RoyceRolls Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Lol, SOOOOOOO not engaging in this discussion again. *coughs and points at the LESS effective Browns rushing game in 2013* Lets see how effective TR is when he's 32. My guess is that we won't have the chance because when Trent is 32 he'll be celebrating the 6 year anniversary of his last NFL game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectralcow Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 So because the Browns chose to pick up a really old guy, it's okay that they made the running game less effective? What sense does that make? In that case, let's get rid of everyone, get a bunch of guys who are too old to be effective, and then it will ALL be okay! I'm not saying that McGahee should have been better than Richardson, I'm saying that if they were going to get rid of Richardson, there should have been some kind of plan in place so that they didn't struggle to score just 4 rushing TDs on the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 So because the Browns chose to pick up a really old guy, it's okay that they made the running game less effective? What sense does that make? In that case, let's get rid of everyone, get a bunch of guys who are too old to be effective, and then it will ALL be okay! I'm not saying that McGahee should have been better than Richardson, I'm saying that if they were going to get rid of Richardson, there should have been some kind of plan in place so that they didn't struggle to score just 4 rushing TDs on the year. McGahee was just as effective as Richardson. And by that I mean, not effective at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectralcow Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Lol, okay, I'm done arguing it. If you guys aren't willing to admit that the running game was less effective in 2013 than it was in 2012, then there's not even a logical enough basis to have a discussion. It's understandable to be disappointed in Richardson or to criticize his (lack of) abilities, but to refuse to acknowledge that the Browns didn't run as well in 2013 is just stubborn and irrational. You guys are so blinded by your dislike for Richardson that (again) you're responding to something I didn't even say. I said, "The Browns run game was less effective in 2013." You responded with "Richardson sucks." Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Lol, okay, I'm done arguing it. If you guys aren't willing to admit that the running game was less effective in 2013 than it was in 2012, then there's not even a logical enough basis to have a discussion. It's understandable to be disappointed in Richardson or to criticize his (lack of) abilities, but to refuse to acknowledge that the Browns didn't run as well in 2013 is just stubborn and irrational. You guys are so blinded by your dislike for Richardson that (again) you're responding to something I didn't even say. I said, "The Browns run game was less effective in 2013." You responded with "Richardson sucks." Well done. Obviously it was less effective in 2013. But not because of Richardson. I'd blame a coach that gave up on running the ball, a regressed right tackle, and lousy backup guards. Just the way you made it sound is Richardson is the sole reason it was significantly worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 I will not beat the TR/McGahee thing up. Fact is, an offense that is 67% pass & 33% run (2013) is NOT going to be effective. Hang the "we don't have talent" stuff, there must be more balance.Yes, we need QB, RB & other important pieces, but I feel we will be much more balanced in '14. I also prefer a "feature" back so, if for no other reason, you're not tipping the next play by changing to a different back. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectralcow Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 I'm perfectly willing to accept that coaching was the reason that the Browns were less effective at running the ball in 2013, but the people on these boards tend to not want to blame Chud for any shortfalls, either. So you can hate Richardson and/or you can support Chud, but somehow the run game got worse between 2012 and 2013. I mentioned the dropoff in reference to the Richardson thing specifically to point out that, assuming Richardson sucked and was so useless to the team, the decline in the running game has to be explained by something other than his departure. To me, that makes the next prime candidate the coaching/playcalling. *wink* Thanks for the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 The Browns qb position led defenses to force pressure on qb's to try to be effective without a running game. They simply stacked the box, and watched Weedone and Campbell squirm, and make mistakes. Sure, the Browns could have run more, and had a whole lot more three and outs. Either way, the Browns offense wouldn't function without Hoyer and Lewis. No other rb had the burst, and no other qb could get their job done, either. And that's a fact, Jack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectralcow Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 That doesn't explain the difference. The Browns didn't have a better QB in 2012; they had Weeden. Josh Gordon and Jordan Cameron made a whole lot more noise in 2013, and the Browns called a greater percentage of pass plays, so there was actually less reason for teams to stack the box against them in 2013, not more. I'm not buying that reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 So because the Browns chose to pick up a really old guy, it's okay that they made the running game less effective? What sense does that make? In that case, let's get rid of everyone, get a bunch of guys who are too old to be effective, and then it will ALL be okay! I'm not saying that McGahee should have been better than Richardson, I'm saying that if they were going to get rid of Richardson, there should have been some kind of plan in place so that they didn't struggle to score just 4 rushing TDs on the year. I think the plan was "use that pick to get our franchise quarterback". It's proven that franchise runningbacks don't really do much without a good quarterback to help open the lanes for them, so I think the FO was fine with experiencing a drop in production in exchange for a first round pick to use as ammunition. The fact that the drop in production wasn't that drastic just sweetens the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectralcow Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Were they? Maybe. Apparently they were not fine with SOMETHING, though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Were they? Maybe. Apparently they were not fine with SOMETHING, though... They're not fine with being classy, upstanding businessmen. The Haslam motto "it ain't cheating unless you're caught, and then just blame it on somebody else". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beefjerky Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Bortles is a beast looking like Brees, not sure if I want him or Manziel more, but I definitely want both over Bridgewater. Bridgewater makes nice plays but I don't like his mechanics as much and it looks like he'll get picked off a lot in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 What bothered me most about the above Bortles' highlights was his under throwing literally all his deep throws. Those WRs had to wait for the ball or reach back for it & then were caught from behind when they were initially wide open. I look at that as a concern. He is NOT going to have that margin for error in the NFL. Just my opinion. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.