2017 Season The Good, Bad and Ugly

I'm not blaming the RB(s)...I am blaming both Crowell and Hue for not calling run plays. Crowell isn't dancing behind the line, he's running up the asses of the line. Part of the problem is the shotgun running game..I certainly hope installing a new offense for Hogan will put the QB under center and that will also help this running game develop. This is the NFL, the holes don't open up and stay open for 2-3 seconds, it's a touch the ball and cut league. You better damn well be at the hole when it is initiated or it will be closed before you get there. I really think Duke has better vision than Crow, however, I'm not convinced he could hold up to a 25 touch per game status.

 

Again I agree, Crowell isn't "seeing it". I also think he's a guy who needs more carries, to get comfortable and begin to allow it to slow down, so he does see it.

It' s the chicken or the egg. It's Adrian Peterson. Crow needs reps, to get it going. I also agree, that going under center will allow that to happen, and that Duke isn't suited to a carry per game. I don't want to see him crippled by injury, thus losing his best asset, quickness and speed.

I would rank our offensive skill players thusly: Duke, Crow, Coleman (out), then the TEs. I'd like to think the coaching staff knows that and can develop a game plan that focuses on that. I believe our D is up to the task, for the most part, and can keep us in games, if we can stop turning it over, so a more conservative Offensive plan makes sense. If we could rely on our kicker, it may actually win us a few games.

Can I get an amen?

 

I WANT PLAYMAKERS

*later*

U DON'T NEED PLAYMAKERS! THE TEAM HAZ WINNING RECORD!

Gronkowski - #1 TE
Aaron Donald - #1 DT
Von Miller - #1 EDGE

I would hate to play the team that has Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Donald, and Von Miller on all the same team. Kareem Hunt in the backfield lined up behind Aaron Rodgers being protected by Joe Thomas with Julio Jones on the outside and Antonio Brown in the slot. Whew.

Eric Fisher - #18
Bryan Witzmann - #47
Zach Fulton - #11
Laurent Duvernay-Tardif - #28
Mitchell Schwartz - #24

All but the LG in the Top Half of players at their position.

Joe Thomas - #1
Joel Bitonio - #5
J.C. Tretter - #22
Kevin Zeitler - #16
Shon Coleman - #29

Chiefs have Kareem Hunt (#1 RB) and Alex Smith (#2 QB).
Browns have Isaiah Crowell (#47 RB) and DeShone Kizer (#32 QB).

But sure, it's the offensive line's problem.

 

Thanks for making my point....wuld u rather have Tom Brady, Rodgers, Brees, etc or Smith? Stats are for losers(not calling u one) but just saying

 

Wait... Smith is 5-0.

Brady: 3-2
Rodgers: 4-1
Brees: 2-2

If winning is all that matters, wouldn't you want Smith?

If stats are all that matters, the Smith would still win. First in completion percentage and QB rating, third in yards, third in touchdowns, first in interceptions.

So... Alex Smith.

 

First, IrishDawg, as soon as I've got some time, I'll answer your earlier post, in response to mine, in more detail. I think there's some good stuff there to think through and respond accordingly. I'd rather do it once I've gotten home and had something to eat than on an empty tank at the end of the here at the office. If it helps, I was talking more broadly, about teams across all sports using analytics as their core. Sure, it works in baseball (even then, the results can be arguable), but there are specific reasons why. Team staffs that brag about using statistical analytics as the basis of their decisions... well, they usually don't have jobs for very long.

But again, I'll go into that in full later. I appreciate the thoughtful reply.

Njoku has played 5 games and has 12 catches. How in the fuck can you draw any statistical significance from that?

Boddy-Calhoun plays a position that is far more dynamic than can be measured with statistics, and if you attempt to do so, those statistics are either highly subjective (in their origination/collection) or tell such an erroneously incomplete part of the story. I'm not saying the kid's not good, but Chicago currently allows the 8th fewest passing yards in the NFL. Their secondary barely belongs in the NFL. I think we can all look at that number and punch holes in it and why it exists, immediately. The same thought applies.

Again, four game sample size, tremendously different offenses. And Cook, despite your incessant criticism, was performing as everyone expected - well. More importantly, "my guy" - I could count on my two hands the amount of times you mentioned him. The most notable were bragging that he topped a fumbling metric (its importance highlighted by the fact that he was followed in those rankings by undrafted and non-impactful RB's), ranking him beneath Cook, in your top 10, and just before the draft ranking him 4th (beneath Joe Mixon, who was indeed "your guy").

In fact, you've spent far more time claiming that Hunt was "your guy" than you did actually talking about him, in the first place. It's remarkable, but not surprising.

You had him as your top overall QB, you ass-hat. And just to show how far you go out of your way to bring up numbers, and to be a purposeful, mindless asshole, I'll compare Trubisky to Glennon: Glennon completed 66.4% of his passes, and had a rating of 76.9, after four games. I'm certain that, since those numbers are better than Trubisky's, and one of the two is markedly better than Kizer's, that Glennon would be your guy between the three, right?

I mean, shit, you want Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers because four games say that he has better final numbers? Even Alex Smith would tell you to get real.

Get out of here with your nonsense, man. I don't know what makes you so bitter, but there have been times when talking football with you was enjoyable - that is no longer the case. You are a repetitive, mindless, asshole poster who does no more than try to show why, at some point, he got something right, and how someone else was wrong about this thing, or that thing. Meanwhile, you regurgitate numbers from a highly subjective source to try and assert your opinions...

Get over it, man. No one enjoys it. I get it, being a Browns fan is hard. But, shit, stop berating your fellow fans just because you can't find another way to deal with it. If you want to talk football, great - everyone here, including myself, is happy to do that with you. But shouting someone else's numbers followed by insults is the mark of a little man, and not one anybody really wants to talk to.

Irish, I owe you an apology. That was a lot longer than intended. You deserved that time far more. I'll make good on that later tonight.

 

Ok Super Bowls??????? Why you play the game

 

*literally grasping at straws*

I want the number one rated guy.

STATS R LAME, WINS MATTER

Okay, so the guy with more wins.

WINS R OVERRATED, NEED BEST PLAYER STATZ

Okay, so back to Point 1?

UR SO DUMB!! SUPERBOWLS R WUT MATTER!!!

 

Well if you would take Smith it doesnt matter what stat you put up there....there isnt a GM or coach in the NFL who would take Smith over the guys I mentioned

 

Well, if this season continues, I would be shocked if he isn't RE-SIGNED by the Chiefs, even if they did just spend a #10 pick on Patrick Mahomes. Would you want to be the GM that doesn't re-sign one of the top QBs in the NFL that led you to the playoffs (and possibly real deep into the playoffs), instead opting for a second year unknown? THEN, the team regresses to the point they don't make the playoffs. Career suicide...

BUT, to your point, the other guys on your list have been where Smith is right now, so it shouldn't be him or one of them, it is merely ADDING him to that group of top QBs.

 

The Ugly:

The Tribe was knocked out of the playoffs last night.......and thus ends the pleasant distraction we had from dwelling full-time on this train wreck we call the Browns.

 

I couldn't believe they lost to the Stankees. Even I'm bummed and I don't dig baseball that much.

 

Alex Smith is seven years younger than Tom Brady, five years younger than Drew Brees, and even one year younger than Aaron Rodgers.

If I'm the GM or coach of a team who wants to win a Super Bowl, he's as attractive an option as any. What's more, he's got another five years of football left in him - Brady and Brees will probably both be retired in the short- to near-future.

You can dig all you want, but you've put yourself into a serious hole.

If wins are all that matter, Alex Smith is your guy. And not just this season. Over the past three seasons, here's how those guys measure up.

Alex Smith: 27-9
Tom Brady: 26-7
Drew Brees: 16-19
Aaron Rodgers: 24-13

If stats are all that matter, here's how those guys measure up.

Alex Smith: 89.0 grade (#2 overall)
Tom Brady: 91.1 grade (#1 overall)
Drew Brees: 88.9 grade (#3 overall)
Aaron Rodgers: 84.2 grade (#5 overall)

 

This guy:



... has four Super Bowl rings. He completed 51.9% of his career passes, boasts a 1:1 TD/INT ratio, and a QB rating of 70.9.

 

^^^ The reason why Bradshaw never makes sense when he talks nowadays.

 

I thought it was because he was from Louisiana.

 

SAS, in proving one QB is better than another, proceeds to use win totals in potentially the most team-oriented game in popular sports (granted, at another poster's insisting), and then cites QB rating, likely the single most flawed stat in all of sports (football, without an argument). Par for the course.

 

Irish, briefly, because I'm at work and my office is so silent that my spacebar alone is set to tip off my boss:

I agree with the "volume" approach to drafting, but it's only good for a couple years, at best. You have to give time for players to develop, and if you're constantly adding players to the team, that churn isn't going to allow that time. It's a good strategy to quickly replenish a team, but then you've got to start proving that you can hit on the really significant players with fewer chances, and that's where I see a move toward the mean.

As for how players are faring, remember that we're watching players on the Browns (and I'll use the Bears as an apt comparison). A starter/big performer for one team may not be for another. For example, everyone was all up about Adrian Amos after his rookie season. And, looking at just numbers and/or starting spot, it looked like the GM had his stuff right. Looking back at that draft, now, it's far less impressive, and Amos is shown to be the bad player he is, succeeding only because someone on a bad team has to (which was obvious to all of us who watched him critically, his rookie year).

My fear is that some of these guys are being elevated only because they're the best of the worst, not because they're actually good. I have sincere doubts about both the Browns and Bears front offices. A good example is the WR position - volume doesn't work when you don't know how to pick a good player.

 

@dlinebass5