ClevelandBigDawg Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 As we can probably all agree, we could've, should've, would've won this game if we had some thing happen or didn't happen, as most teams can say about every week. We COULD'VE won if: - Chris Ogbonnaya doesn't fumble - We don't line up offsides on 3rd and short (twice) - Phil Taylor played That fumble was huge. It would have put us around mid-field with a first down. Instead they got the ball. How does our CB line up offsides on 3rd down, not once but TWICE Phil Taylor is kinda of a stretch here, because he is actually hurt, but with his presence between him and Rubin, they eat up a lot of blockers and can get some pass rush. Now we did have decent pass rush, but it would have been better and freed up the linebackers to make some plays. We WOULD'VE won if: - Joe Haden played Plain and simple, the Bengals passing offense is not that good. AJ Green didn't have a great day, but he sure didn't have a bad day. With Haden in there we get better run support, a lot better pass protection, and their would have been a trickle down effect on who our corners were all guarding. We SHOULD'VE won if: - We could tackle Andrew Hawkins and Pacman Jones TDs might have been the sorriest excuses of tackling I have ever seen. We hold them to a FG on Hawkins and it's a TD game at the end there. We actually tackle Pacman on that return and heck we could have held them to three and out, or even a field goal. All that said, we DIDN'T execute the way we needed to. The offense took a big leap forward this week, but the defense took a few steps back. We're a young team, and right now obviously lack consistency, but hey it's only been two weeks. We lost 2 games by a combine 8 points to teams that most people thought would beat us by at least multiple touchdowns. Am I happy with a loss? No. Am I happy that we are actually competing and our super young team is showing promise? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypicalBrowns Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 As we can probably all agree, we could've, should've, would've won this game if we had some thing happen or didn't happen, as most teams can say about every week. We COULD'VE won if: - Chris Ogbonnaya doesn't fumble - We don't line up offsides on 3rd and short (twice) - Phil Taylor played That fumble was huge. It would have put us around mid-field with a first down. Instead they got the ball. How does our CB line up offsides on 3rd down, not once but TWICE Phil Taylor is kinda of a stretch here, because he is actually hurt, but with his presence between him and Rubin, they eat up a lot of blockers and can get some pass rush. Now we did have decent pass rush, but it would have been better and freed up the linebackers to make some plays. We WOULD'VE won if: - Joe Haden played Plain and simple, the Bengals passing offense is not that good. AJ Green didn't have a great day, but he sure didn't have a bad day. With Haden in there we get better run support, a lot better pass protection, and their would have been a trickle down effect on who our corners were all guarding. We SHOULD'VE won if: - We could tackle Andrew Hawkins and Pacman Jones TDs might have been the sorriest excuses of tackling I have ever seen. We hold them to a FG on Hawkins and it's a TD game at the end there. We actually tackle Pacman on that return and heck we could have held them to three and out, or even a field goal. All that said, we DIDN'T execute the way we needed to. The offense took a big leap forward this week, but the defense took a few steps back. We're a young team, and right now obviously lack consistency, but hey it's only been two weeks. We lost 2 games by a combine 8 points to teams that most people thought would beat us by at least multiple touchdowns. Am I happy with a loss? No. Am I happy that we are actually competing and our super young team is showing promise? Yes. Good post. Tackling was abysmal. Think about it, they dont score that punt TD, its a three point game the ENTIRE time. But talk about turnin it around.....Weeden 26/37 322 yds 2 tds 0int a qb rating 114.9......RICHARDSON- 19 car 109 yds 1 rush td 1 pass td Injuries and suspensions and arm tackling and penalites. Get rid of those and I viewed a fantastic performance today by the browns.....take away the atrocious dbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
browns1979 Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 weeks. We lost 2 games by a combine 8 points to teams that most people thought would beat us by at least multiple touchdowns. Ummm no...most people did not think the bengals would win by 'multiple' touchdowns. The bengals were 7 pt favorites, and without a meaningless garbage time fg the browns don't even get the push on that. There are only a couple teams in the nfl(dolphins, maybe thats it) who would be more than 7 pt dogs in cincinatti. So losing to cincy by 7 is hardly promising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandBigDawg Posted September 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Ummm no...most people did not think the bengals would win by 'multiple' touchdowns. The bengals were 7 pt favorites, and without a meaningless garbage time fg the browns don't even get the push on that. There are only a couple teams in the nfl(dolphins, maybe thats it) who would be more than 7 pt dogs in cincinatti. So losing to cincy by 7 is hardly promising. A playoff team last year. A lot of people thought we would lose by more than 7 coming into the season. After their poor showing last week is why we were only pt dogs in a rivalry game, on the road... Go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 As we can probably all agree, we could've, should've, would've won this game if we had some thing happen or didn't happen, as most teams can say about every week. We COULD'VE won if: - Chris Ogbonnaya doesn't fumble - We don't line up offsides on 3rd and short (twice) - Phil Taylor played That fumble was huge. It would have put us around mid-field with a first down. Instead they got the ball. "That fumble" produced no points for the Bengals... While turnovers are never a good thing, this one was not "huge". How does our CB line up offsides on 3rd down, not once but TWICE Agree... WR's often check with the line Judge to be sure they're on the line, not over it, or off, DB's can do the same... No excuse. Phil Taylor is kinda of a stretch here, because he is actually hurt, but with his presence between him and Rubin, they eat up a lot of blockers and can get some pass rush. Now we did have decent pass rush, but it would have been better and freed up the linebackers to make some plays. Big stretch IMO... Which of our pass rushers were being double teamed in Taylor's absense? Taylor is a space eater against the run to be sure, but the same does not apply to pass protection. We WOULD'VE won if: - Joe Haden played Plain and simple, the Bengals passing offense is not that good. AJ Green didn't have a great day, but he sure didn't have a bad day. With Haden in there we get better run support, a lot better pass protection, and their would have been a trickle down effect on who our corners were all guarding. Agree that Haden would have made a difference although I'd put his presense in the "Could've" catagory. We SHOULD'VE won if: - We could tackle Andrew Hawkins and Pacman Jones TDs might have been the sorriest excuses of tackling I have ever seen. We hold them to a FG on Hawkins and it's a TD game at the end there. We actually tackle Pacman on that return and heck we could have held them to three and out, or even a field goal. I've watched both plays numerous times and if there's a broken tackle in either one I need someone to point it out to me. In my view tackling was not the issue in either case. The punt return was bad coverage, plain and simple. Jones was barely touched. There was little discernible lane coverage and, if the cover team is not in their proper lanes, they cannot help each other set angles that give the opportunity to make contact. How much of the poor lane discipline was us vs the Bengals return scheme? I cannot say, but both factors have to be considered. Ditto the above for the Hawkins TD where he went UNTOUCHED into the endzone. It was a broken play that Dalton extended by escaping out of the pocket to the right. Hawkins was crossing to help with Wade close behind in Man2man. When Hawkins stopped, Wade had to decide whether to stop with him or support against Dalton running... he chose the latter. Once completed to Hawkins all he had in front of him was a broken field with some DB's backs to him as we were in Man coverage... it was virtually a punt return. Add that there were two fine blocks made by Cinci receivers and it was all over. Hawkins made a good play... the Bengals made a good play. Sometimes you just have to give credit to the other team... IMO if there is any blame to be placed for the Hawkins TD, it belongs to the line for letting Dalton break contain, not with our 2ndary. While I am sure QB containment was not stressed during the week to the degree it was Week 1 vs Vick, it is still a basic principle that should have been fresh in the D-lines minds. All that said, we DIDN'T execute the way we needed to. The offense took a big leap forward this week, but the defense took a few steps back. We're a young team, and right now obviously lack consistency, but hey it's only been two weeks. We lost 2 games by a combine 8 points to teams that most people thought would beat us by at least multiple touchdowns. Am I happy with a loss? No. Am I happy that we are actually competing and our super young team is showing promise? Yes. Agree that the offense moved forward, but it's pretty clear that the Eagles D is much better than Cinci's. The Defense allowed fewer yards than last week, we just didn't manufacture the TO's we did last week with considerable help from a very undisciplined game from a rusty Michael Vick. But as we agreed earlier, Haden's absence certainly didn't help. And where was Fort? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandBigDawg Posted September 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 The thing I meant with the "tackling" was that no one tried to break down and wrap up. If you watch the replay, it's just us diving at Pacmans feet. I don't care how small you are even if someone hits your foot you won't trip him completely for the tackle, that's what I meant by poor tackling, no one even tried, they all just dove. It was bad coverage, I agree. I know the Hawkins TD was a broken play, but there were some awful pursuit angles, namely Wade when he ran behind the blocker instead of trying to close the lane that Hawkins was running towards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 To me the tackling cost the game more then all the other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanthros Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Ummm no...most people did not think the bengals would win by 'multiple' touchdowns. The bengals were 7 pt favorites, and without a meaningless garbage time fg the browns don't even get the push on that. There are only a couple teams in the nfl(dolphins, maybe thats it) who would be more than 7 pt dogs in cincinatti. So losing to cincy by 7 is hardly promising. I'm not getting the "garbage time" statements when the team is only down by 2 TDs. Many teams have overcome greater spreads with less time. You MUST be a troll for some other team, and it's pathetic that you feel the need to come here and post nothing but "garbage" yourself. I bet you are yet again another bandwagon jumper with what now 5 posts all pointing out negativity for a team you just now decided to join a forum and post on??? Cleveland is a magnet for douchebags apparently... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchie Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 I don't understand why you are so worried about wins this year. We know we won't make the playoffs with all these rookies, and we need one more draft, a couple of FA's, a new HC, and then I think we will be ready to roll in 2013 and perhaps make the playoffs in 2014. So wins in 2012 just give us a lower draft picks. BTW, the use of a second rounder on a non-starting WR is not looking too good right now. I think the new owner will bring in a new President and eventually a new head coach. Both will have a stronger track record and a greater passion and sense of urgency to win/improve and of accountability if they do not. We clearly need upgrades at RG, FB, CB, FS, LB, and possibly WR. If we lose enough games, we may be able to trade back in the draft a few spots and get a few extra picks beacuse we probably won't need a new QB. I think 2013 team will exclude the following players: Fujita, Gocong, Brown, Cribbs (traded for DP), Marecic, Hardesty, Norwood, McCoy (traded for DP), and Lauano gets demoted to back-up. Assuming Weeden continues to show improvement and potential but the recievers do not, I see us selecting an elite WR with our first selection in the draft. However, if Gordon comes around and Little improves to become a real #1, then we could use the pick on a CB to replace Brown or a FS to replace Hagg. Both are critical. I am looking to FA next year, especially with the LB's. We've got a good crew of young players there but need one, if not two with experience to replace the aging and oft-injured Fujita and Gocong. As for this year, just look for experience and improvements, not necessarily wins. Buffalo will be a great match-up next week. I don't think they are as good as Cinci but they are a very solid team and I see a very close game. If the Browns can shut down their run game, we could see our first victory. I see 3 to 5 wins for the Browns this year, so this against Buffalo falls into one of those games that could signal continued improvement of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 There are only a couple teams in the nfl(dolphins, maybe thats it) who would be more than 7 pt dogs in cincinatti. So losing to cincy by 7 is hardly promising. There are even less teams in the league with 15 rookies on the roster, (including their starting QB and RB) their starting All-Pro corner out and their starting DT out. The Bengals have a stable of capable WR's who had to be covered by the likes of Trevin Wade and Buster Skrine. You continue to think the sky is falling. I, like the rest of the informed and intelligent people around, will take solace in the fact that this is easily the most talented team since the fluke almost playoff run of '07. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 The thing I meant with the "tackling" was that no one tried to break down and wrap up. If you watch the replay, it's just us diving at Pacmans feet. I don't care how small you are even if someone hits your foot you won't trip him completely for the tackle, that's what I meant by poor tackling, no one even tried, they all just dove. It was bad coverage, I agree. I know the Hawkins TD was a broken play, but there were some awful pursuit angles, namely Wade when he ran behind the blocker instead of trying to close the lane that Hawkins was running towards. But you have to be in position to "break down", i.e., in the path of the ball carrier, and for a punt that means in your lane. Agree Wade took a bad angle, but it was coming back to Hawkins after commiting to Dalton. My bottom line is no one bitched about our tackling vs. Philly... and our tackling did not go to shit in one week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchie Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 There are even less teams in the league with 15 rookies on the roster, (including their starting QB and RB) their starting All-Pro corner out and their starting DT out. The Bengals have a stable of capable WR's who had to be covered by the likes of Trevin Wade and Buster Skrine. You continue to think the sky is falling. I, like the rest of the informed and intelligent people around, will take solace in the fact that this is easily the most talented team since the fluke almost playoff run of '07. Great comments. But I have to ask you, why was 07 a fluke? Because we didn't stay competitive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acmike Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 No problem not worrying about wins, if they beat Buffalo it will be a 2 win season at best. It always seems to be next year or the year after..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Great comments. But I have to ask you, why was 07 a fluke? Because we didn't stay competitive? Because nobody repeated their performance from that year, even for other teams. That year was the perfect storm, never to be recreated for Anderson, Edwards, Winslow et al. And we didn't even make it to the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInNYC Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 A couple of things stood out to me as pretty weak in this game. The play by the secondary was all around bad. The corners were giving the receivers way too much cushion off of the line of scrimmage, the CBs were burned in coverage anytime the Bungles receivers made half a move, two penalties for offsides on Patterson is ridiculous, and the tackling was horrendous with the exception of Ward. Secondly, the special teams under Chris Tabor has been abysmal. Cribbs has been less effective and coverage for kickoffs and returns is scary bad. A few years ago, under Brad Seely, the Browns' special teams was a weapon. I don't get it. That being said, I am still excited about this season and watching this team develop because I believe they are finally on the right track. However, people need to manage their expectations of this team. This is a year for development and growth. My biggest hope is that once Haslam comes in, he doesn't make any big changes. I am not sold on Shurmur yet, but I think fans need to be more realistic and give these guys time to do this right. The NFL is extremely competitive and to think that they can turn a franchise around for long term competitiveness in three years is absurd. I was a young kid at the time, but I remember how fans have turned on other coaches, Belichik (released Bernie), without seeing the big picture. In short, what we need most is some consistency, not knee jerk reactions to appease fair weather fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark O Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 That being said, I am still excited about this season and watching this team develop because I believe they are finally on the right track. However, people need to manage their expectations of this team. This is a year for development and growth. My biggest hope is that once Haslam comes in, he doesn't make any big changes. I am not sold on Shurmur yet, but I think fans need to be more realistic and give these guys time to do this right. The NFL is extremely competitive and to think that they can turn a franchise around for long term competitiveness in three years is absurd. I was a young kid at the time, but I remember how fans have turned on other coaches, Belichik (released Bernie), without seeing the big picture. In short, what we need most is some consistency, not knee jerk reactions to appease fair weather fans. Completely agree.. I heard Billick (who I don't think is necessarily objective when it comes to the Browns) talking about the Browns for this year and said that everything that they do this year is really designed to be competitive in 2013. That sucks for fans of the team but I think he's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 A couple of things stood out to me as pretty weak in this game. The play by the secondary was all around bad. The corners were giving the receivers way too much cushion off of the line of scrimmage, the CBs were burned in coverage anytime the Bungles receivers made half a move, two penalties for offsides on Patterson is ridiculous, and the tackling was horrendous with the exception of Ward. Secondly, the special teams under Chris Tabor has been abysmal. Cribbs has been less effective and coverage for kickoffs and returns is scary bad. A few years ago, under Brad Seely, the Browns' special teams was a weapon. I don't get it. That being said, I am still excited about this season and watching this team develop because I believe they are finally on the right track. However, people need to manage their expectations of this team. This is a year for development and growth. My biggest hope is that once Haslam comes in, he doesn't make any big changes. I am not sold on Shurmur yet, but I think fans need to be more realistic and give these guys time to do this right. The NFL is extremely competitive and to think that they can turn a franchise around for long term competitiveness in three years is absurd. I was a young kid at the time, but I remember how fans have turned on other coaches, Belichik (released Bernie), without seeing the big picture. In short, what we need most is some consistency, not knee jerk reactions to appease fair weather fans. I agree. I think the first half of this season will be rough...especially with injuries and suspensions. But once Phil Taylor comes back and Joe Haden, and these "kids" start figuring things out the Browns in the second half of the season should be able to stay with anyone. Shurmur may in fact be the weak link...but we shall see. I disagree on BB however. The guy was here 5 years....and holds the Browns record for the HC with the most losing seasons. He was given a lot more rope than most others had/have been given. And note this: BB was NOT terminated as the HC of the Cleveland Browns. His contract as HC of the Browns was assigned to the new Baltimore (lka Ravens) franchise after the settlement was made with the City/County/NFL that allowed for Modell to get that new B-more franchise. Modell fired him as the HC of the new franchise, not of the Browns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInNYC Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 I disagree on BB however. The guy was here 5 years....and holds the Browns record for the HC with the most losing seasons. He was given a lot more rope than most others had/have been given. And note this: BB was NOT terminated as the HC of the Cleveland Browns. His contract as HC of the Browns was assigned to the new Baltimore (lka Ravens) franchise after the settlement was made with the City/County/NFL that allowed for Modell to get that new B-more franchise. Modell fired him as the HC of the new franchise, not of the Browns. Thanks for the 411. I was in grade school when Belichik was coach so I wasn't aware of everything going on with regards to the Browns, but from what I remember the fans really went after him after the Kosar release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Thanks for the 411. I was in grade school when Belichik was coach so I wasn't aware of everything going on with regards to the Browns, but from what I remember the fans really went after him after the Kosar release. The problem is that he had only the totally incompetent Todd Philcox to turn to. Testaverde was hurt. That move probably cost the Browns a playoff spot. Of course, Bernie got picked up by the Cowboys, helped them win a playoff game, and got a Super Bowl ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownIndian Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 Because nobody repeated their performance from that year, even for other teams. That year was the perfect storm, never to be recreated for Anderson, Edwards, Winslow et al. And we didn't even make it to the playoffs. I disagree with Winslow. HE went to Tampa and played almost every game. He played every game for Tampa in his 3 years there and averaged more than 700 yards every season. We will be lucky if any of our TE's will be as good as him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bringbackbrownie2 Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 I disagree with Winslow. HE went to Tampa and played almost every game. He played every game for Tampa in his 3 years there and averaged more than 700 yards every season. We will be lucky if any of our TE's will be as good as him. Winslow had over 1,100 yards in 2007 and hasn't been close to this total since (including a measly 450 or so yards in 2008). That has 2007 fluke written all over it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 We got rid of Winslow at the right time. His career would have been a whole different story without the knee injury. Zombo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.