Skip to content

Ray Agnew waived...

The Browns Board
33 13 1.8k
  • @clevfan4life said:

    hmmm, didn't really notice Agnew wasn't blocking well.

    But did you notice him blocking well?

    we had the 3rd best running game in the NFL prior to Sunday so I assumed our FB must have been grading well since he was playing a lot in those games where we rushed for a lot of yds.

    @tour2ma said:

    But did you notice him blocking well?

  • lols at 5'8 and 244. If Hoyer had problems overthrowing Agnew in the flat.....aahahahahaha.

  • The kid seems to block well and had some nice hits on special teams.

  • Some nice stuff in the college scouting vid Logic posted...

    - Nice technique pass blocking... very active feet and eyes.

    - Hits the first thing he sees run blocking. Only a few "Blow-ups" of anything bigger than a DB, but several times where he stayed with run blocks.

    - Hands look reasonable.

    - Does not look to have the explosive first step Ag had, but accelerates all the way to the line whether carrying or blocking.

    Looks serviceable...

  • Yeah that was my take away. Won't be anything exciting but will do what is asked of him. I didn't see any whiffs on blocks but this is also a highlight.

  • we had the 3rd best running game in the NFL prior to Sunday so I assumed our FB must have been grading well since he was playing a lot in those games where we rushed for a lot of yds.

    @tour2ma said:

    But did you notice him blocking well?

    @clevfan4life said:

    we had the 3rd best running game in the NFL prior to Sunday so I assumed our FB must have been grading well since he was playing a lot in those games where we rushed for a lot of yds.

    We also used a FB maybe 25% of our snaps and probably passed on a third of those... so not really a major factor in our past run success.

  • Yeah that was my take away. Won't be anything exciting but will do what is asked of him. I didn't see any whiffs on blocks but this is also a highlight.

    @logicisforsquares said:

    Yeah that was my take away. Won't be anything exciting but will do what is asked of him. I didn't see any whiffs on blocks but this is also a highlight.

    lol... true, but they did include a drop...

  • @logicisforsquares said:

    Yeah that was my take away. Won't be anything exciting but will do what is asked of him. I didn't see any whiffs on blocks but this is also a highlight.

    lol... true, but they did include a drop...

    @tour2ma said:

    lol... true, but they did include a drop...

    I guess it very well could just be all of his plays. If so, I like what I see.

  • @tour2ma said:

    lol... true, but they did include a drop...

    I guess it very well could just be all of his plays. If so, I like what I see.

    @logicisforsquares said:

    I guess it very well could just be all of his plays. If so, I like what I see.

    You may be right there... video is by DraftAnalysis.org.

  • @clevfan4life said:

    we had the 3rd best running game in the NFL prior to Sunday so I assumed our FB must have been grading well since he was playing a lot in those games where we rushed for a lot of yds.

    We also used a FB maybe 25% of our snaps and probably passed on a third of those... so not really a major factor in our past run success.

    you sure about that 25%? It seemed like our best runs came on two back sets and we ran out of that more than 25% of our running plays.

    @tour2ma said:

    We also used a FB maybe 25% of our snaps and probably passed on a third of those... so not really a major factor in our past run success.

  • 25% was an estimate I felt good about... but both the PTG and TN counts were 30 and 38% respectively. So rather than 1/4 say 1/3... One factor in my underestimate seems to have been not allowing for the number of 3TE I-form sets.

    In general we tend to start with the I early in every game (should tell you something right there).

    Here are my notes from the PTG game:

    ◦Agnew: +0-9 net -9 w/ 2D- We started the game with Ag in various I-formations and did nothing. We abandoned it and him in Q2 and scored 3 TDs and a FG. We tempted fate by returning to it briefly in S9, which was saved by a PI call, before shelving it again and rolling to our 4th TD. We returned to it in garbage time. All totaled Ag saw the field for 14 plays; he received -'s for half of them.

    Steelers: 12 run plays w/ Ag... 39 run plays total... 30%, but included our last three plays where we might as well have done the victory formation kneel down.

    Titans:

    ◦Ag: +5-6 net -1 w/2D-; After a disastrous game 3 Ag started well in week 5 posting 3 +'s before his 1st neg; He followed with a nice chip/ release on his way to his PAP reception. Ag missed one seam as lead blocker. He hit one LB with the wrong shoulder in another hole allowing the LB to make the tackle (S7P8).

    13 I-form runs... 35 run plays total... ~38%.

  • Where is Vonde Leach x raven, x ECU, he can block???

  • Hey guys, Hawks fan here - just wanted to drop by to see what you were all thinking about Small getting activated...I actually think that this move may have less to do with Agnew's performance and more to to with protecting Small from being reacquired by the Seahawks as we lost our current starting Fullback, Derrick Coleman to a broken foot in warm-ups yesterday.

    A lot of us Hawk fans were sad to see Small get snatched up on waivers after the preseason and were wondering what his status was with Cleveland was and how he was faring as we were expecting the Seahawks to go back out and sign him while Coleman is out. This move obviously protects that Browns investment in Small.

  • In the zone scheme, the FB has to be just as smart as the RB when picking the gaps. The dance runs by West on 2nd and 3rd and short are perfect examples of what we CANNOT allow our RBs to do. Having a smart and decisive FB allows us to run inside zone much more effectively. Agnew played decent, but I think this is more of an upgrade thing by bringing in this kid...

  • He would not have been the starter in the Arky O if he could not block well. It's a point of emphasis from a run oriented HC.

  • In the zone scheme, the FB has to be just as smart as the RB when picking the gaps. The dance runs by West on 2nd and 3rd and short are perfect examples of what we CANNOT allow our RBs to do. Having a smart and decisive FB allows us to run inside zone much more effectively. Agnew played decent, but I think this is more of an upgrade thing by bringing in this kid...

    @thenew23 said:

    In the zone scheme, the FB has to be just as smart as the RB when picking the gaps.

    Bingo!

  • lols at 5'8 and 244. If Hoyer had problems overthrowing Agnew in the flat.....aahahahahaha.

    @clevfan4life said:

    lols at 5'8 and 244. If Hoyer had problems overthrowing Agnew in the flat.....aahahahahaha.

    You mean Manziel right?

  • you sure about that 25%? It seemed like our best runs came on two back sets and we ran out of that more than 25% of our running plays.

    @tour2ma said:

    We also used a FB maybe 25% of our snaps and probably passed on a third of those... so not really a major factor in our past run success.

    @clevfan4life said:

    you sure about that 25%? It seemed like our best runs came on two back sets and we ran out of that more than 25% of our running plays.

    2 back set doesn't mean there's a full back in. Most of our 2 man sets are Tate(or West) and Crowell, which is completely different than having a FB in.

  • @clevfan4life said:

    you sure about that 25%? It seemed like our best runs came on two back sets and we ran out of that more than 25% of our running plays.

    2 back set doesn't mean there's a full back in. Most of our 2 man sets are Tate(or West) and Crowell, which is completely different than having a FB in.

    @manzier said:

    2 back set doesn't mean there's a full back in. Most of our 2 man sets are Tate(or West) and Crowell, which is completely different than having a FB in.

    I can't recall a single time this season when 2 of our 3 "RBs" have been on the field at the same time...

    I've seen a TE take the H-back role or even fill out a full-house, but never a 2nd RB.