the browns plan at QB going forward.
-
Zombo said:
I just know how he'll respond. He'll adjust. He lives off of doubt, obstacles and tough circumstances.
No one is weak against the run by design. If they have to bring a man up to try and contain our backs then they are going to be vulnerable to the play action and guys like O'Dell and Schwartzie running past them.
The failed logic in this thread is that Baker's passes are going to sail on him like they did last week. He won't allow that, I'm telling you right now.
Z
Wait, what? By design a 2 high removes an extra defender from the box. That is why it's literally called a box count - numbers. The commitment to the running game tends to force the additional body to help limit damage. Yes, this opens things up vertically in different ways across the field.
Odell and Schwartz can run past anyone they wish, if Baker can't reliably get them the ball (because he is in fact injured and you refuse to acknowledge that reality) then we have a serious issue.
There is no failure of logic on my part. I've detailed this rather plainly. So now you're just bordering on insults.
It isn't that hard to say "I disagree and we'll see how this plays out". Which is where I think we'll leave this for now.
-
They are 29th against the run
5th against the pass
9th overall defense in yards per game
We're 2nd overall
3rd against the pass
3rd against the run
We're #2 at not giving up 1st downs (60)
They are 20th (86)
-
Zombo said:
I just know how he'll respond. He'll adjust. He lives off of doubt, obstacles and tough circumstances.
No one is weak against the run by design. If they have to bring a man up to try and contain our backs then they are going to be vulnerable to the play action and guys like O'Dell and Schwartzie running past them.
The failed logic in this thread is that Baker's passes are going to sail on him like they did last week. He won't allow that, I'm telling you right now.
Z
Wait, what? By design a 2 high removes an extra defender from the box. That is why it's literally called a box count - numbers. The commitment to the running game tends to force the additional body to help limit damage. Yes, this opens things up vertically in different ways across the field.
Odell and Schwartz can run past anyone they wish, if Baker can't reliably get them the ball (because he is in fact injured and you refuse to acknowledge that reality) then we have a serious issue.
There is no failure of logic on my part. I've detailed this rather plainly. So now you're just bordering on insults.
It isn't that hard to say "I disagree and we'll see how this plays out". Which is where I think we'll leave this for now.
Wait, what? By design a 2 high removes an extra defender from the box. That is why it's literally called a box count - numbers. The commitment to the running game tends to force the additional body to help limit damage. Yes, this opens things up vertically in different ways across the field.
Odell and Schwartz can run past anyone they wish, if Baker can't reliably get them the ball (because he is in fact injured and you refuse to acknowledge that reality) then we have a serious issue.
There is no failure of logic on my part. I've detailed this rather plainly. So now you're just bordering on insults.
It isn't that hard to say "I disagree and we'll see how this plays out". Which is where I think we'll leave this for now.
Yeah, a 100% healthy Baker, I'd be more confident that he's due to have a rebound game. But he's not 100% healthy. A torn labrum takes time to heal. Z saying "I just know he's going to have a great game" is just hoping he will. For the record so do I. As the Boomer says "that's why they play the game".
-
Zombo said:
The failed logic in this thread is that Baker's passes are going to sail on him like they did last week. He won't allow that, I'm telling you right now.
Z
If anyone's logic is failing, it's probably yours. Just might happen Baker's mind will tell him "I can do it", but his body won't.
-
Wait, what? By design a 2 high removes an extra defender from the box. That is why it's literally called a box count - numbers. The commitment to the running game tends to force the additional body to help limit damage. Yes, this opens things up vertically in different ways across the field.
Odell and Schwartz can run past anyone they wish, if Baker can't reliably get them the ball (because he is in fact injured and you refuse to acknowledge that reality) then we have a serious issue.
There is no failure of logic on my part. I've detailed this rather plainly. So now you're just bordering on insults.
It isn't that hard to say "I disagree and we'll see how this plays out". Which is where I think we'll leave this for now.
Yeah, a 100% healthy Baker, I'd be more confident that he's due to have a rebound game. But he's not 100% healthy. A torn labrum takes time to heal. Z saying "I just know he's going to have a great game" is just hoping he will. For the record so do I. As the Boomer says "that's why they play the game".
Yeah, a 100% healthy Baker, I'd be more confident that he's due to have a rebound game. But he's not 100% healthy. A torn labrum takes time to heal. Z saying "I just know he's going to have a great game" is just hoping he will. For the record so do I. As the Boomer says "that's why they play the game".
I don’t think anyone is denying he is hurt and the injury is likely contributing to his accuracy issues. He will adapt this year with the injury.
I counted six passes last week four of which had TD potential the other two were set for 25-30 plus yard gains. 0 for 6 in those spots. He hits on two of those we win 28-7 against a playoff caliber opponent in their building (a team we dominated in all other facets but QB play).
If I had to think about this week I’d definitely say that Baker misses on a few again…but 0 for 6?
I love the Chargers safeties. Nasir Adderely is an emerging Pro Bowl talent. We know about Derwin James. They will March up to the line of scrimmage if we don’t hit a couple and if we go 0 for 6 again - we will likely lose…but I think a few of us on here are betting against that.
Edit: I watched some of the Vikings game…wow the Vikings back 7 tackled really well. The Chargers better do the same we were a couple shoe string partial turf Monster assists from breaking big ones
-
They are 29th against the run
5th against the pass
9th overall defense in yards per game
We're 2nd overall
3rd against the pass
3rd against the run
We're #2 at not giving up 1st downs (60)
They are 20th (86)
They are 29th against the run
5th against the pass
9th overall defense in yards per game
We're 2nd overall
3rd against the pass
3rd against the run
We're #2 at not giving up 1st downs (60)
They are 20th (86)
29th against the run and one of the games was the Chiefs. Anyone remember what the Chiefs run game looked like against the Browns? Zeke and his backup did a number against them too.
The Test will be this week for them and the following week against the Ravens.
-
Zombo said:
I just know how he'll respond. He'll adjust. He lives off of doubt, obstacles and tough circumstances.
No one is weak against the run by design. If they have to bring a man up to try and contain our backs then they are going to be vulnerable to the play action and guys like O'Dell and Schwartzie running past them.
The failed logic in this thread is that Baker's passes are going to sail on him like they did last week. He won't allow that, I'm telling you right now.
Z
Wait, what? By design a 2 high removes an extra defender from the box. That is why it's literally called a box count - numbers. The commitment to the running game tends to force the additional body to help limit damage. Yes, this opens things up vertically in different ways across the field.
Odell and Schwartz can run past anyone they wish, if Baker can't reliably get them the ball (because he is in fact injured and you refuse to acknowledge that reality) then we have a serious issue.
There is no failure of logic on my part. I've detailed this rather plainly. So now you're just bordering on insults.
It isn't that hard to say "I disagree and we'll see how this plays out". Which is where I think we'll leave this for now.
a 2 high removes an extra defender from the box
Counting the box, yes.. OSU [now] has its CB's come down in run-support once run is identified..
Helps out by forcing a cut towards the center of the field on jet sweeps and the far-outside pitches.
-
Counting the box, yes.. OSU [now] has its CB's come down in run-support once run is identified.. Helps out on jet sweeps and the far-outside pitches..
CB's are always in the run fits when they're flat/cloud defenders. Even then, when you're in a deep 1/3 you still have to get downhill and limit runs that might beat the spill & run force.
-
Zombo said:
The insulting part is that you assume I don't understand defenses. I'm the one that had to bring you back to reality when you thought Andrew Billings was going to be the anchor of our defense, remember?
Me:
"I think you might be too quick to dismiss Billings earning another contract with the Browns should his level of play from the 2019 season carry over to 2021."
You
"Yes we have his rights for a year, him playing himself into another contract is one scenario. Point it is, its a position that needs addressed as we move forward".
- April 18th
The man was a top 10 IDL in terms of run stop percentage when he was with his best years in Cincy. There was no "reality" you brought me back to. Malik McDowell however, IS the outlier. That just rarely happens.
-
Zombo said:
You are betting on an outlier as if it were a trend. There is no way Baker repeats that performance, no way.
Hopefully he gains your respect this week.
Z
Sorry Z I worked in Laboratory Medicine for 40 years. 60% < 70% against the Bears is your outlier... 45% is definitely < 70%. You can call it whatever you like- I'll call that a trend.
OK, great- Baker goes back to his 70% completion percentage against the Chargers, you can come back here Sunday evening and tell me- and everyone else "TOLD YA SO".... I'll bet you a six pack of Joe Thomas Great Lakes he won't.
-
Zombo said:
You are betting on an outlier as if it were a trend. There is no way Baker repeats that performance, no way.
Hopefully he gains your respect this week.
Z
Sorry Z I worked in Laboratory Medicine for 40 years. 60% < 70% against the Bears is your outlier... 45% is definitely < 70%. You can call it whatever you like- I'll call that a trend.
OK, great- Baker goes back to his 70% completion percentage against the Chargers, you can come back here Sunday evening and tell me- and everyone else "TOLD YA SO".... I'll bet you a six pack of Joe Thomas Great Lakes he won't.
Sorry Z I worked in Laboratory Medicine for 40 years. 60% < 70% against the Bears is your outlier... 45% is definitely < 70%. You can call it whatever you like- I'll call that a trend.
OK, great- Baker goes back to his 70% completion percentage against the Chargers, you can come back here Sunday evening and tell me- and everyone else "TOLD YA SO".... I'll bet you a six pack of Joe Thomas Great Lakes he won't.
So you admit you're a "Lab Rat" ?
Nickers...."There are no old running QB's in the NFL "~Sam Rutigliano~ -
meanwhile, Garrett is "questionable" vs the Chargers (Cleveland.com) but is fully expecting to play.
Chris Hubbard is RULE OUT.
So, if Wills can't go.....
Hudson at LT ?
Nick Harris is now on injured reserve.... hope Tretter doesn't have to leave the game.
The Browns will have a tough game, but I still believe they win.
The Chargers might stop the run for a little while, then they rampage all over them, and the Browns will run more screens with Hunt, Felton and Schwartz. The latter will have his biggest game yet, I think.
and Baker not have the same bad game two games in a row. bank on it. He's proven it his entire life.
My concern is at LT - and Baker gets a big hit again on that shoulder, could be Keenum steps up. The Browns will still win.
-
Zombo said:
Unlikely win over the Chargers??
We are a better team. Am I the only one watching us?
I'm a sunshine pumper for saying Baker will do what he always does ... rebound big time.
You negative fucks need to go root for Jacksonville or something, you are too used to losing, can't handle a winning qb on a winning team.
Z
We are evenly balanced Z. Negative? Just realistic... BTW, the Vegas guys happen to like the Chargers, and their homerism = ZERO. Really- just because some of us aren't 100% in the sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows crowd 100% of the time doesn't make us any less fans.
1) As I always say- past performance is no guarantee of future results. BUT historically the Browns have played like crap on the west coast.
2) Bosa cancels out Garret.
3) A healthy Herbert is better than a dinged Baker.
4) I can handle reality Z- you should know better than that. You're wishing' and a hoping' Baker can overcome an injury and two consecutive shitty outings. As they say in Missouri "SHOW ME".
3) A healthy Herbert is better than a dinged Baker.
An argument can be made that a healthy Herbert is better than a healthy Baker.
-
Zombo said:
Oh, I can find example after example of you talking about how important Billings was, and me telling you to chill on that guy.
You were an arrogant fuck then too, acting like you needed to explain defenses to me.
I was telling you that Billings was just a guy long before we found a better guy.
Z
Billings position was/is important.
You telling me to "chill" on him is more of an understanding that Richardson and Jackson wouldn't get it done alone.
McDowell coming out of nowhere was damn near a minor miracle. Again, him taking that much time off just doesn't happen.
So I place my belief in proven NFL players of Billings caliber until they demonstrate they Can't be effective. That's hardly arrogant, that's actually pragmatic.
-
Sorry Z I worked in Laboratory Medicine for 40 years. 60% < 70% against the Bears is your outlier... 45% is definitely < 70%. You can call it whatever you like- I'll call that a trend.
OK, great- Baker goes back to his 70% completion percentage against the Chargers, you can come back here Sunday evening and tell me- and everyone else "TOLD YA SO".... I'll bet you a six pack of Joe Thomas Great Lakes he won't.
So you admit you're a "Lab Rat" ?
So you admit you're a "Lab Rat" ?
Hospitals don't keep rats in their labs anymore.
I will say the level of sophistication between the 1970s and now is stunning. I've been retired going on 5 years, and my wife took me on a tour of their core lab that services multiple hospitals. Unless it's some weird specialty test it's hands off. You just put a bar coded tube on a rack and it's off to grand prix land. Follows a track around the lab and stops at the instruments that know what tests to run on it.
FWIW, my specialty was Transfusion Medicine (Blood Banking). In Dayton's Reference Lab. When hospitals had a problem they couldn't solve, they'd send it to us. QC on products we were sending out to the hospitals. And dealing with folks with super rare blood types. In our line of work, AB negative 1:167 is as common as dirt. We had one guy with a very uncommon flavor of Rh negative blood- and with some other funky antibodies, he was a 1:50,000 character. Like only seven other known folks in the country who could safely donate blood for him.
-
Either way it is bound to be a close game, and was bound to be so before the baker news.
My feeling is if Stefanski plays Baker, then he is good to go. If he plays a obviously injured player and has ignored a poor weeks worth of observation during practice, then Stefanski needs to be fired. Stefanski is always talking about putting the players, and thus the team, in to the best position to succeed. If starting Keenum is the best thig to do, he will, or should do that. At minimum make a change in the 2nd qtr.
I am with Z on this one. If he is starting, he will be fine. As to winning the game, I'll stay out of that one because this has always been a losable game. If we lose and Baker is obviously sailing the ball time and time again, it isn't on baker. it's on a coach who can't make a hard decision.
I have been a solid supporter of Stefanski, and still am, but last week I did see some goofy calls that seemed ego based that weren't sound football decisions. I don't have a vast array of stats and data to support this statement, but after years of watching football if seems to me that not getting 3 points early in a game come back to hurt you more often than gaining an extra 4 helps.
How many times have we missed a field goals at some point in a game and we end up to lose by 1-2 points and we blame the kicker for the loss? Had we tried to kick the field goal on that first drive and missed, how many people would have been bitching and moaning all game long about how that was going to end up costing us the game?
-
So you admit you're a "Lab Rat" ?
Hospitals don't keep rats in their labs anymore.
I will say the level of sophistication between the 1970s and now is stunning. I've been retired going on 5 years, and my wife took me on a tour of their core lab that services multiple hospitals. Unless it's some weird specialty test it's hands off. You just put a bar coded tube on a rack and it's off to grand prix land. Follows a track around the lab and stops at the instruments that know what tests to run on it.
FWIW, my specialty was Transfusion Medicine (Blood Banking). In Dayton's Reference Lab. When hospitals had a problem they couldn't solve, they'd send it to us. QC on products we were sending out to the hospitals. And dealing with folks with super rare blood types. In our line of work, AB negative 1:167 is as common as dirt. We had one guy with a very uncommon flavor of Rh negative blood- and with some other funky antibodies, he was a 1:50,000 character. Like only seven other known folks in the country who could safely donate blood for him.
Hospitals don't keep rats in their labs anymore.
I will say the level of sophistication between the 1970s and now is stunning. I've been retired going on 5 years, and my wife took me on a tour of their core lab that services multiple hospitals. Unless it's some weird specialty test it's hands off. You just put a bar coded tube on a rack and it's off to grand prix land. Follows a track around the lab and stops at the instruments that know what tests to run on it.
FWIW, my specialty was Transfusion Medicine (Blood Banking). In Dayton's Reference Lab. When hospitals had a problem they couldn't solve, they'd send it to us. QC on products we were sending out to the hospitals. And dealing with folks with super rare blood types. In our line of work, AB negative 1:167 is as common as dirt. We had one guy with a very uncommon flavor of Rh negative blood- and with some other funky antibodies, he was a 1:50,000 character. Like only seven other known folks in the country who could safely donate blood for him.
Yeah... I still can't get an honest answer to what exactly my blood type is... I have some unusual things like running an abnormal high red blood cell count.. So every couple of months or so.. I have to go to phlebotomy and "Let blood" as it were.. it's the only thing thats worked so far to stabilize my blood..
-
Hospitals don't keep rats in their labs anymore.
I will say the level of sophistication between the 1970s and now is stunning. I've been retired going on 5 years, and my wife took me on a tour of their core lab that services multiple hospitals. Unless it's some weird specialty test it's hands off. You just put a bar coded tube on a rack and it's off to grand prix land. Follows a track around the lab and stops at the instruments that know what tests to run on it.
FWIW, my specialty was Transfusion Medicine (Blood Banking). In Dayton's Reference Lab. When hospitals had a problem they couldn't solve, they'd send it to us. QC on products we were sending out to the hospitals. And dealing with folks with super rare blood types. In our line of work, AB negative 1:167 is as common as dirt. We had one guy with a very uncommon flavor of Rh negative blood- and with some other funky antibodies, he was a 1:50,000 character. Like only seven other known folks in the country who could safely donate blood for him.
Yeah... I still can't get an honest answer to what exactly my blood type is... I have some unusual things like running an abnormal high red blood cell count.. So every couple of months or so.. I have to go to phlebotomy and "Let blood" as it were.. it's the only thing thats worked so far to stabilize my blood..
Yeah... I still can't get an honest answer to what exactly my blood type is... I have some unusual things like running an abnormal high red blood cell count.. So every couple of months or so.. I have to go to phlebotomy and "Let blood" as it were.. it's the only thing thats worked so far to stabilize my blood..
Nickers I'll take this to PM, not today though. I have a long road trip to pick up my wife at her brother's house.
-
Zombo said:
Oh, I can find example after example of you talking about how important Billings was, and me telling you to chill on that guy.
You were an arrogant fuck then too, acting like you needed to explain defenses to me.
I was telling you that Billings was just a guy long before we found a better guy.
Z
Billings position was/is important.
You telling me to "chill" on him is more of an understanding that Richardson and Jackson wouldn't get it done alone.
McDowell coming out of nowhere was damn near a minor miracle. Again, him taking that much time off just doesn't happen.
So I place my belief in proven NFL players of Billings caliber until they demonstrate they Can't be effective. That's hardly arrogant, that's actually pragmatic.
Billings position was/is important.
You telling me to "chill" on him is more of an understanding that Richardson and Jackson wouldn't get it done alone.
McDowell coming out of nowhere was damn near a minor miracle. Again, him taking that much time off just doesn't happen.
So I place my belief in proven NFL players of Billings caliber until they demonstrate they Can't be effective. That's hardly arrogant, that's actually pragmatic.
Don't mind Zombo, he's a piece of shit he doesn't understand football.
-
Billings position was/is important.
You telling me to "chill" on him is more of an understanding that Richardson and Jackson wouldn't get it done alone.
McDowell coming out of nowhere was damn near a minor miracle. Again, him taking that much time off just doesn't happen.
So I place my belief in proven NFL players of Billings caliber until they demonstrate they Can't be effective. That's hardly arrogant, that's actually pragmatic.
Don't mind Zombo, he's a piece of shit he doesn't understand football.
Don't mind Zombo, he's a piece of shit he doesn't understand football.
That hasn't been my experience. He's always been rather good with me.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login