s still not quite to the point where he feels completely comfortable in the pocket against great defenses – yet. Emphasis on yet because I think he’ll get there with a bit more experience.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 27, 2011 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Someone cue Fountains of Wayne…
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Aug 27, 2011 12:24 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I was thinking something more along the lines of Black Sabbath. Or maybe Pink Floyd / Fearless.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 27, 2011 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
So, basically, you’re hoping for the exact opposite of that interception throw … Which was terrible.
by DontCallMeJoey on Aug 27, 2011 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, exactly right.
Go, I say go away boy, you bother me.
by burntorangeandbrown on Aug 27, 2011 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I would just like to see him get the ball out before he takes big hits. Taking hits and getting the ball out is admirable, but I don’t want my franchise getting hit unless he absolutely has to.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Very pumped about Taylor. Dude was a wrecking ball last night.
Didn’t like seeing Tuba get pushed 15 yards downfield on the TD run by Brown though.
by Bernie19Kosar on Aug 27, 2011 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ve actually been very surprised by Sheard. He makes a lot of rookie mistakes, but he looks like he belongs on an NFL football field.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools" -Hemingway
by notthatnoise on Aug 27, 2011 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Agree. Like the fact that he has more than one pass rush move.
by Bernie19Kosar on Aug 27, 2011 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I was worried about his quickness vs. left tackles. He’s calmed me down a little, but now needs to be able to play with that burst but still under control enough to play the run. I think he’s probably swimming a little in the playbook too, despite playing one of the easier positions in the 4-3.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
What has happened to our special teams…I know Cribbs is having nagging injuries, but he doesn’t hold for field goals. There is also no excuse for two fumbles/ Could we be missing Brad Sealy this much already?
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.
Related FanPosts on Dawgs By Nature
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow DBN on Twitter
Browns Links
Local Media Sources
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities/Blogs
The Watercooler
Waiting for Next Year
Dawg Scooper
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
