Garrett Hurt Already
-
No no, i know exactly what i saw...u dont. Ill give you that you know some stuff about some other things, but you have "zero" eye for front 7 mechanics. On a bad ankle garrett ghosted undrneath the guard and center and steamrolled mccown, made them look silly..like they didnt oniw the ball gad been hiked yet.
Ob the 2nd sack garett ripped around the corner but because of that ankle he couldnt lean in like he was during preseason..tried to go around the corner more or less completely vertical. So his initial rush didnt go anywhere but when mccown tried to step up and spill out garrett immediately spun back to the inside and lunged at mccown from behind. Its not the most imoressive sack ever but mccown didnt run into him and for a guy with a clearly bum ankle its a heck of a hustle play. Dont argue with me about how the sacks transpired.
The latger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
He's been calling him 2 tackle Texas since forever. The least he can do is now is call him 2 sack Texas. Do that every game and who cares what Dr. G thinks.
He's been calling him 2 tackle Texas since forever. The least he can do is now is call him 2 sack Texas. Do that every game and who cares what Dr. G thinks.
Let's see, you just posted a response making three references to me...........Who cares what I think? Indeed,
-
Wish the rest of the Browns could suck and get 2 sacks on limited snaps. They can barely even get one sack with unlimited snaps.
-
Since I have him on ignore I can only assume Dr. G. agrees with me. 2 Turnover Trubiski!LOL!!
-
And Dr. G's big rookie pick just threw a pick against Minn with 2:20 to go. Shall we call him 2 turnover Trubiski?
And Dr. G's big rookie pick just threw a pick against Minn with 2:20 to go. Shall we call him 2 turnover Trubiski?
And Trubs one TD should have been an interception that the Vikings defender tipped right to his receiver. High and short.
-
The sacks were not impressive. He broke through a NO BLOCK and barely hit the QB on sack 1, and sack two the QB happened to run in front of him. Garrett sucks gopher dikc.
No no, i know exactly what i saw...u dont. Ill give you that you know some stuff about some other things, but you have "zero" eye for front 7 mechanics. On a bad ankle garrett ghosted undrneath the guard and center and steamrolled mccown, made them look silly..like they didnt oniw the ball gad been hiked yet.
Ob the 2nd sack garett ripped around the corner but because of that ankle he couldnt lean in like he was during preseason..tried to go around the corner more or less completely vertical. So his initial rush didnt go anywhere but when mccown tried to step up and spill out garrett immediately spun back to the inside and lunged at mccown from behind. Its not the most imoressive sack ever but mccown didnt run into him and for a guy with a clearly bum ankle its a heck of a hustle play. Dont argue with me about how the sacks transpired.
The latger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
The larger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
Because Ghoolie is never wrong.
-
The larger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
Because Ghoolie is never wrong.
Because Ghoolie is never wrong.
I u derstand his basic function as a troll but ffs just say attaboy myles keep it up. Its like a rare semi bright spot for us. I can clearly see ghoolie rolling his eyes after that first snap sack of his and saying Shmuck how do i Sheet on this?
-
The sacks were not impressive. He broke through a NO BLOCK and barely hit the QB on sack 1, and sack two the QB happened to run in front of him. Garrett sucks gopher dikc.
No no, i know exactly what i saw...u dont. Ill give you that you know some stuff about some other things, but you have "zero" eye for front 7 mechanics. On a bad ankle garrett ghosted undrneath the guard and center and steamrolled mccown, made them look silly..like they didnt oniw the ball gad been hiked yet.
Ob the 2nd sack garett ripped around the corner but because of that ankle he couldnt lean in like he was during preseason..tried to go around the corner more or less completely vertical. So his initial rush didnt go anywhere but when mccown tried to step up and spill out garrett immediately spun back to the inside and lunged at mccown from behind. Its not the most imoressive sack ever but mccown didnt run into him and for a guy with a clearly bum ankle its a heck of a hustle play. Dont argue with me about how the sacks transpired.
The latger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
No no, i know exactly what i saw...u dont. Ill give you that you know some stuff about some other things, but you have "zero" eye for front 7 mechanics. On a bad ankle garrett ghosted undrneath the guard and center and steamrolled mccown, made them look silly..like they didnt oniw the ball gad been hiked yet.
Ob the 2nd sack garett ripped around the corner but because of that ankle he couldnt lean in like he was during preseason..tried to go around the corner more or less completely vertical. So his initial rush didnt go anywhere but when mccown tried to step up and spill out garrett immediately spun back to the inside and lunged at mccown from behind. Its not the most imoressive sack ever but mccown didnt run into him and for a guy with a clearly bum ankle its a heck of a hustle play. Dont argue with me about how the sacks transpired.
The latger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
Trolls say thing that they don't mean just to piss people off. If I was a troll, you guys would be coming in here all the time with the satisfaction of watching me eat crow.....but very rarely to you get to see that. Making matter worse, despite idiots here saying Sheet like " When Ghoolie is proved wrong, you won't see him, and he will say, "Oh, I knew it all along"................BUT BUT BUT................. that has never been the case with me, It simply has never been my M O, nor my style. In fact, on the rare occasions I have been wrong, I am the very first one to poke fun of myself............ I mean, dude, rain, wind or shine, I am always here.......I don't run from anything.
And look man, if you are giving me a fair shake, I don't change my stories around based on what I think people will be mad at. It just happens that I do not believe what the majority of you people believe. I don't mean this to be derogatory, but I don't consider the "experts" to know more than me, I don't consider them to know as much, if you want to be quite honest, and there is very, very good reason.
The people that write sports articles, the announcers, the experts, are all paid to draw an audience, Furthermore, you surely will agree that the talking heads views are tremendously controlled by what the NFL dictates that they say. Cleveland is so bad that the NFL injects good will and vibe into Browns reporting. Case in point, each and every year the pundits universally exclaim that the Browns just had one of the better drafts. Of course, year after year, like 2017, as the season plays out we find that the draft was actually schidt.
Regarding Garrett.............. I have no dog in his hunt. The only reason the Browns drafted him is because all the pundits said he was the best pick. The Browns had no balls, and with pissed off fans, they made a choice that even if Garrett bombed out, they could say all the pundits agreed he was the best,
I absolutely admire your technical knowledge of front 7 mechanics. I really do. However, as with most things in life, mechanics are more often than not, cowpoop. By mechanics standards, Jourgensen, Stabler, Fouts, Kosar, Unitas and Tarkenton would have been total failures. Certainly Arnold Palmer had weird mechanics.
I don't like Garrett. I believe him to be devoid of character, heart and intensity. For good reason, I believe he will prove to be physically unable to participate in a sustainable career. He is Winslow. Worse, I think. He tried to come of as intelligent (Regrese'), but to me, he is as phony as Sugar Turd Leonard.
Now, be honest with yourself. Don't you see that you are already making excuses for him? Work with me here.
As I watched the Game, I saw Garrett dip into a pool of nothingness in the second half. Many here have also noted that his second half sucked. However, you rush to judgement because you are so sure he is a great prospect, you and others are posting that he is not 100% ready, and that you could tell he wasn't putting full weight on his ankle. Doesn't that make YOU the Troll? I mean I have not seen any official reports saying Garrett is not 100%.........How did you make your assessment on his ankle without any medical reports?
You see what is going on? You see the difference between you and me? I see Garrett play a very impotent second half, and I note call him soft. You on the other hand make the assumption that the reason he sucked MUST BE.................. because of a bad ankle. Examine your own thought process. You are so intent on Garrett being great that already, albeit unwittingly, you can't even recognize that his second half performance is most likely an indicator that he isn't that good, that in your mind, it just HAS TO BE, that his ankles are hurting.
I haven't read a news story about this. So really, be fair, who is trolling? If you take away the Ghoolie schtick, what is left that irritates is simply that my opinions seldom follow the overwhelming majority, but more often than not, I am correct. It is the reality that my contrary thoughts too often for board sanity, come to prove out true.
I don't like Garrett.
-
I u derstand his basic function as a troll but ffs just say attaboy myles keep it up. Its like a rare semi bright spot for us. I can clearly see ghoolie rolling his eyes after that first snap sack of his and saying Shmuck how do i Sheet on this?
Garret is fragile, but his glass man Paxton Lynch has a shoulder owie, and can't play. Garrett was a bust before he ever played a down, but Lynch is gonna light it up- someday. I'm just laughing at his lame trolling from now on. Which I can't see BTW- I'm tired of his board pollution.
The Bengals only need to go 9-2 the rest of the way out to make that lame troll prediction come true while we're at it.
-
No no, i know exactly what i saw...u dont. Ill give you that you know some stuff about some other things, but you have "zero" eye for front 7 mechanics. On a bad ankle garrett ghosted undrneath the guard and center and steamrolled mccown, made them look silly..like they didnt oniw the ball gad been hiked yet.
Ob the 2nd sack garett ripped around the corner but because of that ankle he couldnt lean in like he was during preseason..tried to go around the corner more or less completely vertical. So his initial rush didnt go anywhere but when mccown tried to step up and spill out garrett immediately spun back to the inside and lunged at mccown from behind. Its not the most imoressive sack ever but mccown didnt run into him and for a guy with a clearly bum ankle its a heck of a hustle play. Dont argue with me about how the sacks transpired.
The latger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
Trolls say thing that they don't mean just to piss people off. If I was a troll, you guys would be coming in here all the time with the satisfaction of watching me eat crow.....but very rarely to you get to see that. Making matter worse, despite idiots here saying Sheet like " When Ghoolie is proved wrong, you won't see him, and he will say, "Oh, I knew it all along"................BUT BUT BUT................. that has never been the case with me, It simply has never been my M O, nor my style. In fact, on the rare occasions I have been wrong, I am the very first one to poke fun of myself............ I mean, dude, rain, wind or shine, I am always here.......I don't run from anything.
And look man, if you are giving me a fair shake, I don't change my stories around based on what I think people will be mad at. It just happens that I do not believe what the majority of you people believe. I don't mean this to be derogatory, but I don't consider the "experts" to know more than me, I don't consider them to know as much, if you want to be quite honest, and there is very, very good reason.
The people that write sports articles, the announcers, the experts, are all paid to draw an audience, Furthermore, you surely will agree that the talking heads views are tremendously controlled by what the NFL dictates that they say. Cleveland is so bad that the NFL injects good will and vibe into Browns reporting. Case in point, each and every year the pundits universally exclaim that the Browns just had one of the better drafts. Of course, year after year, like 2017, as the season plays out we find that the draft was actually schidt.
Regarding Garrett.............. I have no dog in his hunt. The only reason the Browns drafted him is because all the pundits said he was the best pick. The Browns had no balls, and with pissed off fans, they made a choice that even if Garrett bombed out, they could say all the pundits agreed he was the best,
I absolutely admire your technical knowledge of front 7 mechanics. I really do. However, as with most things in life, mechanics are more often than not, cowpoop. By mechanics standards, Jourgensen, Stabler, Fouts, Kosar, Unitas and Tarkenton would have been total failures. Certainly Arnold Palmer had weird mechanics.
I don't like Garrett. I believe him to be devoid of character, heart and intensity. For good reason, I believe he will prove to be physically unable to participate in a sustainable career. He is Winslow. Worse, I think. He tried to come of as intelligent (Regrese'), but to me, he is as phony as Sugar Turd Leonard.
Now, be honest with yourself. Don't you see that you are already making excuses for him? Work with me here.
As I watched the Game, I saw Garrett dip into a pool of nothingness in the second half. Many here have also noted that his second half sucked. However, you rush to judgement because you are so sure he is a great prospect, you and others are posting that he is not 100% ready, and that you could tell he wasn't putting full weight on his ankle. Doesn't that make YOU the Troll? I mean I have not seen any official reports saying Garrett is not 100%.........How did you make your assessment on his ankle without any medical reports?
You see what is going on? You see the difference between you and me? I see Garrett play a very impotent second half, and I note call him soft. You on the other hand make the assumption that the reason he sucked MUST BE.................. because of a bad ankle. Examine your own thought process. You are so intent on Garrett being great that already, albeit unwittingly, you can't even recognize that his second half performance is most likely an indicator that he isn't that good, that in your mind, it just HAS TO BE, that his ankles are hurting.
I haven't read a news story about this. So really, be fair, who is trolling? If you take away the Ghoolie schtick, what is left that irritates is simply that my opinions seldom follow the overwhelming majority, but more often than not, I am correct. It is the reality that my contrary thoughts too often for board sanity, come to prove out true.
I don't like Garrett.
Trolls say thing that they don't mean just to piss people off. If I was a troll, you guys would be coming in here all the time with the satisfaction of watching me eat crow.....but very rarely to you get to see that. Making matter worse, despite idiots here saying Sheet like " When Ghoolie is proved wrong, you won't see him, and he will say, "Oh, I knew it all along"................BUT BUT BUT................. that has never been the case with me, It simply has never been my M O, nor my style. In fact, on the rare occasions I have been wrong, I am the very first one to poke fun of myself............ I mean, dude, rain, wind or shine, I am always here.......I don't run from anything.
And look man, if you are giving me a fair shake, I don't change my stories around based on what I think people will be mad at. It just happens that I do not believe what the majority of you people believe. I don't mean this to be derogatory, but I don't consider the "experts" to know more than me, I don't consider them to know as much, if you want to be quite honest, and there is very, very good reason.
The people that write sports articles, the announcers, the experts, are all paid to draw an audience, Furthermore, you surely will agree that the talking heads views are tremendously controlled by what the NFL dictates that they say. Cleveland is so bad that the NFL injects good will and vibe into Browns reporting. Case in point, each and every year the pundits universally exclaim that the Browns just had one of the better drafts. Of course, year after year, like 2017, as the season plays out we find that the draft was actually schidt.
Regarding Garrett.............. I have no dog in his hunt. The only reason the Browns drafted him is because all the pundits said he was the best pick. The Browns had no balls, and with pissed off fans, they made a choice that even if Garrett bombed out, they could say all the pundits agreed he was the best,
I absolutely admire your technical knowledge of front 7 mechanics. I really do. However, as with most things in life, mechanics are more often than not, cowpoop. By mechanics standards, Jourgensen, Stabler, Fouts, Kosar, Unitas and Tarkenton would have been total failures. Certainly Arnold Palmer had weird mechanics.
I don't like Garrett. I believe him to be devoid of character, heart and intensity. For good reason, I believe he will prove to be physically unable to participate in a sustainable career. He is Winslow. Worse, I think. He tried to come of as intelligent (Regrese'), but to me, he is as phony as Sugar Turd Leonard.
Now, be honest with yourself. Don't you see that you are already making excuses for him? Work with me here.
As I watched the Game, I saw Garrett dip into a pool of nothingness in the second half. Many here have also noted that his second half sucked. However, you rush to judgement because you are so sure he is a great prospect, you and others are posting that he is not 100% ready, and that you could tell he wasn't putting full weight on his ankle. Doesn't that make YOU the Troll? I mean I have not seen any official reports saying Garrett is not 100%.........How did you make your assessment on his ankle without any medical reports?
You see what is going on? You see the difference between you and me? I see Garrett play a very impotent second half, and I note call him soft. You on the other hand make the assumption that the reason he sucked MUST BE.................. because of a bad ankle. Examine your own thought process. You are so intent on Garrett being great that already, albeit unwittingly, you can't even recognize that his second half performance is most likely an indicator that he isn't that good, that in your mind, it just HAS TO BE, that his ankles are hurting.
I haven't read a news story about this. So really, be fair, who is trolling? If you take away the Ghoolie schtick, what is left that irritates is simply that my opinions seldom follow the overwhelming majority, but more often than not, I am correct. It is the reality that my contrary thoughts too often for board sanity, come to prove out true.
I don't like Garrett.
No, i could see his ankle wasnt 100% from the beginning and ill explain how. His first sack was a stunt to the inside and was a pure function of straight line speed and fluid hip movement. Both of which are not terribly affected by a bad ankle. His straight forward bull rush was also ok be ause that is also a function of straight line drive. The instant i saw his bidy angle going around the edge i knew he was off. He was not cutting on that snkle and he wasnt leaning in going around the edge where you gave to flex ur ankle as a 320lb tackle is pushing on you.
So the kid in limited reps found ways to work around his injury and produce more than our healthy guys that also played twice as many snaps
-
Trolls say thing that they don't mean just to piss people off. If I was a troll, you guys would be coming in here all the time with the satisfaction of watching me eat crow.....but very rarely to you get to see that. Making matter worse, despite idiots here saying Sheet like " When Ghoolie is proved wrong, you won't see him, and he will say, "Oh, I knew it all along"................BUT BUT BUT................. that has never been the case with me, It simply has never been my M O, nor my style. In fact, on the rare occasions I have been wrong, I am the very first one to poke fun of myself............ I mean, dude, rain, wind or shine, I am always here.......I don't run from anything.
And look man, if you are giving me a fair shake, I don't change my stories around based on what I think people will be mad at. It just happens that I do not believe what the majority of you people believe. I don't mean this to be derogatory, but I don't consider the "experts" to know more than me, I don't consider them to know as much, if you want to be quite honest, and there is very, very good reason.
The people that write sports articles, the announcers, the experts, are all paid to draw an audience, Furthermore, you surely will agree that the talking heads views are tremendously controlled by what the NFL dictates that they say. Cleveland is so bad that the NFL injects good will and vibe into Browns reporting. Case in point, each and every year the pundits universally exclaim that the Browns just had one of the better drafts. Of course, year after year, like 2017, as the season plays out we find that the draft was actually schidt.
Regarding Garrett.............. I have no dog in his hunt. The only reason the Browns drafted him is because all the pundits said he was the best pick. The Browns had no balls, and with pissed off fans, they made a choice that even if Garrett bombed out, they could say all the pundits agreed he was the best,
I absolutely admire your technical knowledge of front 7 mechanics. I really do. However, as with most things in life, mechanics are more often than not, cowpoop. By mechanics standards, Jourgensen, Stabler, Fouts, Kosar, Unitas and Tarkenton would have been total failures. Certainly Arnold Palmer had weird mechanics.
I don't like Garrett. I believe him to be devoid of character, heart and intensity. For good reason, I believe he will prove to be physically unable to participate in a sustainable career. He is Winslow. Worse, I think. He tried to come of as intelligent (Regrese'), but to me, he is as phony as Sugar Turd Leonard.
Now, be honest with yourself. Don't you see that you are already making excuses for him? Work with me here.
As I watched the Game, I saw Garrett dip into a pool of nothingness in the second half. Many here have also noted that his second half sucked. However, you rush to judgement because you are so sure he is a great prospect, you and others are posting that he is not 100% ready, and that you could tell he wasn't putting full weight on his ankle. Doesn't that make YOU the Troll? I mean I have not seen any official reports saying Garrett is not 100%.........How did you make your assessment on his ankle without any medical reports?
You see what is going on? You see the difference between you and me? I see Garrett play a very impotent second half, and I note call him soft. You on the other hand make the assumption that the reason he sucked MUST BE.................. because of a bad ankle. Examine your own thought process. You are so intent on Garrett being great that already, albeit unwittingly, you can't even recognize that his second half performance is most likely an indicator that he isn't that good, that in your mind, it just HAS TO BE, that his ankles are hurting.
I haven't read a news story about this. So really, be fair, who is trolling? If you take away the Ghoolie schtick, what is left that irritates is simply that my opinions seldom follow the overwhelming majority, but more often than not, I am correct. It is the reality that my contrary thoughts too often for board sanity, come to prove out true.
I don't like Garrett.
No, i could see his ankle wasnt 100% from the beginning and ill explain how. His first sack was a stunt to the inside and was a pure function of straight line speed and fluid hip movement. Both of which are not terribly affected by a bad ankle. His straight forward bull rush was also ok be ause that is also a function of straight line drive. The instant i saw his bidy angle going around the edge i knew he was off. He was not cutting on that snkle and he wasnt leaning in going around the edge where you gave to flex ur ankle as a 320lb tackle is pushing on you.
So the kid in limited reps found ways to work around his injury and produce more than our healthy guys that also played twice as many snaps
No, i could see his ankle wasnt 100% from the beginning and ill explain how. His first sack was a stunt to the inside and was a pure function of straight line speed and fluid hip movement. Both of which are not terribly affected by a bad ankle. His straight forward bull rush was also ok be ause that is also a function of straight line drive. The instant i saw his bidy angle going around the edge i knew he was off. He was not cutting on that snkle and he wasnt leaning in going around the edge where you gave to flex ur ankle as a 320lb tackle is pushing on you.
So the kid in limited reps found ways to work around his injury and produce more than our healthy guys that also played twice as many snaps
Nice try, but no cigar. The Browns are not going to put in their #1 #1. If he played, Now, I do think this kid has brittle stems. Let's watch him next week and see what develops.
-
No, i could see his ankle wasnt 100% from the beginning and ill explain how. His first sack was a stunt to the inside and was a pure function of straight line speed and fluid hip movement. Both of which are not terribly affected by a bad ankle. His straight forward bull rush was also ok be ause that is also a function of straight line drive. The instant i saw his bidy angle going around the edge i knew he was off. He was not cutting on that snkle and he wasnt leaning in going around the edge where you gave to flex ur ankle as a 320lb tackle is pushing on you.
So the kid in limited reps found ways to work around his injury and produce more than our healthy guys that also played twice as many snaps
Nice try, but no cigar. The Browns are not going to put in their #1 #1. If he played, Now, I do think this kid has brittle stems. Let's watch him next week and see what develops.
Nice try, but no cigar. The Browns are not going to put in their #1 #1. If he played, Now, I do think this kid has brittle stems. Let's watch him next week and see what develops.
Nice try on what? And u might be right about his ankles but he tuffed it out on sunday and produced, so he's got heart ghoolie. As for this sunday i wouldnt expect much cause they're not gonna put him out there for more snaps than he had sunday. Might even sit him entirely and play him the following week limited like they did sunday, which would be my call if it were up to me
-
No, i could see his ankle wasnt 100% from the beginning and ill explain how. His first sack was a stunt to the inside and was a pure function of straight line speed and fluid hip movement. Both of which are not terribly affected by a bad ankle. His straight forward bull rush was also ok be ause that is also a function of straight line drive. The instant i saw his bidy angle going around the edge i knew he was off. He was not cutting on that snkle and he wasnt leaning in going around the edge where you gave to flex ur ankle as a 320lb tackle is pushing on you.
So the kid in limited reps found ways to work around his injury and produce more than our healthy guys that also played twice as many snaps
Nice try, but no cigar. The Browns are not going to put in their #1 #1. If he played, Now, I do think this kid has brittle stems. Let's watch him next week and see what develops.
Nice try, but no cigar. The Browns are not going to put in their #1 #1. If he played, Now, I do think this kid has brittle stems. Let's watch him next week and see what develops.
Nice try on what? And u might be right about his ankles but he tuffed it out on sunday and produced, so he's got heart ghoolie. As for this sunday i wouldnt expect much cause they're not gonna put him out there for more snaps than he had sunday. Might even sit him entirely and play him the following week limited like they did sunday, which would be my call if it were up to me
-
The sacks were not impressive. He broke through a NO BLOCK and barely hit the QB on sack 1, and sack two the QB happened to run in front of him. Garrett sucks gopher dikc.
No no, i know exactly what i saw...u dont. Ill give you that you know some stuff about some other things, but you have "zero" eye for front 7 mechanics. On a bad ankle garrett ghosted undrneath the guard and center and steamrolled mccown, made them look silly..like they didnt oniw the ball gad been hiked yet.
Ob the 2nd sack garett ripped around the corner but because of that ankle he couldnt lean in like he was during preseason..tried to go around the corner more or less completely vertical. So his initial rush didnt go anywhere but when mccown tried to step up and spill out garrett immediately spun back to the inside and lunged at mccown from behind. Its not the most imoressive sack ever but mccown didnt run into him and for a guy with a clearly bum ankle its a heck of a hustle play. Dont argue with me about how the sacks transpired.
The latger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
No no, i know exactly what i saw...u dont. Ill give you that you know some stuff about some other things, but you have "zero" eye for front 7 mechanics.
He clearly knows a lot more about sucking "gopher dikc" than football...
Now all we need is an animal "husbandry" section of the Board.
Draft is BPA and if that says edge rusher - so be it.
I want this team to have an identity and if that means having a top 3 dline, then I'm perfectly ok with it.
Ditto... but BPA is not always as clear cut as it was for us to kick off the 2017 Draft... and need is a legit tie-breaker.
-
And Dr. G's big rookie pick just threw a pick against Minn with 2:20 to go. Shall we call him 2 turnover Trubiski?
Uh oh, trubs shitting the bed?
Uh oh, trubs shitting the bed?
Nah... just being a rookie.
Most of the game he looked good in a massively simplified game plan that had him on the move a lot. Made a couple insanely good throws on the move. A couple from the pocket as well, but less impressive there. And the pocket is where he was strip-sacked from the blindside. Not really his fault tho, pretty clean beat of his LT.
The late INT was a bad one tho. Failed to see the position that Smith, the SS had on Chi's TE in a broken play.
Since I have him on ignore I can only assume Dr. G. agrees with me. 2 Turnover Trubiski!LOL!!
Doubtful... but I liked the alliteration...
And Trubs one TD should have been an interception that the Vikings defender tipped right to his receiver. High and short.
Yeah.... but since I'd picked up Sendajo (?) in the IDP league, it was not to be.
-
Trolls say thing that they don't mean just to piss people off. If I was a troll, you guys would be coming in here all the time with the satisfaction of watching me eat crow.....but very rarely to you get to see that. Making matter worse, despite idiots here saying Sheet like " When Ghoolie is proved wrong, you won't see him, and he will say, "Oh, I knew it all along"................BUT BUT BUT................. that has never been the case with me, It simply has never been my M O, nor my style. In fact, on the rare occasions I have been wrong, I am the very first one to poke fun of myself............ I mean, dude, rain, wind or shine, I am always here.......I don't run from anything.
And look man, if you are giving me a fair shake, I don't change my stories around based on what I think people will be mad at. It just happens that I do not believe what the majority of you people believe. I don't mean this to be derogatory, but I don't consider the "experts" to know more than me, I don't consider them to know as much, if you want to be quite honest, and there is very, very good reason.
The people that write sports articles, the announcers, the experts, are all paid to draw an audience, Furthermore, you surely will agree that the talking heads views are tremendously controlled by what the NFL dictates that they say. Cleveland is so bad that the NFL injects good will and vibe into Browns reporting. Case in point, each and every year the pundits universally exclaim that the Browns just had one of the better drafts. Of course, year after year, like 2017, as the season plays out we find that the draft was actually schidt.
Regarding Garrett.............. I have no dog in his hunt. The only reason the Browns drafted him is because all the pundits said he was the best pick. The Browns had no balls, and with pissed off fans, they made a choice that even if Garrett bombed out, they could say all the pundits agreed he was the best,
I absolutely admire your technical knowledge of front 7 mechanics. I really do. However, as with most things in life, mechanics are more often than not, cowpoop. By mechanics standards, Jourgensen, Stabler, Fouts, Kosar, Unitas and Tarkenton would have been total failures. Certainly Arnold Palmer had weird mechanics.
I don't like Garrett. I believe him to be devoid of character, heart and intensity. For good reason, I believe he will prove to be physically unable to participate in a sustainable career. He is Winslow. Worse, I think. He tried to come of as intelligent (Regrese'), but to me, he is as phony as Sugar Turd Leonard.
Now, be honest with yourself. Don't you see that you are already making excuses for him? Work with me here.
As I watched the Game, I saw Garrett dip into a pool of nothingness in the second half. Many here have also noted that his second half sucked. However, you rush to judgement because you are so sure he is a great prospect, you and others are posting that he is not 100% ready, and that you could tell he wasn't putting full weight on his ankle. Doesn't that make YOU the Troll? I mean I have not seen any official reports saying Garrett is not 100%.........How did you make your assessment on his ankle without any medical reports?
You see what is going on? You see the difference between you and me? I see Garrett play a very impotent second half, and I note call him soft. You on the other hand make the assumption that the reason he sucked MUST BE.................. because of a bad ankle. Examine your own thought process. You are so intent on Garrett being great that already, albeit unwittingly, you can't even recognize that his second half performance is most likely an indicator that he isn't that good, that in your mind, it just HAS TO BE, that his ankles are hurting.
I haven't read a news story about this. So really, be fair, who is trolling? If you take away the Ghoolie schtick, what is left that irritates is simply that my opinions seldom follow the overwhelming majority, but more often than not, I am correct. It is the reality that my contrary thoughts too often for board sanity, come to prove out true.
I don't like Garrett.
No, i could see his ankle wasnt 100% from the beginning and ill explain how. His first sack was a stunt to the inside and was a pure function of straight line speed and fluid hip movement. Both of which are not terribly affected by a bad ankle. His straight forward bull rush was also ok be ause that is also a function of straight line drive. The instant i saw his bidy angle going around the edge i knew he was off. He was not cutting on that snkle and he wasnt leaning in going around the edge where you gave to flex ur ankle as a 320lb tackle is pushing on you.
So the kid in limited reps found ways to work around his injury and produce more than our healthy guys that also played twice as many snaps
No, i could see his ankle wasn't 100% from the beginning and ill explain how. His first sack was a stunt to the inside and was a pure function of straight line speed and fluid hip movement. Both of which are not terribly affected by a bad ankle. His straight forward bull rush was also ok because that is also a function of straight line drive. The instant i saw his bidy angle going around the edge i knew he was off. He was not cutting on that ankle and he wasn't leaning in going around the edge where you gave to flex ur ankle as a 320lb tackle is pushing on you.
So the kid in limited reps found ways to work around his injury and produce more than our healthy guys that also played twice as many snaps
Trollie is just ignoring the obvious to get a response. It's a waste of your time to argue with him. Took me a while to figure that out. Every OBJECTIVE commentator said Garrett had a a great game, considering how his snaps were limited. Like 18 of them. A sack every 9 plays will get you in the HOF. I saw a guy who was worthy of the #1 overall pick.
-
Glad we don't have a pansy like JJ Watt either. He's a waste of a roster spot.... always injured. What a pussy
-
The larger point id like to make to u is why cant u just say man, that kid showed some heart. He showed more heart in ~10 snaps then our other DE's gave in 4-5 games. Im not calling this kid the answer to our prayers, he may have a decent game here or there but flame out...time will tell.
i just cant understand why you cant just say "meh, not bad kid". All the things you claimed about this kids heart and work ethic, which we are all dubious on in the first place....at least for one game has been proven null. So just own it for one game, just say "maybe i was wrong about the kid but we'll see, time will tell". Thats a fair statement. I stead ur trying to make Sheet up because it appears you want garrett to be a failure, and that i cant understand even if u are just trolling. Good trolling needs to have competent foundation from which to launch trolls. If the kid keeps playing alright and figuring out ways to be productive even while not at 100%.....than ur trolls come off as something else.
Because Ghoolie is never wrong.
-
The ONLY objective commentator...................... is me.
When you find someone who can even attain 1/10th my accuracy, THEN you can bring outside sources to the table. As it is, there is nobody who is more astute about football, than I.
The ONLY objective commentator...................... is me.
When you find someone who can even attain 1/10th my accuracy, THEN you can bring outside sources to the table. As it is, there is nobody who is more astute about football, than I.
Instead of claiming that try studying the mechanics of the game so you have a general idea of schemes, formations and plays. Like i give our other DE's alot of Sheet when the call was clearly to get after the qb and they coyldnt. But sometimes the front 4's assignments are to create a pocket which opens lanes for blitzers, thats the kind of stuff you seem to not understand and you make critical comments about me hanics you clearly dont understand.
Like me i have a very poor eye for wr/db play.....so i only get hot when receivers drop balls that would hit them in the finger if they had no hands. I u detstand enough to know that receivers dont want balls much higher than waist level because they gave to get their hands and shoulders down quick or a quick hit could dislodge the ball. But other than those obvious situations, i stay away from critiquing that which i poorly understand. I let other people yammer about what an awful angle peppers took on a specific route or how this other pooper didnt get enough depth on his wheel route etc,etc.
you could stand just a smidge of modesty when it comes to things you show daily u dont understand the best. Other stuff, like the state of the franchise and some of ur other criticisms of the staff and organization, fair enough....i often find myself agreeing with u, begrudgingly usually because of the way u come off.
but i swear if jimmy fires hue and a new DC gets brought in and we go to a 3-4 you will be fighting me fat boy. Those Sheet 3-4's that had ps guys running for 170 on us kept me up at night. We're finally doing "ok" defensively and pretty damn good against the run so far despite having a Retarded LDE. Coffee fetch williams goes nowhere or its ur arse capiche?
-
For those interested- every one of Garrett's plays against the Jets....
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2017/10/myles_garrett_closer_look.html#incart_river_index
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