IMO Our def scheme sucks...

[tiamat63]

6 minutes ago, CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS said:

RG3 was a system QB. He had guys wide open because of the zone run scheme with Alfred Morris tearing it up.

He never had the arm to be a threat from he pocket. 

 

 

 

 

So now that you've been refreshed, RG3 had a live arm... which was never his issue.   I'll leave any more brilliant rebuttals to you. 

edit:  I'm just convinced you're fucking trolling at this point.     Prove me otherwise.  

[hoorta]

24 minutes ago, tiamat63 said:

 

 

 

ROTFL.  Hey- my best friend, HIgh School buddy and College roommate graduated Summa Cum Laude with a major in physics. Figured he couldn't make money doing that, so went to Medical School instead. Didn't even bother buying a book for freshman calculus. Unfortunately, his math genius didn't rub off on me. He saved my ass when I took the watered down Physical Chemistry for medical majors. The guy actually understood and thought thermodynamics was pretty easy.    If I was better in the math department, I might have gone for a degree in Astronomy, or certainly chemistry (I was one course short of a minor there). 

[Tour2ma]

4 hours ago, tiamat63 said:

That's cool,  RG3 is still faster than any LB in the NFL and some safeties.  I think you fail to understand this point - time and punishment is the enemy of any football player.   Baltimore is asking their QB to double his contact rate and be a long-term franchise QB (10 years) That simply is unheard of and hard to imagine will happen in 2019.

RG3... Vick... there's a list.

There are running QBs. There's are old QBs. There are no old, running QBs.

3 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

Lalalalalalalalalalalaa

🤗👍

lol...

26 minutes ago, CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS said:

It’s not sustainable.. if he develops as a passer, he won’t run as much therefore take less hits.

As for hits, there are more variables to take into consideration, like center of gravity, weight of players, etc. not everyone is built the same.. 

All that I’m trying to say is that he has the potential to be scary good.

Of course if their run game/defense was bad, he’d be struggling right now. I get that.

No dispute excepting the size of the "if" in "if he develops"...

He was and still is primarily a one-read QB... and from what I've seen (mostly at UL) that one read had to be well open. So there's a long road ahead of him.

Not saying he won't make it as a passer... just that I do not like his odds.

We shall see...

[CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS]

3 hours ago, tiamat63 said:

 

 

 

 

So now that you've been refreshed, RG3 had a live arm... which was never his issue.   I'll leave any more brilliant rebuttals to you. 

edit:  I'm just convinced you're fucking trolling at this point.     Prove me otherwise.  

Lmao did you just bust a nut or something?

I’m not watching that but by the time he got to Cleveland his arm was very subpar. I’m not wasting my time watching highlights from years ago I have no interest in

edit: I wastched the video. First 5 throws were to the flat. One was inaccurate, behind the RB. The throw to the wide open Garçon was poorly placed. Throwing motion is long and not quick...

My opinion remains unchanged.

Good try tho.

[tiamat63]

11 minutes ago, CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS said:

Lmao did you just bust a nut or something?

I’m not watching that but by the time he got to Cleveland his arm was very subpar. I’m not wasting my time watching highlights from years ago I have no interest in

edit: I wastched the video. First 5 throws were to the flat. One was inaccurate, behind the rn. The throw to the wide open Garçon was poorly placed. My opinion remains unchanged.

Good try tho.

So you "watched" But have no idea what you're looking at by design then. 

Sweet.   Noted.   

[TexasAg1969]

16 hours ago, hoorta said:

ROTFL.  Hey- my best friend, HIgh School buddy and College roommate graduated Summa Cum Laude with a major in physics. Figured he couldn't make money doing that, so went to Medical School instead. Didn't even bother buying a book for freshman calculus. Unfortunately, his math genius didn't rub off on me. He saved my ass when I took the watered down Physical Chemistry for medical majors. The guy actually understood and thought thermodynamics was pretty easy.    If I was better in the math department, I might have gone for a degree in Astronomy, or certainly chemistry (I was one course short of a minor there). 

LOL-I'm married to one of those. First and only Bs she ever got were freshman year at Cornell. Since she graduated Magna Cum Laude there could not have been too many. However if you measured out common sense I'd get a bucket and she'd get a thimble. That is generally acknowledged in the family. My Magna Cum Laude son in law in computer science once asked my daughter if she was sure her mom really graduated from Cornell with those kind of honors because she didn't have a lick of common sense. LOL! Just verified what my daughter, son and I knew already.🤩

[CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS]

14 hours ago, tiamat63 said:

So you "watched" But have no idea what you're looking at by design then. 

Sweet.   Noted.   

Oh no a random on the Internet noted something! 😮🤯🤯

[Flugel]

On 1/1/2019 at 3:17 PM, Clevfan4life said:

 

sigh....ok, let me explain some things. First, 0-16 is a team effort....which means both sides of the ball. I shouldn't have to explain that to a football fan, let alone a Browns fan...but here we are. Second, that turnover margin must be the ONLY reason why overall we improved only ONE spot in team defense rankings. Let this sink in......in 2017 we were 7th against the run and 19th aginst the pass. That's pretty respectable. In 2018 we were 28th against the run and 26th against the pass. So that turnover margin is the only conceivable reason I can think of why we went from 31st in overall defense to 30th. Ok, we got good at stripping the ball and we had players make some key crucial plays. So even your guys "it's a passing league" arguments fall away when you see we dropped 7 spots in pass defense right? 

I'd sigh too with an explanation like that Clevsies.  I can get a way better "YEAH BUT" from a Budweiser Frog Commercial... 

Defensive rankings are only based on yardage, so it's a percentage of truth you're basing your entire argument on.  NOW, there's 2 other very important variables that come into play when judging the success of a defense like points allowed and turnovers in particular.  For example, the players and scheme combined for a #2 ranking in takeaways with 31 (17 INT 14 FUM) in 2018 compared to a 32nd ranking in takeaways in 2017 with only 13 (7 INT 6 FUM).  You can pretend all you want there's no defensive progress but going to #2 from #32 overall is drastic improvement. And, we went from being ranked 31st in points allowed in 2017 to being ranked 21st in 2018. Understanding we lost 8 less games in 2018 - what tells me most about how our defense competed/improved?  Yardage yielded or points allowed and takeaways? 

What do turnovers tell us?  When Roethlisberger turned the ball over 5-6 times in week 1 - it's a result of better pressure on QB in tandem with better coverage when both upgrades starting at corner were healthy (Mitchell and Ward).  Throughout the period both of our new starting corners were healthy and not allowing the gimme quick passes from QBs - we pressured and sacked QBs to a #1 ranking in turnovers and turnover margin. A lot of the fumbles were from QBs while a lot of INTs were from QBs throwing the ball before they wanted to. Is it just a coincidence Cleveland ends up with a Corner (Ward) and DE (Garrett) in the Pro Bowl?  Granted, some of that #1 ranking subsided when we lost Mitchell, then his replacement, and then his replacement too.  Losing 2 Gaines in 1 season is an oxymoron we can live without. When Mitchell returned - we kept losing Ward to concussions so we really never had the 2 biggest upgrades in coverage on the field together; and suddenly we got easier to throw on again. Coming off 0-16, you can't afford to lose the most important upgrades and their backups to injury or you lose some degree of sting/aggressiveness in your ability and how you attack offenses. The only mutual ground we share - is the tackling was very inconsistent from 1 week to the next; and left a lot to be desired especially during the weeks we didn't win.  Plenty of FA money and draft picks to improve this in 2019 so you can either exhale or try to hold your breath longer than Taco. 

If you look at the Superbowl Championship for the Saints (2009-10) back when Gregg Williams was the DC.  They only ranked 25th in Team Defense and 20th in points allowed. But they ended the season with a turnover margin ranked #3 with +11 behind 26 INTs and 19 FUMs.  Meanwhile, DE Will Smith had his best year as a Pro at sacking the QB with a total of 13.  Who did they need to beat in the Superbowl?  The AFC's HOF QB Peyton Manning and that high powered offense.  When 2 elite QBs meet - the difference in the game is going to boil down to turnovers and what team plays enough defense to win.

[Clevfan4life]

Im still putting more value in yards. Im not buying any cool stories about "contextualized yardage". That smells like millennial participation trophy bullshit to me, which i know ur not a millennial. 

Im glad they're getting more turnovers, obviously. But the "yards" they gave up during the season are what cost us a playoff birth. I mean it did, theres no talking around that  Theres no fumble "scheme", that comes from coaching a certain tackle technique and is irrespective of overall scheme. That overall scheme is what i have an issue with. 

Ive gone through it now too many times to rehash it, but the weird hybrid looks tgat fooled no one and forced the DL into too many cute stunts and loops to try to shore up the interior gaps, THAT is what cost us the season. Because i saw multiple games where opposing teams just murdered us on the exact same play throughout the entire game. That is on the DC flugel....period. 

 

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

Im still putting more value in yards. Im not buying any cool stories about "contextualized yardage". That smells like millennial participation trophy bullshit to me, which i know ur not a millennial. 

Im glad they're getting more turnovers, obviously. But the "yards" they gave up during the season are what cost us a playoff birth. I mean it did, theres no talking around that  Theres no fumble "scheme", that comes from coaching a certain tackle technique and is irrespective of overall scheme. That overall scheme is what i have an issue with. 

Ive gone through it now too many times to rehash it, but the weird hybrid looks tgat fooled no one and forced the DL into too many cute stunts and loops to try to shore up the interior gaps, THAT is what cost us the season. Because i saw multiple games where opposing teams just murdered us on the exact same play throughout the entire game. That is on the DC flugel....period. 

 

 I basically agree with Flugelhorn and not with you 

[Clevfan4life]

31 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

 I basically agree with Flugelhorn and not with you 

Cool. 

[Flugel]

5 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

Im still putting more value in yards. Im not buying any cool stories about "contextualized yardage". That smells like millennial participation trophy bullshit to me, which i know ur not a millennial. 

Im glad they're getting more turnovers, obviously. But the "yards" they gave up during the season are what cost us a playoff birth. I mean it did, theres no talking around that  Theres no fumble "scheme", that comes from coaching a certain tackle technique and is irrespective of overall scheme. That overall scheme is what i have an issue with. 

Ive gone through it now too many times to rehash it, but the weird hybrid looks tgat fooled no one and forced the DL into too many cute stunts and loops to try to shore up the interior gaps, THAT is what cost us the season. Because i saw multiple games where opposing teams just murdered us on the exact same play throughout the entire game. That is on the DC flugel....period. 

 

You've gone through it enough times to show us why nobody is paying you to Coordinate their Defense.  Never said there was a fumble scheme did I?   I can't help it if you want to ruin Paiget's Model of Conceptualization here in 2 easy posts Clevsies. 

I've posted a few times that Gregg Williams counted 28 times in 2017 that his pass rush was within 1-1.5 steps from hitting/sacking the QB.  Then he explained the reason most of those were all "close but no cigar" was because our inability to cover people allowed QBs the quick uncontested throws. Go back and watch our first few games when Mitchell and Ward were both starting to see this was much improved.  We pressured the crap out of Roethlisberger (the tackle of him to the ground out of the pocket by Garrett gave Pitt a bs 1st and goal from the 2 when they would have had to settle for a FG in a game that ended tied in regulation and OT). We pressured Brees so much he considered changing his last name to Mud as well as his undies because of it.  If we made just 1 or 2 of the 4 missed kicks that day it's a W. 

You act like you expect a genius guided hocus pocus with our 4 man d-line in need of 2 upgrade to its starters.  So?  I've seen Williams move Ogunjobi from lining up next to Garrett to lining up on the other side at DT.  He also kicks in a tall wirey Ogbah (that nobody confused as the next Richard Seymore).  Other times doing inside or outside X-stunts to mix it up.  Just like in chess, you'd prefer to attack opponents with your best attack pieces (not pawns).  Our Dline is 50% pawn right now while Ogunjobi and Garrett showed great progress.  LBers were decimated with injury throughout the year (ie; Shobert, Kirksey, Burgess, etc).  Same can be said with all the corners at the top of our depth chart before losing both backup corners named Gaines.  Before you give me the ole all teams have injuries diatribe - THIS was the only team coming off 0-16 football going through that... 

To get an idea of how easy this is.  Challenge someone to a game of chess.  Let them use all of their attack pieces and pawns while you have to replace all your attack pieces with pawns but the Bishop and Queen. Get back to me on how easy it is...  The D is building but it's hard to judge the Coordinator until we get enough of the important dynamics in place.

 

[Unsympathetic]

You don't have a scheme when your top two linebackers are #1 [schobert] and #4 [collins] in the league in missed tackles. 

You have a tactic - run the guy down from behind.

[CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS]

10 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

You don't have a scheme when your top two linebackers are #1 [schobert] and #4 [collins] in the league in missed tackles. 

You have a tactic - run the guy down from behind.

Scho and Collins are both 3-4 players imo.. same with Kirksey, he’s more of an athletic ILB. 

Collins, Scho, Kirksey, Avery. Those guys should be on the field. At the same time. 

[hoorta]

9 hours ago, TexasAg1969 said:

LOL-I'm married to one of those. First and only Bs she ever got were freshman year at Cornell. Since she graduated Magna Cum Laude there could not have been too many. However if you measured out common sense I'd get a bucket and she'd get a thimble. That is generally acknowledged in the family. My Magna Cum Laude son in law in computer science once asked my daughter if she was sure her mom really graduated from Cornell with those kind of honors because she didn't have a lick of common sense. LOL! Just verified what my daughter, son and I knew already.🤩

Strictly OT, but a few personal experiences Bill.  Wife had a supervisor that sounds a lot like your better half.  

There's two types of geniuses. Physics pal Don is one of the most normal guys you'd ever want to meet- medical specialty is Neurology....  I'm Medical Lab myself, me and Don are watching a Browns game, he's on call. All of a sudden he switches into Doctor mode on the phone. After he hangs up, I ask him  "what was that about?"  "Guy had a brain stem stroke."  "Never heard of that one". "That's because you're not a Neurologist."   

Back when I worked in reference lab, we had a Doc as our supervisor.  Nice guy, but he came off as sort of a Goober. Never one to blow his own horn. So over a period of months I heard this stuff second hand.  "Lance went to Stanford Medical School" Oh really?  "Lance got a full free ride to Stanford Medical School."  You're kidding me right?  "BTW, Lance had the highest score in the Country on the MCATS." Makes sense now. Don only aced the math part of the MCATS.  

Then you have my wife Sue's pal who we met up with in Curacao way back for the Solar eclipse. Has a Doctorate in Virtual Reality from MIT. Conversations sort of went like this- "The Earthlings did not understand my communication. I will rephrase."   

 

[tiamat63]

5 minutes ago, CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS said:

Scho and Collins are both 3-4 players imo.. same with Kirksey, he’s more of an athletic ILB. 

Collins, Scho, Kirksey, Avery. Those guys should be on the field. At the same time. 

What the hell does that even mean?  Would Schoberts responsibilities somehow change in a new scheme?  Not likely, he'll still be the off ball ILB.   That also has almost nothing to do with missed tackle percentage. 

Avery is primarily a 2 pt Edge that can move in space when asked.   He's a pass rusher first and foremost.   He's been used between WLB and SLB on occasion and attacked in coverage when there.  Right now of the people you've listed, 2 fill a more utility role for this defense (Collins and Avery)  

[CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS]

7 minutes ago, tiamat63 said:

What the hell does that even mean?  Would Schoberts responsibilities somehow change in a new scheme?  Not likely, he'll still be the off ball ILB.   

Avery is primarily a 2 pt Edge that can move in space when asked.   He's a pass rusher first and foremost.   He's been used between WLB and SLB on occasion and attacked in coverage when there.  Right now of the people you've listed, 2 fill a more utility role for this defense (Collins and Avery)  

Scho would do better. He is not a pure open field tackler, he lacks size to tackle bigger RBs. Scho and Kirko with a solid run stopping/pass rushing Avery and a versatile Collins would be a nice combination of LBs on the field. 

Avery will only get better in pass coverage. That’s not why he got drafted.

[tiamat63]

11 minutes ago, CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS said:

Scho would do better. He is not a pure open field tackler, he lacks size to tackle bigger RBs. Scho and Kirko with a solid run stopping/pass rushing Avery and a versatile Collins would be a nice combination of LBs on the field. 

Avery will only get better in pass coverage. That’s not why he got drafted.

You're literally thinking of this in terms of the most simplistic base defense (34).    So to clear this up for you,  even in your madden like understanding of what a '34' is...  Schob would still be taking on RB's and depending on an exchange of gap responsibilities, would be also asked to fill instead of cleaning up and securing.    No scheme change, NONE, will make him tackle better and at 6'2 230 if you can't tackle well now, then you probably won't just be better overnight.      Joe has plenty of size, the problem is (at times) how we deploy him and how the line in front of him plays at times.   You're never going to get all 4 on the field at a time save for the 15% of the time you might be playing base.  

 

edit:  Check out Roquan Smith in Chi town, guy.   That's what Schob would be playing for the most part.    Now, please tell me what part of that makes him a better tackler?

 

 

[Clevfan4life]

41 minutes ago, Flugel said:

He also kicks in a tall wirey Ogbah (that nobody confused as the next Richard Seymore). 

 

Ogbahs tall and wirey, heehh? Whaa?

he's a fucking monster

[Clevfan4life]

 

 

so "wirey"....really built like a wire no doubt about it

[CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS]

30 minutes ago, tiamat63 said:

You're literally thinking of this in terms of the most simplistic base defense (34).    So to clear this up for you,  even in your madden like understanding of what a '34' is...  Schob would still be taking on RB's and depending on an exchange of gap responsibilities, would be also asked to fill instead of cleaning up and securing.    No scheme change, NONE, will make him tackle better and at 6'2 230 if you can't tackle well now, then you probably won't just be better overnight.      Joe has plenty of size, the problem is (at times) how we deploy him and how the line in front of him plays at times.   You're never going to get all 4 on the field at a time save for the 15% of the time you might be playing base.  

 

edit:  Check out Roquan Smith in Chi town, guy.   That's what Schob would be playing for the most part.    Now, please tell me what part of that makes him a better tackler?

 

 

So what do you suggest then? Dumping Collins? Trading Avery? And getting another interior DL and finding a new LB?

 

[tiamat63]

7 minutes ago, CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS said:

So what do you suggest then? Dumping Collins? Trading Avery? And getting another interior DL and finding a new LB?

 

I would like to see a gap sound 1tech who can hold the point and flow laterally.   Collins can stay because he has utility, Avery absolutely needs to stay and if anything - Kirksey is the one that is really replaceable. 

[Unsympathetic]

3 hours ago, CLEVELANDwantsPLAYOFFS said:

Avery will only get better in pass coverage

He will not. And that's why he shouldn't start. He's our top backup LB.. if you are excited about him then we can move on to long snappers and swing tackles.

I agree with Pluto that we should bring in 2, maybe 3 new LB's between the draft and who we can snag in FA.  Who stays? Frankly, I don't give a buckeye

[Clevfan4life]

11 minutes ago, Unsympathetic said:

He will not. And that's why he shouldn't start. He's our top backup LB.. if you are excited about him then we can move on to long snappers and swing tackles.

I agree with Pluto that we should bring in 2, maybe 3 new LB's between the draft and who we can snag in FA.  Who stays? Frankly, I don't give a buckeye

Why are u down on avery? He's a 5th round rookie project that made considerable improvements in his rushing and coverage over the course of 1 season. Edge defense is his main weakness that prob wont go away anytime soon cause he's not built for it, doesnt have the length. Which is why he was the long down edge rusher and rotation 43 olb'er.

[Flugel]

12 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

Ogbahs tall and wirey, heehh? Whaa?

he's a fucking monster

Which is it?   A monster wearing an Oklahoma State Cowboys jersey 4 years ago? Or the guy you're always complaining about in Cleveland getting rag-dolled?   Newsflash: Photoshop hasn't helped him as a DT in the trenches...

Anyway, he's listed at 6'4" 275 lbs today; so when he kicks inside to DT to face OGs over 300 lbs - he doesn't confuse me with a more effective guy like Philly's Fletcher Cox and 6'5" 315 lbs. If you're going to be that tall inside - you better have some weight on you.  That said, when there's a compact leverage superiority like Aaron Donald at 6'1" 280 lbs that can remove the legs/base of every OG he faces playing with ideal pad height Ogbah is incapable of. He also has ideal quickness and power to consistently whip double teams. Before him, Geno Atkins was a 6'1" 300 NT that frequented Pro Bowls for Cincy as a leverage pad height role model.  Even Ogunjobi (who's a much more effective DT than Ogbah) is listed at 6'2" 305 lbs this year - which explains why I usually see a much better pad height and push as a result of it than Ogbah provides.   DTs playing this weekend will include 2 Ratbirds weighing 340 lbs (Michael Pierce and Brandon Williams), SD's Brandon Mebane at 6'1" 311 lbs, Chicago's Eddie Goldman at 6'4" 320 lbs, Indy's Al Woods 6'4" 330 lbs and Hassan Ridgeway 6'3" 318 lbs, Houston DJ Reader 6'3" 325 lbs and backup Brandon Dunn 6'2" 300 lbs. Moral of the story, if you're going to be as light as 275 lbs - it seems to favor the more compact, power house guys wired for better pad heights. 

Ogbah is only wired to be a DE which I expect him to be when our line up is complete enough to permit that.  That is, if he's good enough to beat out whoever they bring in.  I wasn't nearly as impressed with him this year as I was before he got injured in 2017. Then again, I'd rather be comparing him at the position he was drafted to play here rather than being a temporary band aid at another position we lack depth and starting talent at.

This brings us back to our debate you're having trouble seeing the whole picture in your quest to win an argument in lieu of discussing the situation.  When Gregg Williams has another guy wired to start at DT in our lineup again - I think you'll see less smoke and mirrors to cover up what's missing.  Didn't I say that before your detour above?  

 

[Flugel]

13 hours ago, Clevfan4life said:

 

 

so "wirey"....really built like a wire no doubt about it

Okay, you want me to get excited he's built like Tim Tebow and Brady Quinn, which would have been fine if we weren't counting on him to be the band aid/temporary solution to our lack of depth and talent at DT...  

[Flugel]

11 hours ago, Unsympathetic said:

He will not. And that's why he shouldn't start. He's our top backup LB.. if you are excited about him then we can move on to long snappers and swing tackles.

I agree with Pluto that we should bring in 2, maybe 3 new LB's between the draft and who we can snag in FA.  Who stays? Frankly, I don't give a buckeye

With all due respect, I think you're hurrying your conclusion here.  The same was thought about Schobert by many until some identified the right niche for him with a Pro Bowl to show for it.   After Philip Rivers summarized all his research, he said Schobert is one of the biggest pain in the asses at LBer in the league to match up with in the passing game THIS (especially when we have both Safeties lining up in the same area code as our defense). As fate would have it, Schobert still had a pulled hammy and he never played against the Chargers.  Then again, nobody on defense played against the Chargers when we get right down to it. 

 

[Dutch Oven]

I like Schobert, I think he's athletic and is obviously the QB of the defense. 

But I'd like a more physical force at MLB. Could Schobert move to one of the OLB spots? 

[tiamat63]

9 minutes ago, Dutch Oven said:

I like Schobert, I think he's athletic and is obviously the QB of the defense. 

But I'd like a more physical force at MLB. Could Schobert move to one of the OLB spots? 

He could, but having a Mike backer with his wheels and cover ability is pretty damn nice.  

edit: I'm imaging Schob and Devin White on the field and it makes me tingle.

[Dutch Oven]

1 minute ago, tiamat63 said:

He could, but having a Mike backer with his wheels and cover ability is pretty damn nice.  

It is, especially in today's pass-happy environment. 

But man, he's a weakness when teams decide to stick to the run.