Just watching Balt./Pitt Defense

[Soju]

Yea I could catch heat for this, but I wish the Brownies could play stifling defense like this. They routinely get into the backfield, and stuff runners for little to no gain, make sacks. What does it come down to? Talent? Coaching? I just wish the Browns had this type of fearsome Defensive attack.

[Richiswhere]

Yea I could catch heat for this, but I wish the Brownies could play stifling defense like this. They routinely get into the backfield, and stuff runners for little to no gain, make sacks. What does it come down to? Talent? Coaching? I just wish the Browns had this type of fearsome Defensive attack.

[Soju]

thats what i thought. I thought maybe the blitzing schemes and what not also though. They always seem to draft the same, tough, rugged guys though. Its like they're all clones.

Watching that first game against Pitt and the Browns was scary. We couldn't get jack against their D line, no push, Hillis couldnt get anywhere and they were always in our backfield. We need some firey guys like that.

[miktoxic]

We need some firey guys like that.

 

imagine playing aside ray lewis (as much as i despise him) and taking a play or two off. HE'D kick your ass! both teams defensive strength and conditioning are off the charts.

[Buck The Frowns]

Yea I could catch heat for this, but I wish the Brownies could play stifling defense like this. They routinely get into the backfield, and stuff runners for little to no gain, make sacks. What does it come down to? Talent? Coaching? I just wish the Browns had this type of fearsome Defensive attack.

Both are brutal defenses, and both teams seem to turn it up a notch or so when they play each other. Unfortunate that the Browns have to play them both twice a year. In Pgh's case, they draft well despite generally low draft choices and have that apprenticeship period of several years. If they find out they can play, they play them. If they can't play, they let them go.

[miktoxic]

If they find out they can play, they play them. If they can't play, they let them go.

brilliant!!

[Buck The Frowns]

brilliant!!

What I meant was, they seem to know when to let a player go. Most players don't have a lot left when they leave Pittsburgh. A few play well after leaving but that is the exception rather than the rule.

[The Gipper]

It's talent within a system. As you pointed out, the Steelers draft guys who fit their system. You have to have guys who are not only talented enough, but smart enough, to know when to call certain schemes. For example, the defensive play caller on the field may call what he thinks will work but he doesn't realize that the talent on the field can't execute it.

 

The Brown's problem is two fold:

1. They are always looking for that "diamond in the rough" coach or GM

 

2. Because they don't hire proven coaches and front office people, the system has to be built from the ground up. And the media and fans of Cleveland won't allow the time required to "see" if that system is good enough to compete.

 

Right now the Browns have a "little bit" of a system working and only time will tell if that system is good, bad, mediocre, etc.........the million dollar question? Will the media and fans of Cleveland give the system the time required?

 

 

Stone, we have had certain disagreements on things, but here I think a lot of what you say is fairly right on.

 

The Steelers do have talent within their system of defense. As you know, I think your most valuable asset on your team is your defensive coordinator. I think he gets guys that play really well in his system. They are talented enough and bright enough, but there measure would probably not be nearly the same in most other systems. A few might be, like Polamalu, but overall they work far better in LeBeau's system than they would elsewhere.

 

Also, yes, I think the Browns are developing a system. There are guys that are fitting in, but they definitely need an infusion of more talent on both offense and defense. Though this year it is obvious that the Browns can essentially play with anyone, they are not to the point yet where they can dominate most everyone. They can beat most teams by 3-4 points, but they can also lose to most teams by 3-4 points. (witness of course their losses by 3, 2, 7, 10, 18, 6, 4 points. Wins by 3, 1, 3, 13, 20....the latter couple against two of the best teams in the league I would readily admit to being aberrations).

 

As for the comment that the Browns don't hire proven coaches and front office people, I would say that in comparing them say to the Steelers they are no different there. When the Steelers chose Noll, Cowher and Tomlin, none of them were proven head coaches. They were all "diamonds in the rough". They turned out to be good head coaches, but they by no means were proven to be so.

The Browns have taken some of those same chances...with mixed results at best. At one time they chose an unproven HC who went on to have losing seasons in 4 of his 5 seasons here. Not so good, right? His name was Bill Belichick. Marty Schottenheimer was also a diamond in the rough they took a chance on. That one turned out OK.

In a sense, Mangini is the only "proven" HC they have ever hired. He had 2 winning seasons with the Jets before coming here. That is a better track record than any HC they have ever acquired since Paul Brown.

But, yes, they have certainly gotten burned when their HC and GM choices have not panned out. From Dwight Clark to Phil Savage to Butch Davis to Romeo Crennel to Chris Palmer they have all been disappointments.

 

Now, perhaps with "proven" front office people: Holmgren was GM of a team that went to the SB. Heckert was GM of a team that went to the SB. Mangini is a HC that took a team to the playoffs a couple of time; they will have that quality in place.

 

And FYI, it won't matter what the fans and the media think. The fans and media have no control over the time the system is given to become successful. That all comes from one man: Randy Lerner.

[The Gipper]

Good discussion

 

A couple minor disagreements:

 

I should have pointed out "ownership" The difference between the diamonds in the rough for Pittsburgh and Cleveland are that the decisions in Pittsburgh were made a by an owner who knew what he was doing, and stuck with his commitments. Let's face it, Bruce Arians is the worst OC in the NFL and Tomlin hired him......... and keeps him.......but the system covers up a lot of bad shit!

 

The coaches who failed in Cleveland and went on to succeed elsewhere?.....Again ownership who was capable of knowing what they had.

 

And I disagree that the media and fans don't play a role. This is not a jab okay? The media and fans in Cleveland don't know what it takes to make a winning organization and thus they scream bloody murder when "the Browns don't win right now" and then the ownership caves in to the pressure.

 

The bottom line is that it pretty much boils down to ownership, but then again, (no matter how much it bothers you) the former ownership of the former Browns succeeded pretty quickly in Baltimore.

 

Except I disagree with that last point. The beneficial owner of the Baltimore Ravens at the time the Ravens won their title was already Steven Biscotti. He had already paid for the 49% of the ownership, and had the deal in place where the full ownership would be turned over in a few years. Modell was essentially a caretaker at that point. Biscotti was already having his input into the operations and management of the team at that point. He said he was staying in the background but he had already seen how Modell screwed things up financially with that team so he didn't want to take a chance at a devaluation of his investment. Perhaps the one thing Modell did do maybe in concert with Biscotti was to turn over complete football operations to Ozzie Newsome. Any credit for that teams success should go to him. I will only agree that Modell didn't muck that up....though, in a certain sense he may actually have. When he was here with Belichick, BB wanted to be that designated "Head of Football Operations". Modell had contemplated elevating Ozzie to that position but didn't do so when BB objected. Only after the whole mess with "the move" went down and Modell decided he didn't want the morose Belichick to be the face of his franchise in a new town and thus firing him as HC did he then elevate Newsome to the top football job.

[The Gipper]

Wow!.........That's a stretch even for you!

 

You can't possibly believe that load of spun up crap? Can you? Come on man, we were having a good discussion?

 

 

There is no spin here. This is the absof88ckinglute truth. Biscotti's purchase of the Ravens was done early in the year 2000 after Modell was forced by the league to sell. He essentially began calling the shots at that point. Modell was a mere caretaker.

Also, are you arguing the point that Ozzie Newsome was the primary architect of that Ravens championship?

[The Gipper]

You are making a ton of assumptions because they fit the story you want to believe but the bottom line is that once out of the clutches of Cleveland, it didn't take long "under a system" to build a winner. Which supports my comment a few posts ago about the media and fans of Cleveland influencing the "Browns" decisions. In Baltimore, they "knew" a winner would not happen overnight.

 

Talk about making wild ass assumptions. You are assuming that the "system" they put in place in Baltimore would have been somehow different than if they stayed in Cleveland...just because it was not in Cleveland. The "system" that was put in place was there because Biscotti bought the team and because it was turned over to Ozzie Newsome...just as I have said.

And if the fans and the media had such awesome power over the decision making of of the ownership of the Cleveland Browns....why then did Modell attempt to move the team.....contrary to that omnipotence of the Cleveland fans and media?

 

As evidence I offer you the numerous idiotic threads and posts here about McCoy being better than Roethlisberger, the Browns winning out, the Browns making the playoffs, The Browns shoulda woulda coulda BS, on and on. Even if the noticable improvement of the Browns is the real deal, it will take several more years before they are "a good NFL team" because a good team is not one who makes a 1-2 year run and slides back to the basement like the Browns of the 80's did.

 

So? You really think that Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert are going to listen to some dude on a chat board that thinks the Colt McCoy is better than BR right now? Are you really that dumb?

And where did you learn your Browns history? The Browns were the dominant team in the AFC North/Central...whatever it was then in the latter part of the 80s. They didn't have a 1 or 2 year run then fall back. (That might have only applied to the 1980 team under Rutigliano).

As for whether or not it will take several more years, that totally remains to be seen. The Pats were 4-12 in 2001.....to the Super Bowl the next year, and they have been the dominant team in the NFL ever since.

Certainly they have been able to sustain their excellence...so it can be done. for every team, yes, sustainability is an issue.

 

[miktoxic]

You are making a ton of assumptions because they fit the story you want to believe but the bottom line is that once out of the clutches of Cleveland, it didn't take long "under a system" to build a winner. Which supports my comment a few posts ago about the media and fans of Cleveland influencing the "Browns" decisions. In Baltimore, they "knew" a winner would not happen overnight.

 

Talk about making wild ass assumptions. You are assuming that the "system" they put in place in Baltimore would have been somehow different than if they stayed in Cleveland...I'm not assuming, I'm letting several decades of history speak for itself, I realize facts don't set well with you.....sorry about your luck!. just because it was not in Cleveland. The "system" that was put in place was there because Biscotti bought the team and because it was turned over to Ozzie Newsome...just as I have said.

And if the fans and the media had such awesome power over the decision making of of the ownership of the Cleveland Browns....why then did Modell attempt to move the team.....contrary to that omnipotence of the Cleveland fans and media? Ummmmm, because he was smart enough to leave the shithole and it's fans who don't have a clue, and go to a place where he would have a chance to build a team? Gee.......that's just a guess?

As evidence I offer you the numerous idiotic threads and posts here about McCoy being better than Roethlisberger, the Browns winning out, the Browns making the playoffs, The Browns shoulda woulda coulda BS, on and on. Even if the noticable improvement of the Browns is the real deal, it will take several more years before they are "a good NFL team" because a good team is not one who makes a 1-2 year run and slides back to the basement like the Browns of the 80's did.

 

So? You really think that Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert are going to listen to some dude on a chat board that thinks the Colt McCoy is better than BR right now? Are you really that dumb?

And where did you learn your Browns history? The Browns were the dominant team in the AFC North/Central...whatever it was then in the latter part of the 80s. They didn't have a 1 or 2 year run then fall back. (That might have only applied to the 1980 team under Rutigliano). After the 4 year run of winning seasons the Browns had in the late 80 they returned to 3-13 and pretty much stayed in the basement since. And to answer your question, I got it from the Browns web site.

As for whether or not it will take several more years, that totally remains to be seen. The Pats were 4-12 in 2001.....to the Super Bowl the next year, and they have been the dominant team in the NFL ever since.

Certainly they have been able to sustain their excellence...so it can be done. for every team, yes, sustainability is an issue.

 

you sir, are a big christmas turd.

 

[bringbackbrownie2]

You are making a ton of assumptions because they fit the story you want to believe but the bottom line is that once out of the clutches of Cleveland, it didn't take long "under a system" to build a winner. Which supports my comment a few posts ago about the media and fans of Cleveland influencing the "Browns" decisions. In Baltimore, they "knew" a winner would not happen overnight.

 

Talk about making wild ass assumptions. You are assuming that the "system" they put in place in Baltimore would have been somehow different than if they stayed in Cleveland...I'm not assuming, I'm letting several decades of history speak for itself, I realize facts don't set well with you.....sorry about your luck!. just because it was not in Cleveland. The "system" that was put in place was there because Biscotti bought the team and because it was turned over to Ozzie Newsome...just as I have said.

And if the fans and the media had such awesome power over the decision making of of the ownership of the Cleveland Browns....why then did Modell attempt to move the team.....contrary to that omnipotence of the Cleveland fans and media? Ummmmm, because he was smart enough to leave the shithole and it's fans who don't have a clue, and go to a place where he would have a chance to build a team? Gee.......that's just a guess?

As evidence I offer you the numerous idiotic threads and posts here about McCoy being better than Roethlisberger, the Browns winning out, the Browns making the playoffs, The Browns shoulda woulda coulda BS, on and on. Even if the noticable improvement of the Browns is the real deal, it will take several more years before they are "a good NFL team" because a good team is not one who makes a 1-2 year run and slides back to the basement like the Browns of the 80's did.

 

So? You really think that Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert are going to listen to some dude on a chat board that thinks the Colt McCoy is better than BR right now? Are you really that dumb?

And where did you learn your Browns history? The Browns were the dominant team in the AFC North/Central...whatever it was then in the latter part of the 80s. They didn't have a 1 or 2 year run then fall back. (That might have only applied to the 1980 team under Rutigliano). After the 4 year run of winning seasons the Browns had in the late 80 they returned to 3-13 and pretty much stayed in the basement since. And to answer your question, I got it from the Browns web site.

As for whether or not it will take several more years, that totally remains to be seen. The Pats were 4-12 in 2001.....to the Super Bowl the next year, and they have been the dominant team in the NFL ever since.

Certainly they have been able to sustain their excellence...so it can be done. for every team, yes, sustainability is an issue.

 

don't you have a job or something? why or you still here?

[The Gipper]

.

 

Talk about making wild ass assumptions. You are assuming that the "system" they put in place in Baltimore would have been somehow different than if they stayed in Cleveland...I'm not assuming, I'm letting several decades of history speak for itself, I realize facts don't set well with you.....sorry about your luck!.

 

WE must not be on the same page because I don't know WTF you are talking about with "several decades".

We are talking about a short period of time I thought from like 1995 to 2000.

You seem to be saying that Modell could never have built a winning team in Cleveland. I am saying that Modell could not have built a winning team in Cleveland, Baltimore, the moon if it had not been for Biscotti and Ozzie Newsome taking over.

The problem with Modell not winning had everything to do with Modell and not with the city in which he found himself.

 

just because it was not in Cleveland. The "system" that was put in place was there because Biscotti bought the team and because it was turned over to Ozzie Newsome...just as I have said.

And if the fans and the media had such awesome power over the decision making of of the ownership of the Cleveland Browns....why then did Modell attempt to move the team.....contrary to that omnipotence of the Cleveland fans and media? Ummmmm, because he was smart enough to leave the shithole and it's fans who don't have a clue, and go to a place where he would have a chance to build a team? Gee.......that's just a guess?

 

Yes, it sure is a guess....a way out, whacked out guess. Modell's ability....his 'chance to build a team" had not one goddam thing to do with where he sat. He led the Browns to financial ruin in Cleveland, and he led the Ravens to financial ruin in Baltimore. What saved the Ravens was Biscotti and Newsome.

 

So? You really think that Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert are going to listen to some dude on a chat board that thinks the Colt McCoy is better than BR right now? Are you really that dumb?

And where did you learn your Browns history? The Browns were the dominant team in the AFC North/Central...whatever it was then in the latter part of the 80s. They didn't have a 1 or 2 year run then fall back. (That might have only applied to the 1980 team under Rutigliano). After the 4 year run of winning seasons the Browns had in the late 80 they returned to 3-13 and pretty much stayed in the basement since. And to answer your question, I got it from the Browns web site.

 

It was more than 4 years....it was at least 5. And 4 or 5 is still a lot longer than the 1 or 2 you said. Sorry you can't count. And by the way, the Steelers great run in the 70s was for only like a 6 year period, so that length of time is about right. Why did the quality Browns teams fall apart in the 90s? Because Art Modell got rid of or drove Ernie Accorsi out who was the head of football operations during that period and took over running the football operations himself again. Of course the team was going to falter. Would say, the Rooneys have ever committed such a foolish, egotistical move? Of course not.

 

[Slurp and Burp]

The Browns can't play defense like these teams. Steelers and Ravens hit and hit hard. The Browns rule makes it illegal to play football like a man.

 

 

[The Gipper]

So..............We have a difference of opinion on one item and you admit I am right on the other two?

 

 

SWEET!

 

 

If you are saying the following: that it is Biscotti and Newsome that have the primary credit for the Ravens success.....yes, I admit you are right.

 

If you are saying that the Browns of the 80s had an extended run of success, far more than the 1-2 years you said, then yes.....I admit you are right.

 

If you are saying that it is your opinion that the fans of Cleveland and the media have so much tremendous impact into the running of the Browns, and that thus the impatience over losing will guarantee that the losing will continue, then I will say yes, I do disagree with an opinion that is fraught with such a puerile nature as that that it borders on being scatological.