The 2023 season film studies. Thread of questions and answers.
-
This is the prequel, to the sequel above. I mentioned that a lot of what the Ravens did early was because of Grants miscommunications. This play was that initial tip to the Ravens offensive coaches and came before the QB Wrap TD by Lamar the following drive after the DTR INT.
The two high shell start.
-------------------------------------------------------------
We get the Z on the jet Mo coming across the line. AT this point, Grant is now functioning as a glorified WLB. So he has to cover and protect his '7' in a cover 3, while carrying the #2 seam if necessary. Newsome calls the rotation and roll to Thornhill, but Grant isn't understanding of his assignment off this motion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So what we end up with is a loss of B gap integrity and not a curl/flat defender in sight at the top. Grant looks back to see the screw up.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At this point, Grant see's he has fucked up, now he's just turning his eyes back inward and looking for work while eyeing Lamar for tips. Trying to be an athlete to make up for the fact he's off his landmark.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The defense is fortunate there was no TE leak or any route developing to that side, otherwise it would have been cheap and easy yardage for the Ravens. Plus the pressure from the line helped to erase this smell. It's a trend we had weeks 1-3, in week 4, it finally bit us in the ass.
Motions change run fits and force coverage rotations. I said it in this thread on the previous page, Delpit needs to learn to play intelligently along with playing aggressively. Right now he's losing his head at times when he needs to be thinking the most. What's concerning is that these aren't overly complex motion adjustments he's facing. So these are the demons of season past that are coming back to plague his game, when he has to be a complete safety. We lost B gap integrity on this play and allowed far too much open space off this easy move, and the Ravens made the Browns DEF pay for it on a short field and one play just the next drive off a similar look.
Again, this is where I caution people against using a PFF grade for DB's. It's a first layer metric, much like BMI is to health. But once the details behind the applied metric can be understood, we realize that the number applied can have a great margin for error.
Ghost Hunters was a show on A&E, I do believe? Right now, Delpit is earning a guest spot on that program. He's been chasing nothing at times.
Hey Tia, I do enjoy your write up on the games and the analysis on plays and more. Well done.
You do a really good job keep it up. mjp.
-
A couple things I wanted to briefly touch this morning. The first...
WTF is the NFL even doing here with this Oline alignment depth? How can that even be remotely legal?
Next... my little quip on giving the Titans DBs and their coaches props.
Scissor to the boundary with Njoku and Moore. A good strong ball fake from Watson, something he really needs to improve on from under center, especially selling that zone stretch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1/4 safety and CB build their integrity and bracket Coop at the bottom. At the top you can see the route combination develop.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is such a great pass off. The boundary gives you some leeway in terms of less space to cover, but it's still the NFL and you're doing this so far down the field in terms of your vertical declaration in match coverage. I didn't see any arms flying to point to the exchange, didn't see anybody look like they were yelling at each other. Just two players being on the same page with their defensive I.Q.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW was working that 2 man game at the top, obviously. He was forced to eat the throw because Moore isn't a big enough body to try and box out Byard. And the corners positioning means you aren't going to tempt a throw high and outside because he'll likely mug it. This is where I'd like to see him be a bit more decisive in terms of just picking up a few yards. Tuck, take your 3-4 and slide. I know you run to throw, and I love my QB's to do that. But until the offense starts humming along, take what you can.
Re: Elijah Moore. I know he has low 4.4 speed, but it's burst speed. No long distance type shit. I understand the coaching staff, at this moment at least, maybe hasn't quite parsed that out yet. Because they keep trying to get him involved vertically, even in these sorts of concepts, where if it's Coop functioning as the #1 on the post, maybe DW tries to put it on him and let him be physical downfield. That just isn't Moore's game. Which makes this a sort of all-or-nothing type of downfield shot.
There is no "the light goes on" with this offense, or really anything in football. It's a glimmer that slowly needs to grow brighter. This is the burden and task for not only Watson, but clearly this coaching staff as well as they try to fuse their playing styles and philosophies into one fluid and effective creation.
A couple things I wanted to briefly touch this morning. The first...
WTF is the NFL even doing here with this Oline alignment depth? How can that even be remotely legal?
We have talked about this before, and I agree. Everything has been about protecting QB.s. They let it slide because of that.
At least that is all I can figure since it is pretty common with all teams and all officiating crews.
-
Some PFF gems.. posting here to see if any replies/thoughts to the individual performances:
Alex Wright actually played well for a change, getting the highest DL grade of 73.4 on 15 snaps.
Fields only saw one snap at LB (59.9) but graded better than either Walker or Taki who were in the mid-40's.
Mo Hurst was the second-best IDL by a pretty wide margin.
Mike Ford and Cameron Mitchell were both above a 60 when they had to step in.. Obviously you'd hate to see it but we can be confident with the CB injury standins in some game down the road. Money Mitch: the return?The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown -
All that can be said about the Browns' #1 defense is that this young man captures what it's all about. They are out there having a lot of fun playing like one supertogether unit.??
-
Some PFF gems.. posting here to see if any replies/thoughts to the individual performances:
Alex Wright actually played well for a change, getting the highest DL grade of 73.4 on 15 snaps.
Fields only saw one snap at LB (59.9) but graded better than either Walker or Taki who were in the mid-40's.
Mo Hurst was the second-best IDL by a pretty wide margin.
Mike Ford and Cameron Mitchell were both above a 60 when they had to step in.. Obviously you'd hate to see it but we can be confident with the CB injury standins in some game down the road. Money Mitch: the return?Some PFF gems.. posting here to see if any replies/thoughts to the individual performances:
Alex Wright actually played well for a change, getting the highest DL grade of 73.4 on 15 snaps.
Fields only saw one snap at LB (59.9) but graded better than either Walker or Taki who were in the mid-40's.
Mo Hurst was the second-best IDL by a pretty wide margin.
Mike Ford and Cameron Mitchell were both above a 60 when they had to step in.. Obviously you'd hate to see it but we can be confident with the CB injury standins in some game down the road. Money Mitch: the return?Looks about right.
- Wright was in a rain soaked game that best helps what he's (limitedly) good at - using his wingspan to set an edge and kick inside to 4tech on occasion. Whatever pass rush we might get out of him is cherry on the top. I don't expect him to take the edge on anyone consistently.
- Awalk got smoked on a couple occasions including a well designed wheel to CmC that Purdy couldn't connect on. VERY fortunate for that, because it was 6 points.
- Taki was late a few times but played serviceably. Thornhill saved his ass on that HB choice otherwise that would also have likely been a TD, if not a 1st down conversion at minimum.
- Mo has been playing really well. Not only that, but showing some positional versatility along the interior. Glad he has been keeping healthy and contributing.
- Jordan Elliot is who he is. His play reflects that - still a below average IDL at best.
- Both Ogbo and D.T. had a nice day, them and JoK were the big difference makers at times.
- C.Mitch has been a nice addition. Good strength at the line going hands on with receivers despite not having the best wingspan.
Working on my grades for Jed & Dawand after I go through a watch of how the defense did after the Run CmC shell shock early. I'll check back then.
-
All that can be said about the Browns' #1 defense is that this young man captures what it's all about. They are out there having a lot of fun playing like one supertogether unit.??
All that can be said about the Browns' #1 defense is that this young man captures what it's all about. They are out there having a lot of fun playing like one supertogether unit.??
Impossible to watch that and not love that guy!
-
All that can be said about the Browns' #1 defense is that this young man captures what it's all about. They are out there having a lot of fun playing like one supertogether unit.??
Impossible to watch that and not love that guy!
-
was the same that Schwartz has used to shut down Shanahan before.Cover 1 lurk on 3rd down -- Man outside, one safety coming downhill to the intermediate middle, outside leverage to drive on an underneath route because no fear of the deep ball.
Fun fact: Browns D is on pace to be the 3rd team ever to allow 200 YPG or less. The last was 1970 Minnesota.
And to anyone who says SF should have still won at the end with the FG..... using that logic, OSU should have beat Georgia last year.
-
Just in case anyone was still asking themselves if that toss was the right call on 4th down.
Ford just muffed a play he's run hundreds of times since youth league.
-
Credit has to be given when due - Stef called a solid game yesterday for what he was working with. On the flip side, so did the Colts coaching staff.
I mentioned this in the game thread, but I remembered that power toss the Pats hit us with when they saw how desperate we were to limit the interior runs.
-
Just in case anyone was still asking themselves if that toss was the right call on 4th down.
Ford just muffed a play he's run hundreds of times since youth league.
-
I'm already charting plays, I'll be back on tomorrow to reply to quotes and notifications.
Wanted to hit you guys with something while I'm working. Just in case you like having conversations and you're willing to opened to changing your minds about things when new information comes to light. First off, Browns punting average is 45.4 yards. Given field position, that means the ball would have been around the SEA 26, instead of their own 43. A net difference of 17 yards. Now, this is where it gets fun. Seattle had 2 time-outs, but had 6 plays, 5 offensively ran, the 6th being an accepted penalty on the Browns, that covered those 57 yards for a touchdown. Took a grand total of 72 seconds, just under 1.3 yards per second. Meaning, had the Browns punted and gave Seattle the additional ground to cover, at that pace, Seattle scores with 25 seconds remaining and still keeps their 2 time outs.
Of the Browns 3 games, where the defense was in a place to prevent a tie or a loss score on given field position, including field goals, they currently sit at 1-2 mark. The defense gave up a game winning drive to the Niners. Where San Fran had an 85.21% chance of hitting a 39 yard field goal. I don't know about you guys, but if I was given an 85% success rate at anything, I'd likely be a multi-millionaire. Mother Nature was on our side that day, and dealing with the elements is something both teams had to do. But point being, the Browns defense surrendered those yards when it mattered most. Obviously today counts, as the Browns gave up 7 points in just over a buck 10 in seconds, plus the penalty. Seattle has zero blocked punts last season and this season (so far) so that's likely not an issue here. I don't like working on hypotheticals to that exact, only stuff that's a bit easier to keep track of with some realistic trends to it. Only against the Colts have they secured a game winning defensive stop when the opportunity presented itself.
Granted, my rant is a vacuum situation and I don't really like giving analysis as such. The defense could have given up a game losing FG to the Colts, but that same defense produced some turnovers and a defensive score that helped to win that game as well. Likewise for the San Fran game, where they got stops and produced negative plays to help our offense put some points on the board. It's an ecosystem and there has to be some give and take. My post here is to highlight the silliness of the absolute which is the "punt and play defense" being the right and definitive call. That "mythical" call which wins the game every time. Right now, under that scenario, the Browns have a losing record of yardage surrendered. Point blank. The defense gave up 3 scores in the 1st quarter today while dropping a sure-fire defensive score. In a game where the offense had to dig deep on the road early to keep us in it, to the point they ended up getting a lead. That same offense sputtered at points in the 2nd half when the Hawks made their adjustments. Are those all presumably the head coaches fault? We've been effusive in our praise of Schwartz, but we've missed out on including some of his good fortune while it's a 'what have you done lately for me?' world. If we punted and gave up said score, would the venom turn to the defense as it has Stef? Again - give with some take.
Put things in proper perspective, Browns fans. This is an injury riddled team that took a chance on the road to ice a game against a defensive look they enjoyed some success against on previous drives.
Apologies to all for not being able to get back to conversation tonight... but I've got grades to do. I'll pay that respect tomorrow with appropriate responses.
-
Seahawks game...the long pass to Cooper who got to the 2 yard line...and then the 1 yard line with the roughing the passer call. Nothing was open initially, but the OL gave PJ time. When they showed the replay from the Behind the QB angle I could see that the receivers reached the end of their route. The receiver who ran the underneath route below Cooper was standing there like a statue whereas Cooper realized the situation immediately upon reaching the end of his route (which of course, was a little after the shorter route concluded) and turned and moved to an open area giving PJ some place to throw it. I don't know who the underneath receiver was, but he makes a nice statue...although that's not really helpful.
-
I'm already charting plays, I'll be back on tomorrow to reply to quotes and notifications.
Wanted to hit you guys with something while I'm working. Just in case you like having conversations and you're willing to opened to changing your minds about things when new information comes to light. First off, Browns punting average is 45.4 yards. Given field position, that means the ball would have been around the SEA 26, instead of their own 43. A net difference of 17 yards. Now, this is where it gets fun. Seattle had 2 time-outs, but had 6 plays, 5 offensively ran, the 6th being an accepted penalty on the Browns, that covered those 57 yards for a touchdown. Took a grand total of 72 seconds, just under 1.3 yards per second. Meaning, had the Browns punted and gave Seattle the additional ground to cover, at that pace, Seattle scores with 25 seconds remaining and still keeps their 2 time outs.
Of the Browns 3 games, where the defense was in a place to prevent a tie or a loss score on given field position, including field goals, they currently sit at 1-2 mark. The defense gave up a game winning drive to the Niners. Where San Fran had an 85.21% chance of hitting a 39 yard field goal. I don't know about you guys, but if I was given an 85% success rate at anything, I'd likely be a multi-millionaire. Mother Nature was on our side that day, and dealing with the elements is something both teams had to do. But point being, the Browns defense surrendered those yards when it mattered most. Obviously today counts, as the Browns gave up 7 points in just over a buck 10 in seconds, plus the penalty. Seattle has zero blocked punts last season and this season (so far) so that's likely not an issue here. I don't like working on hypotheticals to that exact, only stuff that's a bit easier to keep track of with some realistic trends to it. Only against the Colts have they secured a game winning defensive stop when the opportunity presented itself.
Granted, my rant is a vacuum situation and I don't really like giving analysis as such. The defense could have given up a game losing FG to the Colts, but that same defense produced some turnovers and a defensive score that helped to win that game as well. Likewise for the San Fran game, where they got stops and produced negative plays to help our offense put some points on the board. It's an ecosystem and there has to be some give and take. My post here is to highlight the silliness of the absolute which is the "punt and play defense" being the right and definitive call. That "mythical" call which wins the game every time. Right now, under that scenario, the Browns have a losing record of yardage surrendered. Point blank. The defense gave up 3 scores in the 1st quarter today while dropping a sure-fire defensive score. In a game where the offense had to dig deep on the road early to keep us in it, to the point they ended up getting a lead. That same offense sputtered at points in the 2nd half when the Hawks made their adjustments. Are those all presumably the head coaches fault? We've been effusive in our praise of Schwartz, but we've missed out on including some of his good fortune while it's a 'what have you done lately for me?' world. If we punted and gave up said score, would the venom turn to the defense as it has Stef? Again - give with some take.
Put things in proper perspective, Browns fans. This is an injury riddled team that took a chance on the road to ice a game against a defensive look they enjoyed some success against on previous drives.
Apologies to all for not being able to get back to conversation tonight... but I've got grades to do. I'll pay that respect tomorrow with appropriate responses.
"punt and play defense"
This should not be in quotation marks. The disputed play that resulted in the turnover was on a 3rd and 3. The dispute: some including myself are still sick to our stomach we didn't run in that situation, while you argued the merits of passing.
Some numbers of my own: Like I said, we were 3rd and 3. Over the game, we were averaging 3,9 YPC. So by those numbers alone, we get the 1st and the game is as good as over. I cannot find a site that allows me to drill down to 2nd half stats, but from memory the running game was improving. Even against the occasional stacked box, which I called out earlier in the game thread, so the counter that the opposing coaches and defense were expecting the run doesn't fly IMO.
Hunt also doesn't have a turnover this year, and only one all of last season. The likelihood of a turnover if we had let him run the ball is very slim indeed.
Compare that to Walker: 3 interceptions over the first 2 games; got sacked 4 times, and produced a completion rate of less than 50%. At this point in the game, he only had one Int, so another one was increasingly likely every time he threw. The chance of a successful outcome with him throwing is much lower than desired, than acceptable even. To be clear: I have nothing against the guy. Comes across respectful and humble. Just not an NFL caliber player, even as a back-up. Putting him in that situation is on Andrew Berry, who on the whole has done remarkably well the past off season, I think.
IMO, arguing in favor of the pass in that situation can only be done in a completely theoretic vacuum.
- With an in-from NFL caliber starter such as Watson against the Titans, passing probably is your best bet.
- With a serviceable back-up like Jacoby Brisett, while probably not being our best bet, passing would still be acceptable.
Neither of those apply. By the numbers I have presented, the choice with the best 'expected value' for the Browns in that situation was clearly letting Hunt run the ball.
All that stuff about punting only comes into play after the running play with a good chance of success.
Furthermore, the run also takes time off the clock, or forces Sea to take one of their time-outs.Instead of stopping the clock and just F@%#!#G giving them the ball in great field position like we did.I am still fuming about that choice, but happy to agree to disagree.
EDIT: forgot about the two-minute warning, but the remainder of my argument still stands.
-
I'm already charting plays, I'll be back on tomorrow to reply to quotes and notifications.
Wanted to hit you guys with something while I'm working. Just in case you like having conversations and you're willing to opened to changing your minds about things when new information comes to light. First off, Browns punting average is 45.4 yards. Given field position, that means the ball would have been around the SEA 26, instead of their own 43. A net difference of 17 yards. Now, this is where it gets fun. Seattle had 2 time-outs, but had 6 plays, 5 offensively ran, the 6th being an accepted penalty on the Browns, that covered those 57 yards for a touchdown. Took a grand total of 72 seconds, just under 1.3 yards per second. Meaning, had the Browns punted and gave Seattle the additional ground to cover, at that pace, Seattle scores with 25 seconds remaining and still keeps their 2 time outs.
Of the Browns 3 games, where the defense was in a place to prevent a tie or a loss score on given field position, including field goals, they currently sit at 1-2 mark. The defense gave up a game winning drive to the Niners. Where San Fran had an 85.21% chance of hitting a 39 yard field goal. I don't know about you guys, but if I was given an 85% success rate at anything, I'd likely be a multi-millionaire. Mother Nature was on our side that day, and dealing with the elements is something both teams had to do. But point being, the Browns defense surrendered those yards when it mattered most. Obviously today counts, as the Browns gave up 7 points in just over a buck 10 in seconds, plus the penalty. Seattle has zero blocked punts last season and this season (so far) so that's likely not an issue here. I don't like working on hypotheticals to that exact, only stuff that's a bit easier to keep track of with some realistic trends to it. Only against the Colts have they secured a game winning defensive stop when the opportunity presented itself.
Granted, my rant is a vacuum situation and I don't really like giving analysis as such. The defense could have given up a game losing FG to the Colts, but that same defense produced some turnovers and a defensive score that helped to win that game as well. Likewise for the San Fran game, where they got stops and produced negative plays to help our offense put some points on the board. It's an ecosystem and there has to be some give and take. My post here is to highlight the silliness of the absolute which is the "punt and play defense" being the right and definitive call. That "mythical" call which wins the game every time. Right now, under that scenario, the Browns have a losing record of yardage surrendered. Point blank. The defense gave up 3 scores in the 1st quarter today while dropping a sure-fire defensive score. In a game where the offense had to dig deep on the road early to keep us in it, to the point they ended up getting a lead. That same offense sputtered at points in the 2nd half when the Hawks made their adjustments. Are those all presumably the head coaches fault? We've been effusive in our praise of Schwartz, but we've missed out on including some of his good fortune while it's a 'what have you done lately for me?' world. If we punted and gave up said score, would the venom turn to the defense as it has Stef? Again - give with some take.
Put things in proper perspective, Browns fans. This is an injury riddled team that took a chance on the road to ice a game against a defensive look they enjoyed some success against on previous drives.
Apologies to all for not being able to get back to conversation tonight... but I've got grades to do. I'll pay that respect tomorrow with appropriate responses.
I'm already charting plays, I'll be back on tomorrow to reply to quotes and notifications.
Wanted to hit you guys with something while I'm working. Just in case you like having conversations and you're willing to opened to changing your minds about things when new information comes to light. First off, Browns punting average is 45.4 yards. Given field position, that means the ball would have been around the SEA 26, instead of their own 43. A net difference of 17 yards. Now, this is where it gets fun. Seattle had 2 time-outs, but had 6 plays, 5 offensively ran, the 6th being an accepted penalty on the Browns, that covered those 57 yards for a touchdown. Took a grand total of 72 seconds, just under 1.3 yards per second. Meaning, had the Browns punted and gave Seattle the additional ground to cover, at that pace, Seattle scores with 25 seconds remaining and still keeps their 2 time outs.
In addition to what was said, this math ain't mathin.
Cleveland was on their own 41 on the 3rd and 3 play. Assuming they don't gain a yard, a 45 yard punt (Cody was averaging 47 in the game, but I'll give you 45), put the ball on the 14 yard line, not the 26. Even using the very flawed methodology of yards per second (which I can truly say I've never seen in my life), you also didn't consider the 10+ seconds a punt takes off the clock as opposed to the time saved from the turnover.
Lastly, I won't add much to what Korsou said. Football can be a simple game sometimes, and Stefanski despite being a very solid coach has a marked problem of overthinking it. The Browns were moving the ball on the ground well, and the QB was a third string guy who missed two wide open people on previous plays. I can't find the statistic, but I recall watching the game that the Browns held the Seahawks to that point to 44 total yards in the 2nd half. Running the ball was the prudent decision, and not choosing it cost the team dearly.
EDIT: I'm taking an educated guess you're presuming the Seahawks get 12 yards return (their average) but in that situation it's very unlikely.
-
Thought you wouldn't see this under-the-radar contract if it was posted any other place
The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown -
I'm already charting plays, I'll be back on tomorrow to reply to quotes and notifications.
Wanted to hit you guys with something while I'm working. Just in case you like having conversations and you're willing to opened to changing your minds about things when new information comes to light. First off, Browns punting average is 45.4 yards. Given field position, that means the ball would have been around the SEA 26, instead of their own 43. A net difference of 17 yards. Now, this is where it gets fun. Seattle had 2 time-outs, but had 6 plays, 5 offensively ran, the 6th being an accepted penalty on the Browns, that covered those 57 yards for a touchdown. Took a grand total of 72 seconds, just under 1.3 yards per second. Meaning, had the Browns punted and gave Seattle the additional ground to cover, at that pace, Seattle scores with 25 seconds remaining and still keeps their 2 time outs.
In addition to what was said, this math ain't mathin.
Cleveland was on their own 41 on the 3rd and 3 play. Assuming they don't gain a yard, a 45 yard punt (Cody was averaging 47 in the game, but I'll give you 45), put the ball on the 14 yard line, not the 26. Even using the very flawed methodology of yards per second (which I can truly say I've never seen in my life), you also didn't consider the 10+ seconds a punt takes off the clock as opposed to the time saved from the turnover.
Lastly, I won't add much to what Korsou said. Football can be a simple game sometimes, and Stefanski despite being a very solid coach has a marked problem of overthinking it. The Browns were moving the ball on the ground well, and the QB was a third string guy who missed two wide open people on previous plays. I can't find the statistic, but I recall watching the game that the Browns held the Seahawks to that point to 44 total yards in the 2nd half. Running the ball was the prudent decision, and not choosing it cost the team dearly.
EDIT: I'm taking an educated guess you're presuming the Seahawks get 12 yards return (their average) but in that situation it's very unlikely.
EDIT: I'm taking an educated guess you're presuming the Seahawks get 12 yards return (their average) but in that situation it's very unlikely.
First off, I started this post on Monday in another tab. Haven't had even remotely enough time to finish it. I'm on my way to go drop my car off for some work (pre-winter stuff too. Because, as luck would have it, mother nature is cool to be a bitch and snow the other day) I'll be at the gym, sort of writing more down mentally as I go. But first I wanted to apologize specifically to you for Sunday. I didn't mean offense or arrogance, but it came across as both and that wasn't my intent. You're a solid dude and post quality stuff. Again, that's my bad.
This should not be in quotation marks.
I am still fuming about that choice, but happy to agree to disagree.
.
Happy to have you as a part of the conversation.
I have a post, like I said I started monday, that goes over some things.
- Defensive tendencies for both teams
- Defensive tendencies for the Browns against San Fran
- Offensive tendencies and playcalls for those last few drives
- Playcalls for that last series.
I'm not arguing against the merits of what the alternative may have been, and just like the Watson trade, it's probably something I would have gone the opposite of. In Sunday's case, if I were calling plays, I would have dialed up that QB wrap... although I know what that could spell, and then punted. Again, NOT questioning the validity of the strategy. With the way this defense is structured and playing, I actually suspect there might be more last drive struggles ahead of them in these sorts of games. I know that isn't a popular or fun opinion, but I have good evidence to highlight it.
I appreciate Stefs balls trying to ice the game. He didn't call it like he was scared. More importantly, I saw the designs he called and they were there against similar coverages from earlier in the game, no less. The throw(s) were there, the execution just wasn't. I'm only saying this - neither play would have been an absolute. Ever see Crimson Tide? Denzel and Gene Hackman? Great movie, check it out if you haven't. That's sort of how I'm viewing these debates.
Ultimately we will (likely) end up on that 'agree to disagree'. And keep in mind, fellas - I'm perfectly fine with that. All I ask is that the reasoning, and the acceptance of counter reasoning, is still maintained.
-
Thought you wouldn't see this under-the-radar contract if it was posted any other place
Thought you wouldn't see this under-the-radar contract if it was posted any other place
Yeah, that one still stings.
-
EDIT: I'm taking an educated guess you're presuming the Seahawks get 12 yards return (their average) but in that situation it's very unlikely.
First off, I started this post on Monday in another tab. Haven't had even remotely enough time to finish it. I'm on my way to go drop my car off for some work (pre-winter stuff too. Because, as luck would have it, mother nature is cool to be a bitch and snow the other day) I'll be at the gym, sort of writing more down mentally as I go. But first I wanted to apologize specifically to you for Sunday. I didn't mean offense or arrogance, but it came across as both and that wasn't my intent. You're a solid dude and post quality stuff. Again, that's my bad.
This should not be in quotation marks.
I am still fuming about that choice, but happy to agree to disagree.
.
Happy to have you as a part of the conversation.
I have a post, like I said I started monday, that goes over some things.
- Defensive tendencies for both teams
- Defensive tendencies for the Browns against San Fran
- Offensive tendencies and playcalls for those last few drives
- Playcalls for that last series.
I'm not arguing against the merits of what the alternative may have been, and just like the Watson trade, it's probably something I would have gone the opposite of. In Sunday's case, if I were calling plays, I would have dialed up that QB wrap... although I know what that could spell, and then punted. Again, NOT questioning the validity of the strategy. With the way this defense is structured and playing, I actually suspect there might be more last drive struggles ahead of them in these sorts of games. I know that isn't a popular or fun opinion, but I have good evidence to highlight it.
I appreciate Stefs balls trying to ice the game. He didn't call it like he was scared. More importantly, I saw the designs he called and they were there against similar coverages from earlier in the game, no less. The throw(s) were there, the execution just wasn't. I'm only saying this - neither play would have been an absolute. Ever see Crimson Tide? Denzel and Gene Hackman? Great movie, check it out if you haven't. That's sort of how I'm viewing these debates.
Ultimately we will (likely) end up on that 'agree to disagree'. And keep in mind, fellas - I'm perfectly fine with that. All I ask is that the reasoning, and the acceptance of counter reasoning, is still maintained.
First off, I started this post on Monday in another tab. Haven't had even remotely enough time to finish it. I'm on my way to go drop my car off for some work (pre-winter stuff too. Because, as luck would have it, mother nature is cool to be a bitch and snow the other day) I'll be at the gym, sort of writing more down mentally as I go. But first I wanted to apologize specifically to you for Sunday. I didn't mean offense or arrogance, but it came across as both and that wasn't my intent. You're a solid dude and post quality stuff. Again, that's my bad.
Nothing but love big dog - it takes a man to own up to things and I sincerely appreciate it. Can’t say I have that issue here in south Florida- don’t miss the snow one bit.
still shoulda run the damn ball though haha.
-
First off, I started this post on Monday in another tab. Haven't had even remotely enough time to finish it. I'm on my way to go drop my car off for some work (pre-winter stuff too. Because, as luck would have it, mother nature is cool to be a bitch and snow the other day) I'll be at the gym, sort of writing more down mentally as I go. But first I wanted to apologize specifically to you for Sunday. I didn't mean offense or arrogance, but it came across as both and that wasn't my intent. You're a solid dude and post quality stuff. Again, that's my bad.
Nothing but love big dog - it takes a man to own up to things and I sincerely appreciate it. Can’t say I have that issue here in south Florida- don’t miss the snow one bit.
still shoulda run the damn ball though haha.
Nothing but love big dog - it takes a man to own up to things and I sincerely appreciate it. Can’t say I have that issue here in south Florida- don’t miss the snow one bit.
still shoulda run the damn ball though haha.
Aaaaand it ended up being 60 today. Only in Ohio can you play 9 holes after work then go to a high school playoff game that's going to be 40-ish degrees within a few hours.
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