Jump to content

Vee-Rex

Members
  • Content Count

    189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Vee-Rex

  1. 11 hours ago, MWil23 said:

    I don't care if it's a new scheme or not, if the offense is getting thumped by the defense on a regular basis, early in the year or not, that's an issue with the clear talent advantage that offense possesses, especially with our secondary and linebacker corps decimated/sucking. 

    I've watch nearly every offensive snap for our live training camp, and I don't think the offense is getting 'thumped on a regular basis'.

    The passing hasn't been great 2 out of the last 3 practices and reporters feel like they need to exaggerate just to get clicks. Baker recently just shredded the defense a few days ago (I think it was Saturday), was something like 16/19 with 7 TDs no INTs, making short, mid, and long throws like it was nothing. And he had a wonderful practice before that as well.

    The problem is the media is searching for a story. The media gives absolutely no attention to our rushing game - Chubb and Hunt have been DOMINATING on the ground. I want to put some extra mustard on that - they have been running all over EVERY SINGLE PRACTICE like they're playing against a varsity defense.

    In a real game, that would completely warp the defensive scheme and force them to adjust. In camp, the defense knows that the offense is gonna just pass the ball because they need to work on that, whereas in a real game they better do something to stop Chubb from running his way to the end zone. Don't get me wrong - our offense (passing specifically) has struggled in camp at times, but if Stefanski commits to the run, the overall product won't look as bad as reporters are making it out to be. We have work to do with passing but I have faith it'll come with time - we've seen that potential in camp already.

    • Like 1
  2. 15 hours ago, Rod Johnson said:

    Not saying it's right or wrong but I'm surprised some positive tests can shut the entire building down.  At my company a positive test means nothing except that single person has to quarantine for 2 weeks, outside of that it's totally business as usual.  You can't have high hopes this season is going to happen if that's the protocol.

    Shutting down the building in the NFL is the appropriate response to keep it from spreading. Your company likely doesn't depend on people tackling each other and having physical contact with one another. After a shutdown, it's easy to do further testing to confirm the authenticity of the previous tests, as well as determine if and how far it has spread. Then the team can reopen as soon as that information is available while quarantining the affected people.

    Shutting down isn't the problem - the ability to reopen is the most important part. A team can shut down on a Wednesday and reopen on Thursday or Friday and function well even if it means bringing up players from the practice squad - it would not impact an NFL game like it would MLB where a team will play 23498023 games in a day.

    A week between games makes it SO much more likely the season can happen. Not to mention the NFL regular season is only 4 months long - if for some reason there is a ton of positive results right before a game, they can easily reschedule the game at the end of the year. Maybe the playoffs start in February. Maybe the Super Bowl takes place in March or April. Tons of flexibility - I'm not too worried about a cancelled season unless they stop testing so frequently (or people start dying).

  3. On 8/15/2020 at 9:50 AM, candyman93 said:

    What does a “playoff contender” look like? What pieces do they need exactly? What type of foundation justifies spending?

    QB and coach - I think I've stated this several times now?

    I'm as confident in Baker as anyone else - but no one can say he's going to be our guy. And no one can say anything about Stefanski right now.

  4. 18 hours ago, candyman93 said:

    If you don’t watch baseball, ignore this question.

     

    What’s the difference between what the Browns have done and what Paul Dolan has done and will do?

    Are you trolling?

    The Indians were in the World Series just 4 years ago and were competing at a high level, even being favored to make deep playoff runs (with disappointing losses). They already have Tito in place and have had numerous talented pitchers. They SHOULD have had a bigger budget.

    The Browns haven't had more than 7 wins in 13 years. No QB or coach worth investing heavily into. They should be careful with spending until the foundation is set and we look like we're playoff contenders - at which point we should spend more.

  5. 21 hours ago, candyman93 said:

    And they’ll win more games than money ball has ever won.

     

    Them, Philly, and New Orleans are winning rings when we’re winning the salary cap sweepstakes.

     

    People point to the Rams and their cap struggles. So what? They win more than Cleveland, Indy, and Cinci. The salary cap darlings who never do anything.

     

    Having salary cap space simply means you don’t have good enough players worth paying.

    The Chiefs will win because they have a bonafide QB and coach in place.

    Philly has a legit coach and QB in place.

    New Orleans has the same combination.

    The Rams have the coach but the QB is questionable, and that's why they're trending downward because they mismanaged their cap space.

    You're arguing from 100% emotion because you want us to start winning, but I'm glad our front office isn't looking through the same lens. We want to build our foundation (GM, coach, QB) and once that's in place then we can be more active with spending that cap space. We have a lot of young talent on this team and it's CERTAINLY more than talented enough to be a playoff team. Let's make that happen first.

    • Like 1
  6. 54 minutes ago, candyman93 said:

    So the chiefs are signing Kelce to a long term deal as well.

     

    Can we stop stressing over the salary cap? It’s foolish at this point.

     

    The chiefs are spending insane amounts of money and winning. Yet you have Browns fans who think you can only sustain long term success by playing small ball.

    The Chiefs will soon have a roster composed of Mahomes, Kelce, Hill, Jones, and 49 vet minimum players.

    They're cashing in now BECAUSE they have had success, and it has worked since Mahomes is playing at a HOF level. We'd be idiots to spend everything and we haven't won more than 7 games in over a decade. Not to mention our QB's name isn't Mahomes so we need to be smart about our spending until we know FOR SURE Baker is our franchise QB.

    • Like 2
  7. 3 hours ago, buno67 said:

    whats easier to fine, A stud RB or a stud WR? Also the Browns are going to be in a system that can easily pop out RBs that can produce at a high level. Lets not forget that Hunt has the potential to be better than Chubb and might be cheaper long term.

    I mean, that depends on which way they're trending. If our stud WR puts up another disappointing year and Chubb continues trending towards becoming the 2nd best RB to ever play for our team, then it's not an easy decision to make. Chubb can be a legendary, HOF player and he has the best attitude/demeanor on the entire team. I'm FAR from the type of fan that criticizes OBJ (I'm always defending him) but if we're going to directly compare him to Chubb, then I have to put some value on Chubb's attitude. Hunt is unreliable off the field.

    I'm also not buying this new herd-like mentality around the NFL that we can just swap RBs in and out as if it's nothing. I understand the value of a RB vs. WR, but we're looking at more than just positional value here.

  8. https://247sports.com/nfl/cleveland-browns/Article/Kevin-Stefanski-Wide-Zone-Run-142274849/

    That's pretty much all the detail you'll need. A short and sweet summarized version:

    Wide Zone blocking schemes is about the offensive line blocking while moving horizontally. The point is to gain leverage and push the defense into tight spaces while the running back makes 'one cut' and is able to get downfield. It can be extremely effective as you see average RBs have enormous games.

    The running game is 'marriaged' with the passing game. This means that most running plays look like passing plays and vice versa. This makes the defense hesitate even when the ball is snapped (often times not getting as much pressure on passing plays because they are defending gaps if they wrongly believe it's a running play), and if they react poorly it can be pretty devastating. Nasty play actions can come out of this, and generally it's easier on a QB since he doesn't have to make 2340982 reads and have simpler targets.

    Everything is far more focused and intentional, and the offense will have an actual identity.

    • Like 1
  9. 20 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

    It's dumb to assess someone else's situation without knowing their story. He could have a relative at high risk. If you and your family is taking care of sick or elderly family members and then you kill them that doesn't die when they bury the body, you have to live with that. I'm in that boat to a degree. I'm not worried about me, at least no more than anyone else is worried about themselves but when you are taking care of 90+ year old family members who rely on you to provide meals and supplies then you have to try to protect yourself as if you are at high risk.

    These stories may or may not be anything like that but you certainly shouldn't assume either way so I will hold off judging them.

    Agree.

    Same applies for people who have newborns or wives that are pregnant. My wife is 8-weeks pregnant and I'd definitely opt out if I was an NFL player. I'm lucky to have a job where I'm working from home.

    • Like 1
  10. OBJ is a talent that's rare and you want to keep him if possible.

    The fat trimming will come in the form of decent (not elite) players like Tretter, Bitonio, Richardson, Ogunjobi, etc...

    Those are the positions you want to cycle through, asumming you're drafting well. And then if someone like Wills or a new draft player turns into an elite monster, you extend him. OBJ is not untouchable but he's certainly not at the top of the list like some of you are wanting.

    • Like 1
  11. 1 hour ago, candyman93 said:

    I hope you’re right.

     

    I don’t value runningbacks much, but I’d rather have Kareem than Obj. Keep Chubb and Kareem, then trade OBJ if you have to.

    OBJ just went back to his blonde hair though. He got his superpowers back.

  12. On 7/7/2020 at 7:19 PM, DizzyDean said:

    Is that the moneyball thing to do?  I don’t think so.  I will get raked over the coals for this by fans thinking with emotion and not their heads, but here is what I think happens in our RB room.  Chubb will go off and dominate the league this year and next.  Hunt will have a very good year this year as a weapon type of player that is all over the field.  Both are all pro talents.  Hunt will be extended after this year for a long term middle of the road RB type of contract which will be a bargain honestly.  After the 2021 season they will let Chubb walk and sign elsewhere for the largest RB contract in the league which will bring us a nice comp pick.  Then in 2022 Hunt takes over as the primary back.

    I agree.

    I know the following is a weird line of thinking but it's my gut feeling:

    I think we want to sign/extend Hunt to create more leverage in our talks with Chubb. If Chubb wants too much, we let him walk and happily stick with Hunt. If Chubb is willing to come back for a reasonable deal, we'll bring him back even if it means having to move on from Hunt (not that we'd want to) to do so.

  13. 5 minutes ago, bruceb said:

    I am trying to understand his thinking and pulled up the most ridiculous reason I could think of.

    That simple.

    Sounds like agent speak.

    If Njoku is that unsure of himself under an HC and OC who believe in high use of TEs, he is an idiot.

    Alright, it just comes across a little weird, the way it was worded. Basically "In this day and age I wouldn't be surprised (because he's black) if he thinks losing out is due to racism."

    But I'll take your word for it.

    I'd personally rather we trade Njoku and sign a guy like Delanie Walker as a cheap vet to add depth.

  14. 7 minutes ago, kayelcio said:

    Considering his apparent change of heart since march:

    g2p9e5q59p851.jpg

    And he just switched representation to Drew Rosenhaus

    I think this is simply Drew doing Drew things

    Yeah, I think Drew gets into these players ears and convince them they can get big paydays.

    I don't see it with Njoku but the logic is there.

    • Like 1
  15. 2 hours ago, bruceb said:

    Have to call BS.

    Never accused him of anything, preemptively or otherwise.

    Think you would do well to check your reception filters.

    What exactly does this mean then:

    Quote

    In this day and age it wouldn't surprise me if this, in his mind, turns into a racist thing.

    It sounds like you're trying to say that Njoku may turn this into a racial thing because of Hooper and Bryant being brought in. I'm not insulting you, but if you're going to make this kind of ridiculous statement - please clarify what you're saying.

    2 hours ago, bruceb said:

    Based on what...his potential?

     

    We exercised his 5th year option.

    His contract is not coming up for two years.

    If he thinks he is going to parlay a trade into a long-term extension he is crazy.

    And if that is what he thinks, is this all about Hooper getting paid and the Browns buying his 5th year of service "on the cheap"?

    I am just tying to figure this out, dude.

    Dont's diss me.

    The well is drying for him here. Again - a toddler can see that. Hooper is #1 and will be #1 for his contract. Bryant can possibly eclipse Njoku. Why would Njoku want to stay in a place where he might get bumped down to the #3 TE spot?

    He has two years left on his contract - yes, so he's better off finding a place where he won't have as much competition so that he can inflate his numbers for a bigger payday. It's simple to understand why he'd want a trade - what's not simple is somehow turning it into an idea that he might, in his mind, be turning it into a racist thing. Like... how do you even come to that conclusion?

    Feel free to explain. If you can't and feel that you're being dissed, maybe it's because you make such a ridiculous statement.

  16. 26 minutes ago, bruceb said:

     

    In this day and age it wouldn't surprise me if this, in his mind, turns into a racist thing.

    Did I just read this correctly?

    Dude's contract is coming up. He lost his starting position to Hooper. Harrison Bryant was drafted and can potentially threaten the #2 spot. He has a better chance of earning big money with another team that has a need at the TE position. I mean, a toddler can put it together. However, you'd rather ignore all of that and instead preemptively accuse him of using the race card? JFC, no wonder this country is the mess it is right now.

  17. 2 hours ago, candyman93 said:

    Offense is heavily reliant on chemistry. Defense is “see ball, hit ball.” 

    Please tell me you don't seriously believe that.

    There is a ton of communication and trust involved on defense that develops with time. Simple gap and coverage assignments rely on chemistry and understanding when to stay in your lane and when to cover for someone else.

  18. 20 hours ago, candyman93 said:

    I see this a lot and it makes me ask this question, who’s getting paid?

     

    Myles is for sure, but that’s it. I doubt we pay Nick because it’s terrible to pay a lot of money to a runningback. Hopefully Baker, but I’m not sure. Denzel? He needs to stay healthy first.

     

    So who are these “absolutely will need to get paid guys” I keep hearing about?

    Well, I mean Myles is gonna get 20+. Baker is the best QB we've had since Bernie. The front office and coaching staff appears to have full faith in his ability. So that's another 25+ million gone. If your argument is that we should trade for Jamal and sign him to a huge contract because Baker might not be good enough to get an extension then acquiring Jamal would be meaningless anyway since we'd need a QB. That's kind of a weird way to look at it.

    I disagree about Chubb. I feel like people are adopting this sheep-like mentality that all RBs are not worth big money and they regurgitate it over and over. Not only has Chubb shown the potential to be a generational RB, but the Stefanski offense will likely be built around him. Most RBs are not worth that money but you do everything you can to keep a guy that can possibly go down in the history books. Denzel is up in the air, but if he becomes lockdown in 2020 and 2021 then he's a guy you'll want to keep over Adams. CB is regarded as the 2nd most important position on defense, and an argue can be made that it's 1st.

    There will always be other glaring needs and opportunities.Would I get excited if we got Jamal? Absolutely - but I don't like giving up top-end draft compensation AND a big contract for him. Our cap space mostly rollover cap so we need to spend it wisely.

    • Like 2
  19. I must be the only one who still have as much faith in Baker as I did when we drafted him.

    The heel turn he has taken for Browns fans after last year is pretty crazy to me. I mean, I know he didn't have a good year at all but do our fans think he's actually a bad QB now? Even if you isolate his one horrendously awful, worst-ever-season-for-a-QB (it's so heavily overblown to be bad and that's because of the hype), when was the last time we had a QB that did better? Josh McCown perhaps? Hoyer?

    We will be fine. He's the best QB we've had since Bernie - one bad year with crazy hype, 2nd year where defenses study, awful coaching, play-calling, and scheme. Tons of interceptions off receivers hands, bad tackle play - Baker clearly lost faith in his o-line and bailed too early from the pocket. All of that, EVERYTHING that could've possibly went wrong actually went wrong. Even the schedule had us face 10 elite-to-respectable defenses in the first 12 games (lol Bills, 49ers, Steelers x2, Pats, Broncos, Jets, Ravens, Rams, and Titans) and no one saw it turning out that way. We were 6-7 in control of our own destiny.

    I'm not saying I think we're going to wreck the league, but I think 9-7 is a good possibility for us this year and I fully believe Baker is capable of delivering on that.

    • Like 3
  20. 17 minutes ago, buno67 said:

    that is true they relied on sacks and INTs to cover up horrible QB play. Now they potentially could have avg. QB player that could offset the lack of sacks and INTs compared to last year

    Agree, but that's no guarantee. We have no idea how Ben will be as QBs can easily fall off a cliff at his age, especially coming back from injury.

    Big Ben is easily a better QB than Duck and Rudolph but those two were put into an offense tweaked to not rely on them and to limit their mistakes. It's not like they were thrown out there and were completely decimated. Together, they went 276/443 (62%) 18 TDs and 17 INTs. As Browns fans, we've seen far worse QB play.

    Ben is not going to be coming back to a team with as many weapons. He's not going to be slinging the ball all over and shredding defenses constantly. He's quite turnover prone himself and with an aging o-line, could have some disastrous performances that the defense can't simply overcome (as they have with Duck and Rudolph).

    LSS: I could see the Steelers winning 10 games, but I could also see them only winning 6.

×
×
  • Create New...