Jump to content

Browns General Discussion

candyman93

By candyman93
in Cleveland Browns

 Share

Recommended Posts

mtmmike

mtmmike

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I appreciate that Hance seems well prepared and is scrappy and such, but like, what does he do well?  He gets cooked in pass pro with help and doesn’t seem like a terribly physical dude in the run game.

Hudson I’m guessing may hive them a bit more in the run game and they can try to scheme to provide him help in the pass game.  They probably won’t, we’ll just run empty half the game, but they could.

Is Hudson the lowest rated tackle in the nfl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MWil23

MWil23

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:
18 hours ago, MWil23 said:

I'll be surprised if we run as much empty without those 2 TE, as that's 1/2 of the reason we do so (personnel mismatches). JMHO

I’ll never understand this.  Like “I get it”, but I don’t get it.  I understand wanting to get favorable personnel matchups, but I think you lose most of what you gain by doing so when you scream to the world “WE’RE THROWING THE BALL”.

You don't get heavy personnel at all, or you don't understand 5 wide? My comment was specifically meant to be personnel only, not formation based.

That said, here's why (I'm not trolling).

*Baker can't identify pressure or a Mike Linebacker. 5 wide allows him to see both, as you cannot disguise pressure against 5 wide very easily whatsoever.

*Baker struggles to read coverages. Going 5 wide allows him the flexibility to see based upon presnap alignment whether it's a 1 or 2 high safety look and whether it's man or zone

*Since you can't bring pressure against it without showing your cards, our 5 OL vs. the opposition's 4 DL or a single blitzer is very advantageous to us

16 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

3-4 wide is fine, just stop with the empty ****.  At least make the LBers worry about Nick Chubb or Kareem Hunt for like, a split second.

I agree based upon what we have left to work with, and I'm not a huge empty set fan. Leaving the RB in the backfield makes someone having to account for them in any capacity, whether it's out of the backfield or based upon the potential running threat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas5737

Thomas5737

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, MWil23 said:

*Baker can't identify pressure or a Mike Linebacker. 5 wide allows him to see both, as you cannot disguise pressure against 5 wide very easily whatsoever.

*Baker struggles to read coverages. Going 5 wide allows him the flexibility to see based upon presnap alignment whether it's a 1 or 2 high safety look and whether it's man or zone

*Since you can't bring pressure against it without showing your cards, our 5 OL vs. the opposition's 4 DL or a single blitzer is very advantageous to us

So why is Baker much more efficient when we aren't 5 wide?

Why would the defense only bring 4? We don't have man beaters and if you bring a blitzer...or even two then you get immediate pressure and most routes can't be completed.

None of this makes sense as far as putting your team in the best situation for their success. Just saying Baker can't read a defense as the reason you put him in a situation he isn't doing well at doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LETSGOBROWNIES

LETSGOBROWNIES

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, MWil23 said:

You don't get heavy personnel at all, or you don't understand 5 wide? My comment was specifically meant to be personnel only, not formation based.

That said, here's why (I'm not trolling).

*Baker can't identify pressure or a Mike Linebacker. 5 wide allows him to see both, as you cannot disguise pressure against 5 wide very easily whatsoever.

*Baker struggles to read coverages. Going 5 wide allows him the flexibility to see based upon presnap alignment whether it's a 1 or 2 high safety look and whether it's man or zone

*Since you can't bring pressure against it without showing your cards, our 5 OL vs. the opposition's 4 DL or a single blitzer is very advantageous to us

I don’t like the 2 TE’s with Chubb split out for one, and generally not the formation at all.

If you run empty with 4-5 receivers at least you’ve got athletes on the field and the potential for a big play. Having Chubb who’s not a great target for anything really other than a screen pass and a pair of lumbering TE’s isn’t ideal imo.

The personnel is fine if you leave the RB in the backfield and they need to be concerned about running out of what is still a 2 TE personnel grouping.  Saying “we’re passing” while having a pair of slow arse TE’s who do nothing and a RB who’s not great in the pass game isn’t imo the advantage they think it is.  Results would back this up. This allows for a lot of fun stuff with PA.

Even if it allows Baker to make easier reads, there’s no one that’s able to get open or do anything of consequence with it if they do on the field.

1 hour ago, MWil23 said:

I agree based upon what we have left to work with, and I'm not a huge empty set fan. Leaving the RB in the backfield makes someone having to account for them in any capacity, whether it's out of the backfield or based upon the potential running threat.

Especially Chubb.  Every time they motion him to the outside I’m just chuckle.  Like, no defense is concerned about him any longer. No one is worried about Nick Chubb roasting a corner from outside the hashes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MWil23

MWil23

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

So why is Baker much more efficient when we aren't 5 wide?

As a pure dropback passer without a play-action? He's not.

3 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

Why would the defense only bring 4? We don't have man beaters and if you bring a blitzer...or even two then you get immediate pressure and most routes can't be completed.

Because if they bring pressure (which they aren't), you can't disguise it and it vacates the middle of the field completely, which you can't do as a defensive coach.

3 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

None of this makes sense as far as putting your team in the best situation for their success. Just saying Baker can't read a defense as the reason you put him in a situation he isn't doing well at doesn't make sense.

I'll trust guys like Kurt Warner and the video above, which also confirm what I know about formations and Baker's limitations, which is exactly what the analytics tells us is the case as well.

Like I said, I'm not interested in 5 wide because of how dominant our running game is, but that's WHY they've done it. There is a method to the madness and saying otherwise is disingenuous towards the staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...