Hillis And The Wco

[Hawgdawg]

I saw where Shurmer said that the WCO (at least his version) is a two back offense. He went on to say that Hillis may play fullbsck when Hardesty and Hillis are in the backfield at the same time because Hillis is big enough to be a lead blocker for Hardesty. I'm not fully sure what I expected the role of the fullback to be in a two-back set in the WCO, but this ain't it. If the fullback is a lead blocker, why the talk about losing Vickers?

 

Will some of you knowledgeable posters help me understand the role of a fullback in the WCO? It really seems to me that we need to be providing a lead blocker for Hillis rather than using Hillis as a lead blocker. I can't believe that a football coach at any lever would do anything to diminish Hillis' performances offensively.

 

My personal opinion is that the team has -- and continues to -- count too heavily on Hardesty. He obviously has shown nothing -- except the ability to get hurt. I can see nothing he has done that merits the team's confidence in him as a savior capable of moving Hillis to the role of lead blocker.

 

So what is HIllis' role going to be?

[Harry Buffalo]

If they use Hillis and Hardesty at the same time on the field, Shurmer has said that either or could block or run. That is the point of having two HB's on the field at the same time, so the defense doesn't know who the ball is going to. At no point this offseason has the likes of Shurmer, Heckert, or Holmgren said that Hillis would be used in a fullback role.

 

Now the role of a FB in a WCO is to be able to lead block, while also being able to catch passes in the flats. The later is something that Vickers has been horrible at over the past few seasons and it is why another FB was drafted this year.

 

You are correct that Hardesty has yet to show anything, but he has a lot of potential and talent if he can stay healthy. All the talk about 2 HB sets are speculation as of now because no one truly knows if Hardesty will stay healthy next season, or for the matter Hillis... McCoy... hell anyone who plays the game of football could be on IR when the season starts.

 

Hillis' role is going to be that of feature RB. He is going to be our true #1 RB, even though ideally he will share some carries with another back to an extent. He should have anymore than 250 carries this year and possibly half as many receptions if our WR's develop. That is his role. If anyone is telling you he is going to play FB, feel free to tell them they are a stupid dumb ass.

[CLEVELandMILIDH]

I saw where Shurmer said that the WCO (at least his version) is a two back offense. He went on to say that Hillis may play fullbsck when Hardesty and Hillis are in the backfield at the same time because Hillis is big enough to be a lead blocker for Hardesty. I'm not fully sure what I expected the role of the fullback to be in a two-back set in the WCO, but this ain't it. If the fullback is a lead blocker, why the talk about losing Vickers?

 

Will some of you knowledgeable posters help me understand the role of a fullback in the WCO? It really seems to me that we need to be providing a lead blocker for Hillis rather than using Hillis as a lead blocker. I can't believe that a football coach at any lever would do anything to diminish Hillis' performances offensively.

 

My personal opinion is that the team has -- and continues to -- count too heavily on Hardesty. He obviously has shown nothing -- except the ability to get hurt. I can see nothing he has done that merits the team's confidence in him as a savior capable of moving Hillis to the role of lead blocker.

 

So what is HIllis' role going to be?

 

Full back was almost exempt for Shurmur's offense in St. Louis. Mike Carney their stating FB had 6 carries for 12 yards and 5 catches for 14 yards, so if he was on the field he was probably blocking. But that wasn't often, most of the time they ran a 1 back set and if a extra blocker was needed they shifted a TE into the backfield.

 

Dont worry, if Hillis is blocking he's going to be picking up a blitz's on passing downs not playing the rule of the fullback

[ballpeen]

I saw where Shurmer said that the WCO (at least his version) is a two back offense. He went on to say that Hillis may play fullbsck when Hardesty and Hillis are in the backfield at the same time because Hillis is big enough to be a lead blocker for Hardesty. I'm not fully sure what I expected the role of the fullback to be in a two-back set in the WCO, but this ain't it. If the fullback is a lead blocker, why the talk about losing Vickers?

 

Will some of you knowledgeable posters help me understand the role of a fullback in the WCO? It really seems to me that we need to be providing a lead blocker for Hillis rather than using Hillis as a lead blocker. I can't believe that a football coach at any lever would do anything to diminish Hillis' performances offensively.

 

My personal opinion is that the team has -- and continues to -- count too heavily on Hardesty. He obviously has shown nothing -- except the ability to get hurt. I can see nothing he has done that merits the team's confidence in him as a savior capable of moving Hillis to the role of lead blocker.

 

So what is HIllis' role going to be?

 

 

 

It isn't hard to figure out. If Vickers is in, he is there to block because he sucks at catching the ball and double sucks at running th ball.

[miktoxic]

My personal opinion is that the team has -- and continues to -- count too heavily on Hardesty. He obviously has shown nothing -- except the ability to get hurt. I can see nothing he has done that merits the team's confidence in him as a savior capable of moving Hillis to the role of lead blocker.

 

hey if hardesty breaks the chains in the first couple of games of the season (chirp, chirp) and shows signs of being an arian foster then fine, but until then i'd like to see him take A snap.i love hillis too, i'm just hoping that he's fast enough to dodge those missiles coming at the bullseye on his back this year.

[Riffer X]

The PDF link below is a great resource for the WCO. It implements a ton of two back sets, and both backs can have different roles in each set, but the key point is both are options in the running and receiving game but have to be able to block. I said awhile back that Hillis and Hardesty would be a fantastic combo for this offense, sort of like Mack and Byner in the day. They are both prototypes, and neither has to be considered a "true" fullback. Marecic will obviously play a role, but he is an all around player, good for all special teams and part of the three man rotation at back---plus insurance for Hardesty.

 

The WCO uses lots of two back sets in lieu of a slot or TE. In many cases (and what I believe the Browns will do), they will use their TE in a hybrid slot role, hence the size mismatches of both Moore and Cameron. This is why Vickers' days were numbered the second the Browns went to the WCO with the hiring of Shurmur. He will demand too much salary at this point of his career and is a liability in both running and receiving. It's not all about hands, it's about route running and being a weapon.

 

There are basic alignments in this PDF if you care to look, and many institute the two back sets. A lot of it is relegated to personnel, and since the Browns have big plans for the two big backs, they will most certainly use this as a heavy part of their arsenal. The main concept of the WCO (coined by Bernie BTW), is too pressure the defense in all areas. Having two good (and big) backs, plus a good TE, really helps the rest of the receiving game. Everybody has to be accounted for, and mismatches will be available. That's why it is important to have a sharp and accurate QB who can get the ball quickly to his target. McCoy is ideal for this, and his mobility gives all sorts of options for roll outs, play actions and misdirections.

 

Obviously, the Browns still need another back, but I'm not too sure receiver is that much of a priority after the drafting of Little and the further maturation of Robo, MoMass, Mitchell, Haggerty, Norwood and Cribbs.

 

http://www.centuryinter.net/midway/chris/westcoast/wco.pdf

 

The bolded below is a basic description of what is expected of the backs in the WCO as the prototype, and below that is an excerpt from the PDF link.

 

Two other positions important to the West Coast offense are the fullback and running back positions. The ideal size for the fullback position should be about six foot one inch and weigh about 245 pounds. The running back should be large enough to take punishment and retain stamina. The main goals for the fullback and running back position in the West Coast offense are to be able to block and catch. In this offense these positions also have to able to pick up blitzing linebackers. The most important value for these positions is to be able to catch. These positions in the West Coast offense will probably have more catches than rushing attempts.

Running Game

We are committed to running the football. While we will throw the ball, we are also going to run the ball,

and do so successfully.

Our running game has been designed so that we will have an advantage over our opponents. We will,

through play calling and practice, create conditions under which we will run the football. To do so, we will:

• Make use of formational variations.

• Use motion and shifting to force desirable defensive adjustments just prior to the snap of the

ball.

• Package running plays with appropriate play action passes.

• Use 'special' plays that take advantage of defensive commitment and aggressiveness.

Additionally, we will do four things to ensure our running plays will be successful:

• Secure a numerical advantage at the point of attack.

• Create good blocking angles.

• Cause the defense to hesitate in reading the play, and react more slowly.

• Slow support of the defensive backs.

As with our passing offense, we have several different packages, or types of running plays. They are:

1. Base Runs- Plays that can be used in nearly any down and situation, from any location on the field.

These running plays are the core of our ground attack.

2. Nickel Runs- A series of runs from three and four wide receiver formations that are designed to be

used against nickel and dime defenses.

3. Short Yardage Runs- Our short yardage (second, third and fourth down and two or less) running

plays.

4. Goal Line Runs- Runs that we can run from inside of the opponent's five-yard line. They are similar

runs to our short yardage plays, but feature two and three tightened personnel groups.

5. Red Zone- Running plays designed for use in the opponent's Red Zone.

6. Four Minute- A group of running plays that we will use when we enter our Four Minute offense.

Mostly runs between the tackles that are designed to keep the clock moving.

[kshutchins]

As I was reading about the WCO I started wondering why you only see it in the NFL. I found this article which really gives a nice, very thorough answer to that question and in the process explains some important aspects of the WCO. I recommend clicking on the link for the 200 page scouting report which Mike Shanahan and his cohorts made for the Denver Broncos as they prepared for the Indy Colts in 2002.

 

http://smartfootball.com/gameplanning/can-the-west-coast-offense-work-anywhere-besides-the-nfl

[Harry Buffalo]

You never do see it in college, but I have actually seen come high school teams run it. They start teaching it to kids in JR so by the time they get through freshmen year and JV they have it down pact by the time they get to the Varsity team.

[ballpeen]

Nice post Riff

[kshutchins]

You never do see it in college, but I have actually seen come high school teams run it. They start teaching it to kids in JR so by the time they get through freshmen year and JV they have it down pact by the time they get to the Varsity team.

 

I don't think anyone ever has the WCO "down pat." It's a complicated offense with lots of nuances and I'm betting even the people who run it at the pro level are still learning about it. A handful of plays, maybe, but a full blown WCO is unlikely.

[Riffer X]

Agreed, Kathy. We ran a hybrid run & shoot/WCO in HS that also involved the Power I, which is three backs, but we also had a very limited playbook.

 

Full blown WCO means a whole lot more than just calling it that and lining up that way, there are hundreds of formations and hundreds of options out of those formations. Since precision and execution is key, it is not a system that just any HS/college team can implement.

 

I think certain college teams could do it with the right QB, but personnel would need to be recruited that way over a period of time and a lot would depend on the QB. It seems the spread is the better option in college.

[Nw220]

Yeah i feel the same the WCO is very difficult to learn and theres all different types of concepts to it...

 

I dont think they would use Hillis as a lead blocker theres really no point in doing it also considering we just used a 4th round pick on a FB i sure hope hes blocking some people with authority which means Hillis wouldnt have to..

 

And my High School also was putting in the WCO but whats even crazier is that the middle school i know the are running the Triangle offense

[The Gipper]

Of course, all y'all gotta remember that the WCO is really the NCO, the North Coast Offense, as that offense is really just a regurgitation perhaps with a few modifications of what Paul Brown ran here with Otto Graham at QB. Bill Walsh was a Paul Brown assistant and disciple and adapted what he learned under PB to his team in San Fran when he got a Head coaching gig.

[nickers]

Of course, all y'all gotta remember that the WCO is really the NCO, the North Coast Offense, as that offense is really just a regurgitation perhaps with a few modifications of what Paul Brown ran here with Otto Graham at QB. Bill Walsh was a Paul Brown assistant and disciple and adapted what he learned under PB to his team in San Fran when he got a Head coaching gig.

 

 

I hate to burst your bubble but the WCO did not originate with Paul Brown...If you look at this paragraph and the link I posted it will explain moe clearly where it evolved from. http://www.westcoastoffense.com/history.htm

 

 

 

 

 

The Walsh offense owes much to the past. As a Raiders' assistant in 1966, Walsh learned under Al Davis and John Rauch, who was the Raider's head coach. Raiders football was based on the theories of Sid Gillman. Al Davis had taken Gillman one step further. This system became the basis of Walsh's offense.

 

Gillman brought refinement to the game. Every technique and skill was isolated. In the Raiders organization, Walsh had no barriers to restrict creativity. It was a fully dimensional approach. For example, a system was developed for offensive line blocking that used almost all conceivable blocking combinations. It took time to learn it, but when the linemen mastered it they were well equipped to handle any situation.

 

The pass offense included an almost unlimited variety of pass patterns as well as a system of calling them. Coach Walsh used backs and tightends more than anybody in the NFL in his passing game.

 

In 1968, Coach Walsh joined Paul Brown in his new franchise in Cincinnati. While in Cleveland, Paul Brown implemented a highly organized structure and format that transformed the game to the modern era. In Cincinnati, Coach Walsh was the wide receiver coach and became responsible for the passing game. Coach Walsh used much of what he learned with the Raiders to create the Cincinnati passing attack.

[ballpeen]

 

 

Cutting Hillis back to 7 - 10 carries per game is the desired goal here. Saving him for pouind-it-out yards, and occasionally handing off to him on downs one would expect a pass.

 

 

 

I don't think it will be cut that much....I am thinking he will carry more like 10-20 times a game. The 20 in games where we get a lead and then pile up the yards and carries in the 4th qtr much like Riggins did with the Skins.

 

Riggings went in to halftime with 30 yards but by games end he had 115.

 

But on a whole...I agree...Hillis will carry less and I am not sure how much more involved in the passing game he can be since he had a boatload of receptions last season...seems like it was around 60 catches.

 

Hillis poses a problem for me in my keeper league...I am wondering if I should trade him.

[CLEVELandMILIDH]

Anybody else notice all the interest's King Ghoolie Lives has listed. Pretty funny, Im a big proponent of peanut buster parfaits myself.

[Riffer X]

http://football.calsci.com/WCOHistory2.html

 

Bill Walsh's early NFL career

 

When you actually sit down and try to summarize how you pursued the major goals in your life, it is relatively difficult to determine from which point you should began. Most people interested in football want to know where did Walsh develop his professional philosophies, and in particular the West Coast offense.

 

All factors considered, the birth of the West Coast offense started with the legendary Paul Brown, from whom Walsh worked for in Cincinnati, and the offensive genius Sid Gillman. Gillman made his mark in 10 seasons with the San Diego Chargers, leading them to five championship appearances.

 

Walsh learned from Gillman when Gillman hired him with the Oakland Raiders. Walsh gives credit to Gillman as being the biggest influence in his early career. Gillman was just one of the numerous pro coaches whom Walsh studied from. Walsh also credits individuals such as Blanton Collier, Al Davis, Don Coryell and Clark Shaughnessy, the legendary Stanford coach and Chicago Bear assistant to George Halas who brought the T formation into college and professional football.

[The Gipper]

This is a BIT of good news.

 

Shurmur at least realizes that The Browns can't win if they feature HIllis as the main back.

 

Straight ahead, too predictable, too easy to stuff. Just as I have said all along, for Hillis to have NAY success in 2011 the Browns need offensive weapons and diversions to keep defenses form keying on Hillis.

 

Cutting Hillis back to 7 - 10 carries per game is the desired goal here. Saving him for pouind-it-out yards, and occasionally handing off to him on downs one would expect a pass.

 

Hillis is big and powerful. But he isn't bigger and more powerful than 5 defensive players keying on him.

 

Hillis' career just got extended thanks to the WCO.

 

Like I said before, Hillis can be on the order of Roger Craig. 1000-1200 yards rushing. 500-600 yards receiving on like 50-60 catches. 12-15 TDs rushing and receiving. If the Browns used him that same way, like Craig, he could be around for 6-7 more years.

[The Gipper]

I hate to burst your bubble but the WCO did not originate with Paul Brown...If you look at this paragraph and the link I posted it will explain moe clearly where it evolved from. http://www.westcoastoffense.com/history.htm

 

 

 

 

 

The Walsh offense owes much to the past. As a Raiders' assistant in 1966, Walsh learned under Al Davis and John Rauch, who was the Raider's head coach. Raiders football was based on the theories of Sid Gillman. Al Davis had taken Gillman one step further. This system became the basis of Walsh's offense.

 

Hello! McFly. Is anybody home? Who do you think Sid Gillman learned from? He was an assistant under PB at both Miami, Ohio and with the Browns.

Gillman brought refinement to the game. Every technique and skill was isolated. In the Raiders organization, Walsh had no barriers to restrict creativity. It was a fully dimensional approach. For example, a system was developed for offensive line blocking that used almost all conceivable blocking combinations. It took time to learn it, but when the linemen mastered it they were well equipped to handle any situation.

 

The pass offense included an almost unlimited variety of pass patterns as well as a system of calling them. Coach Walsh used backs and tightends more than anybody in the NFL in his passing game.

 

In 1968, Coach Walsh joined Paul Brown in his new franchise in Cincinnati. While in Cleveland, Paul Brown implemented a highly organized structure and format that transformed the game to the modern era. In Cincinnati, Coach Walsh was the wide receiver coach and became responsible for the passing game. Coach Walsh used much of what he learned with the Raiders to create the Cincinnati passing attack.

 

Oh? And you think that Paul Brown, who was his boss and who may have been the greatest coaching genius of all time had absolutely no influence on Walsh?

So, both Gillman, and Walsh learned under PB, but nothing that PB had to say came through into the WCO that both of them ran.

Yea, and the Beatles music all came out of McCartney and Lennon's head. They didn't have any influences on them like say Chuck Berry or Buddy Holly.

I am not saying that Walsh didn't modify and extrapolate on what he learned from PB and Gillman, but you better ass believe the basis of Walsh's WCO came from PB.

All you have to do is look at tape of the Browns offense under Otto Graham.

What does it remind you of?: The 49ers offense of the 80s.

[The Gipper]

Saturday, April 04, 2009

Sid Gillman, "Father of the Modern Passing Game," notes on passing offense

Sid Gillman, along with Paul Brown, basically invented modern football. Bill Walsh left his stamp, but he was largely just making systematic what those two had already created. Brown, an approach to football itself -- gameplanning, huddling, drawing up plays (the modern convention of Xs and Os and diagrams looking how they do can basically be attributed to him).

[nickers]

I never said PB didnt have any influence on Walsh...of course he did...But it just seems that all of you want to make the WCO A direct bi-product of PB and its not...I dont care what any of you say...The link speaks for itesf...But somehow you all want PB to take credit for something Walsh developed from several Systems. All Im saying is what the article clearly demonstrates. The WCO is a bi-product of several offenses not just PB's. Everyone is trying to make it a PB/Cleveland thing...And the only real cleveland thing about it is Bernie Kosar is credited for actually giving the WCO its name.

[The Gipper]

I never said PB didnt have any influence on Walsh...of course he did...But it just seems that all of you want to make the WCO A direct bi-product of PB and its not...I dont care what any of you say...The link speaks for itesf...But somehow you all want PB to take credit for something Walsh developed from several Systems. All Im saying is what the article clearly demonstrates. The WCO is a bi-product of several offenses not just PB's. Everyone is trying to make it a PB/Cleveland thing...And the only real cleveland thing about it is Bernie Kosar is credited for actually giving the WCO its name.

 

 

Something you have to understand about Bill Walsh: he was the supreme egotist. He DID learn much of what was in the WCO from PB and Gillman, but he would never admit that directly. He wanted to take credit for something that he developed, yet, there was far less originality in his "WCO" than he took credit for. Yes, he modified and tinkered with the concepts that he got from PB and Gillman, but he sure as hell didn't invent the WCO out of the blue as sometimes he would like to suggest.

The thing that he did? He was successful. Yes, he was a good coach, but not the ultimate creator of that offense.

It would be like Reese's claiming they invented both chocolate and peanut butter. Well, they didn't invent either, they just put them together and it worked out well, which is pretty much what Walsh did. And it helped Walsh that he hired a pretty good cook by the name of Joe Montana. His offense wasn't working all that great when he had Steve DeBerg running it.

[nickers]

Something you have to understand about Bill Walsh: he was the supreme egotist. He DID learn much of what was in the WCO from PB and Gillman, but he would never admit that directly. He wanted to take credit for something that he developed, yet, there was far less originality in his "WCO" than he took credit for. Yes, he modified and tinkered with the concepts that he got from PB and Gillman, but he sure as hell didn't invent the WCO out of the blue as sometimes he would like to suggest.

The thing that he did? He was successful. Yes, he was a good coach, but not the ultimate creator of that offense.

It would be like Reese's claiming they invented both chocolate and peanut butter. Well, they didn't invent either, they just put them together and it worked out well, which is pretty much what Walsh did. And it helped Walsh that he hired a pretty good cook by the name of Joe Montana. His offense wasn't working all that great when he had Steve DeBerg running it.

 

Agreed...DeBerg was a career back up for the better part of his career. But Im just simply saying consider all of the factors that went into it and Im not in any way trying to underscore Browns influence but like the article said credit was also given to Al Davis on John Rausch also who didnt have much to do with Paul Brown and nor did LaVelle Edwards who also was a big influence on Walsh.

[The Gipper]

Agreed...DeBerg was a career back up for the better part of his career. But Im just simply saying consider all of the factors that went into it and Im not in any way trying to underscore Browns influence but like the article said credit was also given to Al Davis on John Rausch also who didnt have much to do with Paul Brown and nor did LaVelle Edwards who also was a big influence on Walsh.

 

 

Like I said, it is like the Beatles and who influenced them: Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Elvis Presley....even throw in Sophie Tucker.

 

The following is just a sampling of Paul Browns coaching tree:

 

Coaching treeThe following coaches either coached under or played for Paul Brown and were influenced at least to some degree by him and his football knowledge and offensive system:

 

Blanton Collier (coach under Paul Brown)

Weeb Ewbank (coach under Paul Brown)

Abe Gibron (player)

Sid Gillman (coach)

Otto Graham (player for Paul Brown)

Bill "Tiger" Johnson (coach under Paul Brown)

Chuck Noll (player for Paul Brown)

Ara Parseghian (player for Paul Brown)

Lou Saban (player for Paul Brown)

Don Shula (player for Paul Brown)

Bill Walsh (coach under Paul Brown)

Bruce Coslet (player and head coach under team President Paul Brown)

Sam Wyche (player and head coach under team President Paul Brown)

 

And let's face it, many of these guys have their own "coaching tree" which are a couple of generations removed. So, we can get biblical here. Paul Brown begat Sid Gillman who begat Bill Walsh who begat Mike Holmgren who begat Pat Shurmur. See how that works?

 

[The Gipper]

One thing I have learned from researching things is that Bill Parcells did not apparently learn his trade through the influences of the likes of Paul Brown, Lombardi, Landry, etc. that a lot of today's coaches came through.

His primary coaching influences actually came from the college ranks, and not necessarily football. His biggest influence in his coaching career came from none other than Bobby Knight, who actually was greatly influence by Woody Hayes. He also learned under Ray Perkins, who was coached by Bear Bryant. So that branch of coaching, which includes the likes of Bill Belichick, Tom Coughlin, Mangini, Crennell, Sean Payton et al came more from the collegiate ranks.

[nickers]

One thing I have learned from researching things is that Bill Parcells did not apparently learn his trade through the influences of the likes of Paul Brown, Lombardi, Landry, etc. that a lot of today's coaches came through.

His primary coaching influences actually came from the college ranks, and not necessarily football. His biggest influence in his coaching career came from none other than Bobby Knight, who actually was greatly influence by Woody Hayes. He also learned under Ray Perkins, who was coached by Bear Bryant. So that branch of coaching, which includes the likes of Bill Belichick, Tom Coughlin, Mangini, Crennell, Sean Payton et al came more from the collegiate ranks.

 

 

 

..I know...I also have that walsh coaching tree as My banner on another forum lol...And I was aware of Parcells background...Sam Rutigliano was from the Lombardi tree as well if Im not mistaken..but I think the over all point is football is all the same plays, its just a matter of likes and and application. And lets not understate what Brown brought to the game because every playbok has Paul Brown in there...id say pretty much the lions share...I thought he did more for the game than any other coach before or after him. Wich I dont understand why its called the Lombardi trophy...I thought it was one hell of a snub by the NFL.

[Harry Buffalo]

I just think that you can really compare his physical abilities to Steven Jackson in St. Louis and look what he did last year under Shurmer. Plus Hillis still had 4.4 yards a carry while teams knew he was the Browns only offensive option. He should do fine next year with the pass taking heat off of him.

[The Gipper]

I don't think Hillis will again hit the 1000 yard mark. Roger Craig wasn't as big and he had more moves.

 

Again, don't get me wrong, I know he is a tough, strong bastard. IF the Browns had some other offensive weapons he could relaly be effective. As it is, I think he is going to get smothered in 2011.

 

 

I think the point of instituting this North-West Coast offense is to spread the ball around to more players; to get those wide receivers more involved in timing pass plays; to spread it around more to the tight ends and the backs; and, to open up more holes in the running game. I do not believe they are going to be running the ball up the gut on every play. This offense is supposed to be designed to improve the production of even our mediocre receiving corps.

[Thomaspro]

I don't think Hillis will again hit the 1000 yard mark. Roger Craig wasn't as big and he had more moves.

 

Again, don't get me wrong, I know he is a tough, strong bastard. IF the Browns had some other offensive weapons he could relaly be effective. As it is, I think he is going to get smothered in 2011.

 

 

Ghooli stop trolling this forum. You have no idea what your talking about. Anything that is Browns your being negative on. Grow up.

[The Gipper]

Ghooli stop trolling this forum. You have no idea what your talking about. Anything that is Browns your being negative on. Grow up.

 

Well, Ghoolie is not a troll. He is an origninal on Browns message boards from the early days of the internet. And he does know a lot of what he is talking about, even though sometimes, like in this case, you or I might disagree with him.