Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Fix It List


Earl34

Recommended Posts

I never like over-analyzing the preseason but on a team with a lot of questions, it's hard not to. I was frankly disappointed that this didn't look much like a Mangini-coached team. The talent level on this team isn't something that's going to change drastically, of course, so I won't discuss the lack of speed on defense. Of the things I saw, here's some things that should (and hopefully can) be shored up.

 

1) Running Back blitz pick ups. I mention this in another post but it was SO horrible, it made me wonder if these guys even practiced. (I know they did because I spoke to someone who watched them practice this and it was, ahem, a challenge). If you can't pick up a blitzer and keep your QB upright, then it won't matter who is taking the snaps.

 

2) Cornerback contain on running plays. My 10 year-old plays corner and even he knows the cardinal rule of playing the run is not to give up the outside. Time and again (especially in the red zone) the corner didn't stay to the outside and gave up the edge.

 

3) Penalties. It goes without saying that penalties in the preseason should be fixed but this was an inordinate number. The offensive line took points of the board and the backups looked way overmatched against a defense that was still adjusting to the 3-4. Mangini's Jets were in the top ten least penalized teams last year and were top 3 in fewest penalty yards allowed.

 

4) WR play. I thought I would be more disappointed with the play of WRs. I thought that if the running game had been more effective, what I saw from the receivers was enough except for #17 not holding on to the ball. Furrey was good and Cribbs looks much better as a WR than any other special teams-WR-wannabe that I can remember. As good as the WRs were, I need to see some consistency out of the TEs (that wasn't there).

 

5) Pressure. It goes without saying that getting pressure on the opponent's QB is key in this league. It will make the back 7 players instantly better. You didn't see much of that. It's hard to believe that what we saw on Saturday had Rob Ryan's seal of approval on it but I just have to hope that perhaps this was more about being vanilla than anything else. Personally, I think that's a delusion...but hope that I'm wrong.

 

6) Rookies. On a rebuilding team, your hope lies in the rookie class. You want to see as much out of them as possible. The only current hope on the talent front is that any of these guys will be good enough to unseat an incumbent starter. I saw flashes of good stuff from Mack but at other times he looked like a rook. There was one play in particular where he had the right idea...he passed off a rusher to pick up a delayed blitzer but didn't get into the guy fast enough and he was by him. Robiskie (as above) showed some good hands. Francies showed he can be physical (a great hit BTW) and had a pick. Davis looked pedestrian to me. #36 on defense looked to be around the ball a lot. Time will tell.

 

I don't mention the QBs here because I think we don't have enough real-game data points. For my money (and I have no preference) I thought that Quinn looked more the part as he drove the team down the field. I was impressed with his delivery as it seemed more compact than I recall seeing in the past. He looked decisive and in control. We saw DA throw up a couple of poor attempts without anything that would resemble mechanics but I wouldn't feel comfortable excluding him just yet based on two plays. It doesn't look good for him so far. Ratliff looked uncomfortable but I've seen a lot of him in the past that makes me think he could start in this league some day.

 

I was particularly disappointed that Elam gave up the big play and Coleman looked average since they both were better than that last year. Barton frustrated me because he seemed to overrun a couple of plays but when you look up at the end of the season, he leads your team in tackles.

 

I hope that the film study has given the coaches a plan of action because you can only gain so much practicing against one's self.

 

Just my .02. I could be wrong. Feel free to add your own...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ATENEARS

7) Coaching - I was disappointed in the coaching. Our Defense was schemed, set-up, stretched-out, and taken advantage of. We were playing chase and not meeting the ball at the point of the attack. If the DE's turned a play inside, it still went for a huge game as no LB or Safety was there to plug the hole. The Packers sent out two from the backfield on one play and we got caught out of position. If they had that many behind the line at the snap, who the hell were seven of our DB's covering?

 

Stating that your offense/defense was vanilla, is a cop-out. A good coaching staff will show you everything, with confidence that you can't stop anything. You make an adjustment to counter something and they are ahead of you exposing the area you rolled a player from. The Packers flat-out outcoached the Browns staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Masters

I am not sure how you came to that observations on RB blitz pick up. The only guy who missed assignments was Davis. It's a bit of a stretch to call out all the RB blitz pick up/blocking when it was only a late round rookie that had problems with it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Aloysius
I am not sure how you came to that observations on RB blitz pick up. The only guy who missed assignments was Davis. It's a bit of a stretch to call out all the RB blitz pick up/blocking when it was only a late round rookie that had problems with it.

Noah Herron also whiffed a few times, but the top two backs didn't seem to have any problems picking up the blitz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Masters
Noah Herron also whiffed a few times, but the top two backs didn't seem to have any problems picking up the blitz.

 

Good point, I forgot about Herron. When it got to him and Davis, they pretty much blurred into one guy while watching.

 

But as you said, this wasn't the top two guys on the RB depth chart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Aloysius
I was particularly disappointed that Elam gave up the big play and Coleman looked average since they both were better than that last year. Barton frustrated me because he seemed to overrun a couple of plays but when you look up at the end of the season, he leads your team in tackles.

Elam did do a nice job blowing up the first play from scrimmage, blitzing the A gap and stopping the run play. But I'm concerned that he may be the type of guy who's always going to struggle against pass-heavy teams like the Packers. Do you remember how bad he was against the Broncos last year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ATENEARS
Elam did do a nice job blowing up the first play from scrimmage, blitzing the A gap and stopping the run play. But I'm concerned that Elam is the type of guy who's always going to struggle against pass-heavy teams like the Packers. Do you remember how bad he was against the Broncos last year?

 

I believe on the bomb that he got burned on, that we gave them way too much time to throw. He appeared to maybe get caught up into thinking the play was underneith ... although, thats a concern in itself (safety biting).

 

At the training camp sessions, I was very pleased to see us bringing the heat from the corners. We also played up tighter on the receivers than what was displayed Saturday night. I didn't see as much Safety blitzing at the camps, but if we will bring a corner I'd have to assume that we'd be bringing a safety up even more.

 

My concern is still with the LB's ... DQ was making tackles 7 yards down field like Andra Davis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elam did do a nice job blowing up the first play from scrimmage, blitzing the A gap and stopping the run play. But I'm concerned that he may be the type of guy who's always going to struggle against pass-heavy teams like the Packers. Do you remember how bad he was against the Broncos last year?

 

Yes, not one of his better games. Then again, he comes up with a game-changing pick six against Buffalo.

 

Masters, if you saw it differently then perhaps I am not accurate. I was pre-conditioned by the fact that all of the running backs from Ali to Jamal were chewed on for bumbling through that drill and not just on one occasion. At this point, we'd better hope that Davis isn't going to do as badly in the future.

 

Atenears, I too hate it when they serve up the "vanilla" argument. That's a point well-taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Aloysius
I believe on the bomb that he got burned on, that we gave them way too much time to throw. He appeared to maybe get caught up into thinking the play was underneith ... although, thats a concern in itself (safety biting).

Could be. But as I think Bernie said Saturday night, Elam's problem is that he lacks the recovery speed to compensate for his mistakes. If he bites, our defense is going to get burned deep.

 

Hopefully, Rob Ryan will help him out by rushing more than three guys. And it wouldn't be such a bad idea to sub in Mike Adams on obvious passing downs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Masters
My concern is still with the LB's ... DQ was making tackles 7 yards down field like Andra Davis.

 

Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is. But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):

 

3-1-GB 31 (13:33) 25-R.Grant right guard to GB 33 for 2 yards (52-D.Jackson, 98-R.Smith).

1-10-GB 33 (12:54) 25-R.Grant right tackle to GB 47 for 14 yards (26-A.Elam, 52-D.Jackson).

3-10-CLE 42 (4:48) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to CLE 37 for 5 yards (52-D.Jackson).

2-4- (15:00) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to 50 for no gain (52-D.Jackson).

 

Sure Jackson had two stops 5 and 14 yards up field. But he also had two stuffs in there as well. Then when you look at where the big runs were and what you saw, those runs have a lot to do with the guy at OLB on that side not sealing off the run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ATENEARS
Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is. But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):

 

3-1-GB 31 (13:33) 25-R.Grant right guard to GB 33 for 2 yards (52-D.Jackson, 98-R.Smith).

1-10-GB 33 (12:54) 25-R.Grant right tackle to GB 47 for 14 yards (26-A.Elam, 52-D.Jackson).

3-10-CLE 42 (4:48) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to CLE 37 for 5 yards (52-D.Jackson).

2-4- (15:00) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to 50 for no gain (52-D.Jackson).

 

Sure Jackson had two stops 5 and 14 yards up field. But he also had two stuffs in there as well. Then when you look at where the big runs were and what you saw, those runs have a lot to do with the guy at OLB on that side not sealing off the run.

 

Dude, with all due respect, you put up four plays that netted 21-yards and used it in a positive light for our LB-defense. that's kind of like sayin, "Take away the INT, add a phantom TD and we scored 7-points ... add in the missed field goal and we only lost 17-10!"

 

Oh wait, you did say that too.

 

This was the best preseason game I bet you've ever watched ... the second time around.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ate,

 

When did you start to get all hater on here?

 

It wasnt the prettiest game, but it's preseason who gives two shits about the final score.

 

Quinn moved the ball and looked good doing it.

 

DQ looked good, our DE's were getting washed out. Our LB's scare me when in pass coverage though..they don't seem comfortable making reads yet. Our RB's looked unimpressive. Jamal is so washed up I am suprised he is still collecting an NFL paycheck.

 

As far as coaching schemes go, who would want to run anything but vanilla basic offense and defence in week ONE OF PRESEASON..don't tip your cap before the actual season starts.

 

I would go as far as saying it's stupid to run anything but the most basic of packages.

 

Not a bad game, just iron out some kinks and move on.

 

-Lambdo

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Masters
Dude, with all due respect, you put up four plays that netted 21-yards and used it in a positive light for our LB-defense. that's kind of like sayin, "Take away the INT, add a phantom TD and we scored 7-points ... add in the missed field goal and we only lost 17-10!"

 

Oh wait, you did say that too.

 

This was the best preseason game I bet you've ever watched ... the second time around.

 

Read my post, think, then respond. Not in reverse order.

 

"Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is." I think that just goes against your first sentance, as well as your first snippy comment. And do you think your Ricky Bobby with the "with all do respect" line.

 

I have no where made the statment about taking away the int, adding a phantom TD and CLE scored 7 or 10 points.

 

Then, "But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):". Now look at that as solely about Jackson, and where the play was run at/to. I simply questioned singling out Jackson. Twice he did get in there and stuff the run. Twice he tackled up field when the ball was run away from him and the OLB didn't seal.

 

As to your last statement, obviously you haven't read anything on what I said I saw in that game, including the thread I started about what I saw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ATENEARS
Twice he did get in there and stuff the run. Twice he tackled up field when the ball was run away from him and the OLB didn't seal.

 

You do realize that on a 3rd-and-1 call that netted 2-yards was a first down for the Packers right?

 

Later in the half, we stopped'em for a two-yard gain on 2nd-and-goal from the two .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Masters
You do realize that on a 3rd-and-1 call that netted 2-yards was a first down for the Packers right?

 

Later in the half, we stopped'em for a two-yard gain on 2nd-and-goal from the two .....

 

I do realize that and you know that my point had nothing to do with down, but only distance, which was your harp on Jackson and exaggeration of where he was tackling guys. Settle your feet their Fred Astaire, your tapping all around my comments and around you responding w/o reading/thinking the first time here.

 

Not sure what your goal is with that last attempt at a witty snide comment. Seeing as how I never said CLE stopped the run at all. I'll try an make this simple for you. Play of Jackson - one subject. Play of the CLE D as a whole against the run, different subject.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ATENEARS
I do realize that and you know that my point had nothing to do with down, but only distance, which was your harp on Jackson and exaggeration of where he was tackling guys.

 

Seriously? a two-yard stop on 3rd-and-1 has nothing to do with the down or distance?

 

Maybe it was pass plays that I witnessed DQ getting caught in no man's land and playing chase, maybe it was the inside track and whiff on the 2nd-n-2 that resulted in a Packer rushing TD ... but whatever it was, I wasn't as impressed as you on what seems like a lone play in an entire half.

 

I singled him out as I hope he's our best defender to play behind Smith. I'd much rather be dwelling on a couple tackles for loss, or 3-and-outs he created, and not twelve-and-a-half minutes of ball possession by the Packers in the second quarter.

 

I won't apologize for the teams play, make excuses with ya, or celebrate Packer first downs from valiant defensive efforts. I'm disgusted. Deal with it.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...