Garrett Hurt Already

[Ghoolie]

6 hours ago, hoorta said:

<<What I'm getting at is you don't need to have a Jack Lambert or Mike Singletary demeanor to be a great defensive player. >>

Name me one badass defensive player who acted like John Denver on the field.

<<Regarding Joe, you don't get voted to 10 straight Pro Bowls by being a bum. >>

Yeah,,,that is fucking impressive. Kind of like getting an award from JD Powers. Look man, you are a waffle specialist. When it came to Hickerson, you didn't care what the "experts said" and you didn't care what awards he won..........goddammit.....he was over due for the HOF.

Segue now to Thomas. You can't cite his accomplishments, you surely can't point to one offensive parameter that the Browns improved in once he came to the team. Bullshit euphemisms, that's all you have.

 

[Orion]

9 hours ago, Ghoolie said:

 Paul Brown built a career on running the sweep, and I can't ever remember JT taking part in a successful power sweep. He is okay, but he isn't anything special.

Get the smelling salts.  HELLOoo.......it's 2017 now.  Jim Brown couldn't run power sweeps in today's NFL.  Defensive players are no longer guys that weren't good enough to play offense.

I'll agree...JT is not what you'd call a run blocking road grader.  He's a left tackle of TODAY'S NFL.  He's a pass blocker...which is what the NFL has become. - But you know this stuff.

[Ghoolie]

2 hours ago, Orion said:

Get the smelling salts.  HELLOoo.......it's 2017 now.  Jim Brown couldn't run power sweeps in today's NFL.  Defensive players are no longer guys that weren't good enough to play offense.

I'll agree...JT is not what you'd call a run blocking road grader.  He's a left tackle of TODAY'S NFL.  He's a pass blocker...which is what the NFL has become. - But you know this stuff.

Jim Brown couldn't run power sweeps today? The fucking guy played at 228 without testosterone injections. He would annihilate today's defenses. 

[hoorta]

1 hour ago, Ghoolie said:

Jim Brown couldn't run power sweeps today? The fucking guy played at 228 without testosterone injections. He would annihilate today's defenses. 

He just might have been above average. In case  you don't remember Jim was running over 230 pound defensive ends, not the 270+ pound guys of today's NFL.. The 3-4 defense with linebackers weighing at least as much- or 250 ish and almost as fast might have made a slight difference on running power sweeps. DUH. So stop the hero worship.

[Dutch Oven]

2 hours ago, hoorta said:

He just might have been above average. In case  you don't remember Jim was running over 230 pound defensive ends, not the 270+ pound guys of today's NFL.. The 3-4 defense with linebackers weighing at least as much- or 250 ish and almost as fast might have made a slight difference on running power sweeps. DUH. So stop the hero worship.

The size/speed combo of today's game makes the "power sweep" of Lombardi's Packers team a thing of the past. The fact that this was used as a "slam" against Joe Thomas shows how idiotically out of touch the user is with today's NFL.

[ATENEARS]

1 hour ago, Dutch Oven said:

The size/speed combo of today's game makes the "power sweep" of Lombardi's Packers team a thing of the past. The fact that this was used as a "slam" against Joe Thomas shows how idiotically out of touch the user is with today's NFL.

You are measuring physical size. In the Jim Brown era, players were measured by Heart, Pride & Determination ... aspects that are hollow in today's game.

[jiggins7919]

I haven't picked Browns to win this year, and having Myles Garrett wouldn't change that. However, if we WERE going to win, the only way would be for us to get pressure. As previously stated in another post, the Bengals have the worst rated tackles in the league. That sounds good until you realize we have the worst pass rushers in the league. We will not get pressure without bringing heat, and even then it's severely doubtful and would expose our secondary to being torched by another elite receiver. Make no mistake, we're in trouble...again. Several times last week we brought 8 men rushing, and multiple times the Colts blocked us 8 on 8. None of our guys won their match up. The most glaring example was the 2nd and 13 from the Colts 1 yard line, when we brought serious heat, only to not get remotely close. Brissett threw it up to Moncrief, who made the easy catch for a huge gain. Our defender couldn't track the ball (per usual), and the reception allowed the Colts to score yet another touchdown, effectively ending the game. No Collins, no Garrett...no pass rush. 

Maybe it's good Garrett isn't playing. Why rush him back? Yeah, I'm dying to see him. Yeah, coming back against awful tackles while at home sounds nice. But we're thinking long term here, and that's a good thing. We don't have Jamie Collins, probably Shelton, and now Garrett. Let's not risk further injury in a game we basically have little chance of winning. It's simply not worth it. 

I know what many people are saying, and that's the Bengals are 0-3, so why wouldn't this be a golden opportunity for us to get our first victory? We're at home. They haven't looked great. So what gives? Well, I'm glad you asked. The Bengals have perhaps the best front 7 in the league, and they are getting their heart and soul linebacker from suspension in Burfict. Conversely, we WON'T be getting our guys back. No heart and soul for us....nope. So we know Burfict will destroy us, but he's not even the real concern. Geno Atkins, their star DT, will annihilate us. Tretter has difficulty blocking raw power, and NOBODY has more power than Atkins (please see the clip last year when Atkins blew apart Cam Erving's butt). And if Atkins wasn't bad enough, their other DT from Auburn is playing out of this world. What is the biggest problem for our "revamped and improved" offensive line? Good question! Stunts...stunts absolutely destroy us. Everyone on this board probably understands what that is, but for anyone who doesn't, a stunt is generally when the DT's and DE's swap paths to the QB after the snap. There are variations, but imagine the DT shooting to the side to nail the OT, and then the DE looping around inside between the center and guard. It will kill us. Again. 

So now that Garrett and Collins arent playing, we know we won't get consistent pressure. What happens when we don't get pressure? We get torched by elite receivers, of course. Antonio Brown and TY Hilton have over 300 yards against us, and AJ Green will have approximately 200 by himself. Haden wasn't what he used to be, but you can't tell me we're better off without him. He played Green tough a few times, and we simply don't have anyone who can give him trouble. I'm not kicking either...Green very well may have 200 yards. And Tyler Eifert? The TE with the slow start? Give him 85 yards and 2 tds. 

The Bengals might be 0-3, but they're not Cleveland Browns 0-3. They should've won against the Packers and the Texans. I know they didn't, but what better way to get off the schnide than playing us? Anyone that played sports knows how important confidence is, and the Bengals literally expect to win this game. On the other hand, we HOPE to win. One of the most difficult intangibles for us to overcome is that every team we play fully expects to WIN. We're a breath of fresh air, a "Thank God" in the schedule, a way for teams to get back on track. That's what we are to virtually every team we play, and the only way that changes is to start winning, and that's not happening any time soon. Think about if you were playing us, who would scare you? What would you say as a fan the keys to victory are? Who would you have to stop? Gameplan for? Double team? Anything come to mind? Because it doesn't for me. We're the biggest cream puff out there. No deep weapons. No pass rushers. And no running game. Sounds appetizing, right? We don't even have a veteran QB who MIGHT get hot and win a game (see Josh McCown last week). 

No, this game won't be close. You'd think two teams who are 0-3 would somehow be close in several categories, or perhaps the game might even be a coin toss. You'd be mistaken. As I said after the last preseason game, if the Browns are going to win a couple games, they absolutely MUST win them early before the injuries set in because we simply don't have the necessary depth needed to compete in the NFL. However, since we're the Browns, the injuries happened earlier than even I thought possible, and here we are with a bunch of nobodies and our best players hurt before the 4th game. It's depressing and I get no joy from saying this...it's merely fact. We don't have talent. 

Now, you may ask, "Well, all-knowing and arrogant Jiggins, there are no certainties in life, so how COULD the Browns win?" I'll dig deep and lay out a scenario, however unlikely and comical. Browns win if we have a total team performance. By that I mean the special teams, defense, and offense all play relatively mistake free football for 4 quarters. We get a defensive or special teams touchdown (stop laughing, it's rude), we actually score points on our first drive (ok really, it's rude), and we somehow win an effing coin toss. We get our defense out there, force Bengals off the field, and gain some momentum EARLY. We also severely cut down on penalties, turnovers, and find some way to get pressure on Dalton and force him into poor decisions. We basically have to do ALL that to have a chance. No problem, right? 

Listen, I want a victory as bad as anyone. I especially want one in front of our home crowd and against a division rival. And hell, I could be wrong. We could play well and the Bengals may be worse than I thought. But don't bet on it. In fact, I'd bet against us no matter what the spread currently is. Wish I had better news. 

[ATENEARS]

4 minutes ago, jiggins7919 said:

Anyone that played sports knows how important confidence is, and the Bengals literally expect to win this game. On the other hand, we HOPE to win. One of the most difficult intangibles for us to overcome is that every team we play fully expects to WIN. We're a breath of fresh air, a "Thank God" in the schedule, a way for teams to get back on track. That's what we are to virtually every team we play, and the only way that changes is to start winning, and that's not happening any time soon. Think about if you were playing us, who would scare you? What would you say as a fan the keys to victory are? Who would you have to stop? Gameplan for? Double team? Anything come to mind? Because it doesn't for me. We're the biggest cream puff out there. No deep weapons. No pass rushers. And no running game. Sounds appetizing, right? We don't even have a veteran QB who MIGHT get hot and win a game (see Josh McCown last week). 

Great points and nicely stated without an in-your-face attitude for attention.

This Browns franchise has a lot over-come and I just wonder how much of your comments above are talked about in the locker room and front office. This is a HUGE hurdle to jump. I said going into this season, "Just win FOUR games, and I will start putting more fan effort into following this team ... just Four." It shouldn't be much to ask as a fan, but what is asked from the front office and from the coaching staff? I'm a bit tired of the small measurables this franchise seems to set as the bar. We seriously need a Ditka to grab guys by the facemask, take a baseball bat to the buffet table after games and start making some real noise. It is going to take A LOT to overcome the hurdles and this kid glove approach isn't enough. The franchise lacks an attitude and we parade in analytics. I'm not knocking analytics, I actually kind of like a modern approach, but I'm questioning the emphasis on attitude. Hue should be drawing a line in the sand during this stretch of "winnable" games. 

I just don't connect with today's players. I can't relate to being 1-18 since joining the club and celebrating a sack down by two scores late in the third-quarter ... just can't imagine celebrating a single play with such a long path ahead.

[Orion]

39 minutes ago, ATENEARS said:

The franchise lacks an attitude

I think that was some small part of the reason to bring in Greg Williams.....to try and bring an attitude to the D.  Of course, good players would help too.

[ATENEARS]

8 minutes ago, Orion said:

I think that was some small part of the reason to bring in Greg Williams.....to try and bring an attitude to the D.  Of course, good players would help too.

I suppose ... good point. Probably same goes for attempt with Rob Ryan. 

[Dutch Oven]

1 hour ago, ATENEARS said:

You are measuring physical size. In the Jim Brown era, players were measured by Heart, Pride & Determination ... aspects that are hollow in today's game.

And players of Nagurski's era considered players of Jim Brown's era to be soft and coddled. Every generation thinks the following generation is inferior.

[mjp28]

6 minutes ago, Dutch Oven said:

And players of Nagurski's era considered players of Jim Brown's era to be soft and coddled. Every generation thinks the following generation is inferior.

I like how yesterday Terry Francona said how today's BASEBALL players are far superior to players in his era.....just a fact! 

And football is no different, just checking the BUCKEYES depth chart today EVERY OL player over 310, unheard of in Jim Brown's era.

[Westside Steve]

A quote from American Graffiti, I think from John Milner.

" Rock and roll's been going downhill ever since Buddy Holly died."

WSS

[Dutch Oven]

8 minutes ago, mjp28 said:

I like how yesterday Terry Francona said how today's BASEBALL players are far superior to players in his era.....just a fact! 

And football is no different, just checking the BUCKEYES depth chart today EVERY OL player over 310, unheard of in Jim Brown's era.

Jim Brown could play in any era.

But here's a thought that will probably fire up some people: The 1964 Championship Cleveland Browns would lose if they could magically play the 2017 Cleveland Browns.

[mjp28]

3 minutes ago, Dutch Oven said:

Jim Brown could play in any era.

But here's a thought that will probably fire up some people: The 1964 Championship Cleveland Browns would lose if they could magically play the 2017 Cleveland Browns.

The 64 team would get beat, biggest player a DE was 275, the BUCKEYES could give them a run.

And star RBs, WRs, some QBS could have played in other eras, today's players don't need off season jobs just to get by and are pound for pound way better conditioned and prepared NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL.....don't believe it ask the current or former players!

[Flugel]

2 hours ago, ATENEARS said:

Great points and nicely stated without an in-your-face attitude for attention.

This Browns franchise has a lot over-come and I just wonder how much of your comments above are talked about in the locker room and front office. This is a HUGE hurdle to jump. I said going into this season, "Just win FOUR games, and I will start putting more fan effort into following this team ... just Four." It shouldn't be much to ask as a fan, but what is asked from the front office and from the coaching staff? I'm a bit tired of the small measurables this franchise seems to set as the bar. We seriously need a Ditka to grab guys by the facemask, take a baseball bat to the buffet table after games and start making some real noise. It is going to take A LOT to overcome the hurdles and this kid glove approach isn't enough. The franchise lacks an attitude and we parade in analytics. I'm not knocking analytics, I actually kind of like a modern approach, but I'm questioning the emphasis on attitude. Hue should be drawing a line in the sand during this stretch of "winnable" games. 

I just don't connect with today's players. I can't relate to being 1-18 since joining the club and celebrating a sack down by two scores late in the third-quarter ... just can't imagine celebrating a single play with such a long path ahead.

Great post Stan!  Good to see you popping in.  I LOVED to watch Ditka blow a gasket with OLD SCHOOL or Bill Parcells ready to insert his size 13 cleat up someone's dumpster.

This has been the most disgusting football season of my life. If these punks put as much energy into trying to beat their opponents as they do taking a knee - they might understand the game better than they appear to understand why and how they have freedoms to abuse here. And, oh by the way, they just might notice we have an African American that gets to start EVERY game no matter how long he can't find the strike zone as he negotiates the pocket like Helen Keller.  I'm gonna write the ad - attention deaf dumb and blind QBs: If you have a strong arm - we got your tenure.   Only in Cleveland can you have a Stanford intellect at QB that played in a Pro Style Offense throughout his 4 year scholarship watching a 21 year old pinball wizard behind center that played in Notre Dame's chaotic sand lot spread (after his college coach forewarned "he's not ready.") Geee, ya think?  Now just how would a coach that watched him practice every single day for 2 years know such a thing?

Yeah, I just love reading how we should just forfeit at least our first 8 games this year because the QB nobody thought well enough of in a shakey QB draft couldn't crack the first round priority anywhere among 32 teams.  Clearly, that's got tenure in Cleveland written all over it while it secures a place on the t-shirt.  It has always been easy to predict this franchise will struggle; but my family tradition centered on this team kept me feeling like the right thing to do is to keep putting on the game face every year.  Watching these punks golden shower people that were willing to die for our freedoms so they could earn their 6-8 digit salaries at an entertainment value of 1-15 followed up by 0-3 this year is a disgrace. By all means, keep turning this offense into looking like a baseball team sentenced to 9 innings behind a pitcher that can't find the strike zone all day.  When he finally does find the strike zone - we have to hope he throws to somebody that's still awake, not to be confused with Kenny Britt.

This team played better and moved the ball when Hogan replaced him (minus 1 bad decision). Not much different than how he looked during the preseason games he played in.  When is winning ever going to be an urgency here?  It's not like we're training the next Troy Aikman here making it all worth the growing pains.  It looks a lot more like we're training the next Brandon Weeden or Jamarcus Russell.  Besides, it's okay to sit a rookie like we did with Bernie for his first 5-7 games or NE did with Brady for his first 16 games, or the Oilers did with Steve McNair for his first 2-3 years, or the Rams did with Goff for half a year. Kizer isn't ready for us any more than our line up is ready for him (like our WR Corps in particular).   

 

 

[ATENEARS]

Why are we still parading out physical size to measure this era over past era's? That was never My point, at least ... I'm talking heart. Yeah, the players of yesteryear had off-season jobs to get by, but that made them even more hungry to let loose and play the game with all they had and with all heart. These wannabe's today are specialty players and are probably measured by how long the last on their personal trainers massage table after games, moreso than actual play. They are playing fantasy ball, and you are footing the bill.

[ATENEARS]

17 minutes ago, Flugel said:

Great post Stan!  Good to see you popping in.  I LOVED to watch Ditka blow a gasket with OLD SCHOOL or Bill Parcells ready to insert his size 13 cleat up someone's dumpster.

 

Wassup brother? Good to see you too. 

I was in the shower doing my thinking today and thought, "What if someone started a grass-roots professional football league to rival the NFL, and the difference was that the players wore no pads, wore no helmets (aka Rugby style)?" I'd watch it ... can't wait for the downfall of this dumbass league. This minute of football between six commercials sucks.

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, mjp28 said:

I like how yesterday Terry Francona said how today's BASEBALL players are far superior to players in his era.....just a fact! 

And football is no different, just checking the BUCKEYES depth chart today EVERY OL player over 310, unheard of in Jim Brown's era.

Football players today are NOT superior football players.  What it is is that some positions are  bigger, maybe stronger because of weight training and nutrition. Mainly the OL.

Running backs are no bigger/faster than in the 50s/ 60s/70.  Wide receivers are no bigger/faster than in the50s/ 60s/70s.  DBs and LBs are no bigger/faster than in the 60s/70s.

Defensive Ends are no bigger/faster than in the 50s/60s/70s.

I did a vast documentation of all this not too long ago.

QBs on average ARE a bit taller.

And Interior DL and OL are bigger...and probably stronger.  

So, it is ONLY in those two areas where things are that much different.

 

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Dutch Oven said:

Jim Brown could play in any era.

But here's a thought that will probably fire up some people: The 1964 Championship Cleveland Browns would lose if they could magically play the 2017 Cleveland Browns.

I would bet not.  Again, these Browns simply have a size advantage over that group in a couple of areas:  OL and interior DL.  

Compare all the other players on the two teams.

I would take a 1964 version of Paul Warfield and Gary Collins right here right now to play on this team. Compare their sizes, weight/height/speed to our current crop of WRs.....they would be better.

Collins  6'5   215   (they don't have 40 times for players back then that I can find)

Warfield was smallish at 6'0  188.   But compare to guys we got now and he is not any smaller.  

And tell me any of our guys that can catch the ball the way Collins could, or run routes the way Warfield did.   None of them.

That team would find a way to negate the weight disadvantage.

[The Gipper]

32 minutes ago, ATENEARS said:

Why are we still parading out physical size to measure this era over past era's? That was never My point, at least ... I'm talking heart. Yeah, the players of yesteryear had off-season jobs to get by, but that made them even more hungry to let loose and play the game with all they had and with all heart. These wannabe's today are specialty players and are probably measured by how long the last on their personal trainers massage table after games, moreso than actual play. They are playing fantasy ball, and you are footing the bill.

I wouldn't even go so far as to say players today have less "heart" as players of yore, I don't want to short changed today's players in that area.......but I will say that players today do not have any more SKILL than players of yore.

Size may matter now, like I said only in two places.  Skill is no better at all.

[ATENEARS]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

I would bet not.  Again, these Browns simply have a size advantage over that group in a couple of areas:  OL and interior DL.  

Compare all the other players on the two teams.

I would take a 1964 version of Paul Warfield and Gary Collins right here right now to play on this team. Compare their sizes, weight/height/speed to our current crop of WRs.....they would be better.

Collins  6'5   215   (they don't have 40 times for players back then that I can find)

Warfield was smallish at 6'0  188.   But compare to guys we got now and he is not any smaller.  

And tell me any of our guys that can catch the ball the way Collins could, or run routes the way Warfield did.   None of them.

That team would find a way to negate the weight disadvantage.

Your bringing that era to modern day, how about taking these modern day pre-Madonna's back in time, riding a bus to far away cities, sleeping at the motel 6 equivalent, no money for all the luxuries, playing on a cow pasture with less equipment, dealing with much, much greater racism and family hardships, etc ..

[Dutch Oven]

17 minutes ago, ATENEARS said:

Your bringing that era to modern day, how about taking these modern day pre-Madonna's back in time, riding a bus to far away cities, sleeping at the motel 6 equivalent, no money for all the luxuries, playing on a cow pasture with less equipment, dealing with much, much greater racism and family hardships, etc ..

I audibly laughed at "pre-Madonna's".

I don't think it's a coincidence that all these "back in the good ol' days" posts are popping up this week.

[ATENEARS]

Just now, Dutch Oven said:

I audibly laughed at "pre-Madonna's".

I don't think it's a coincidence that all these "back in the good ol' days" posts are popping up this week.

It's throw-back week! 

[Dutch Oven]

13 minutes ago, ATENEARS said:

It's throw-back week! 

Can the Browns wear their old uniforms then? Pleeeeeeeeease?

[Tour2ma]

15 hours ago, Orion said:

Get the smelling salts.  HELLOoo.......it's 2017 now.  Jim Brown couldn't run power sweeps in today's NFL.  Defensive players are no longer guys that weren't good enough to play offense.

I'll agree...JT is not what you'd call a run blocking road grader.  He's a left tackle of TODAY'S NFL.  He's a pass blocker...which is what the NFL has become. - But you know this stuff.

Really...

Plus there's a couple factoids... the Paul Brown era "power sweep" was lead by two pulling OGs with the sweep-side OT blocking down. Bob Gain and finger Schafrath did not pull either. "Pulling" OTs came a decade or two later.

As for Joe pulling... can't say I've seen a lot of that, but I can say that every ZBS run in his direction requires a similar skillset and Joe is great in the ZBS. It's demands have a lot in common with the PassPro skills that you pointed out are where Joe excels. Drive blocking? He doesn't suck... just not quite up to the level of his other first-ballot HoF game. Those he can't bury, he beats with his burst and hands to gain angles. Result is the same... Joe wins... a HoF percentage of the time.

[Tour2ma]

3 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Football players today are NOT superior football players.  What it is is that some positions are  bigger, maybe stronger because of weight training and nutrition. Mainly the OL.

Running backs are no bigger/faster than in the 50s/ 60s/70.  Wide receivers are no bigger/faster than in the50s/ 60s/70s.  DBs and LBs are no bigger/faster than in the 60s/70s.

Defensive Ends are no bigger/faster than in the 50s/60s/70s.

I did a vast documentation of all this not too long ago.

QBs on average ARE a bit taller.

And Interior DL and OL are bigger...and probably stronger.  

So, it is ONLY in those two areas where things are that much different.

Love to see your "vast documentation"... Link? Also like how you snuck the 70's into the argument...

[TexasAg1969]

2 hours ago, ATENEARS said:

It's throw-back week! 

Throw back week? I've been in "throw back" since the day I turned 40......................."Oh he's so old...............throw him back!"

[Orion]

Football players train all year 'round now-a-days.  They are physically bigger (more weight) and stronger (more muscle) than they were way back when.  And they are faster.  As I've said before, no longer are defensive players just guys that weren't good enough to be on offense.  Now, kids grow up WANTING to be LB'ers (Lawrence Taylor, Singletary, etc.) and WANTING to be DB's (Deon Sanders, etc.).   

You can't run power sweeps anymore.  Pulling linemen?  RB's would get chased down from behind.  The DE's & LB'ers are as fast as THEY are now.  

Sure, Jim Brown would still be good...but he wouldn't be a 'man among boys' anymore.  

note - there's a bunch (gaggle, pride, group, etc) of wild turkeys roaming the neighborhood.  Time to take my dog for a walk.

 

 

[jiggins7919]

Something else that doesn't bode well for us is this:

Andy Dalton's last 4 Browns games 4 wins & 0 losses 72.6% completion 9.2 yards per attempt 9 TDs (8.8%) & 0 INTs 130.4 passer rating. 

See, this is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. How confident you think Dalton is about this game? They probably can't wait for the damn kickoff. 

What really surprises me is how our team doesn't get that one blowout win every year, or even 2 "easy" wins a year. Those games where everything goes right. Virtually every team gets those just about every year. The game you get the pick 6, the blocked FG touchdown, or whatever. That magical game where Sheet just goes right. We don't get that. Ever.