Can't wait to see how our offseason unfolds... The laws of average says we'll eventually get it right...

Peace

T.Dawg

@dawgtracker said:

Every one of those teams you mentioned had a great QB, not a good one. Warner was a great QB but I remember him throwing downfield quite a bit. Well Seattle didn't have a great QB but they had a tremendous running game. Manning throws a lot of short routes so I guess that is a west coast offense too.

It seems to me that we still need the same things we needed before: A great QB, talented receivers, tremendous running back better pass blocking. The three step drops do help with the pass rush making it harder for a team like the steelers/ravens to sack the passer.

No they won it as soon or thereafter they got Tom Brady...The RB in NE's system have had marginal impact in My view.

Also, I'd say the Rams offense was predicated on spreading the field and hitting WRs on crossing routes in stride. Warner doesn't have a big arm. It's pretty WCO-ey. I've heard Martz's offense called WCO-ey before.

Bottom line when you start talking about championship teams, no matter what other variables you're looking at: They almost always have a great quarterback, or at least a quarterback playing at his peak level (Brad Johnson in TB, Pro Bowler).

Every one of those teams you mentioned had a great QB, not a good one. Warner was a great QB but I remember him throwing downfield quite a bit. Well Seattle didn't have a great QB but they had a tremendous running game. Manning throws a lot of short routes so I guess that is a west coast offense too.

It seems to me that we still need the same things we needed before: A great QB, talented receivers, tremendous running back better pass blocking. The three step drops do help with the pass rush making it harder for a team like the steelers/ravens to sack the passer.

The answer of cours is yes, we addressed those problems.....but did not answer them with those picks.....we don't think. Jury out on Lauvao.

I agree that we need to address them again. Gip

*******************************************

No. Vauvao is an OG, and our two picks at wr - MoMass and Robo were hardly blue chipper #1's by any wild imagination of anybody.

ELITE blue-chippie wr that makes db's sick, has great hands and is quick to get open, and too fast to be caught from behind....

well, ideally, add high character to the mix.

@dawgtracker said:

What teams have recently won superbowls running the west coast offense?

I would say the way the Pats won Super Bowls without any real running game was short pass after short pass after short pass... very WCO.

The Raiders, Rams, Cardinals, Packers, and Seahawks ran offenses that were predicated on high percentage passing and crossing routes, three step drops... either literally WCO or very much like it.

Most of the league is playing an offense that looks just like a WCO if you squint.

@alo said:

Argh. My spidey sense was tingling on this guy.

@calfoxwc said:

I see those two problems addressed in the top 4 picks.

Well, weren't we supposed to have addressed those problems in top 4 picks when we took Robo and MoMass in the 2e round and Shaun Lauvao in the third with recent drafts?

The answer of cours is yes, we addressed those problems.....but did not answer them with those picks.....we don't think. Jury out on Lauvao.

I agree that we need to address them again.

I see those two problems addressed in the top 4 picks.

@dawgtracker said:

What teams have recently won superbowls running the west coast offense?

Weather is irrelevant - Green Bay and Philly run this offense, and they're pretty good football teams. I think we can pick on every offense out there and ask if that offense has recently won a Super Bowl. Seattle and Philly went to Super Bowls in 05 and 06, and Tampa Bay in 03.

As you know the teams that win Super Bowls do it as a team, not because of one side of the ball over the other (unless you're talking about BAL.)

The WCO is just one side of the ball, and is probably better than anything we have seen in CLE since Bernie Kosar. And I am not sure I call the WCO a finesse offense.

Hey whatever we are doing now isn't working.

What teams have recently won superbowls running the west coast offense?

@hoss said:

That was my point. That we'll disagree sometime... but not yet.

@hoss said:

He kept Mangini here this season, thus buying himself and Heckert/Haskell time to evaluate the roster, determine who to keep as the core and who to deal/cut, and then whoever takes over as HC will have a front office in place to feed him information. Now if you would have fired Mangini last season, that meant you'd have a President/GM/HC all blindly looking through the roster, game tape, practice tape and so on trying to determine who to keep, while also trying to study other NFL rosters, as well as get the draft up and running, not to mention install offensive and defensive systems.

So I think we are set up for the WCO pretty well.

let me guess, through all that blabbering, do you think holmgren will want to install the WCO?????

Fing genius.

He could be successful somewhere else, but I don't see why any of the Browns' head coaching candidates would push for him. If anything, Mularkey's lack of success with Drew Bledsoe in Buffalo would mitigate against him wanting a similar QB in Mallett.

@alo said:

The only reason he pop up here is who we DON'T want.

@shepwrite said:

You quoted my post - where did we disagree?

@shepwrite said:

I've never been a huge Mallett fan. Not my type of QB at all, actually. My favorite is Aaron Rodgers and second is Drew Brees. Like Mallett's arm, sure. I'm just saying what a guy like Mularkey might say. Keep in mind that Derek Anderson never had a year remotely CLOSE to the two Mallett had, so he'll get comparisons to Ben and Flacco, not DA.

Off to the side, there's already talk that he has some Leaf-ish qualities. He's had a booze-related bust and there are whispers that there will be more coming to the surface.

Damn your last statement.

I wanted to make the Ryan Leaf comparison.

Holmgren won't go another year NOT living or dying with his own systems. That's why we're already reading that Shurmur is the "favorite" for the Browns coaching job. He's WCO through and through... and a quarterback coddler, too.

Holmgren has said exactly what's on his mind so far, so we can believe him when he says "IF Colt McCoy is the guy." He could be... but Holmgren isn't 100 percent sold.

That said? It's the right move to give Colt a full offseason and regular season as the starter getting starter reps in the offense he's best suited to. All his best qualities fit well there (accuracy, intelligence, quick reads, mobility, throws on the run, hits receivers in stride, can throw accurately without being set) while his deficiencies (size, so-so arm strength) are minimized. He showed enough to deserve it.

And guys... this isn't Retardedly polarized American politics. It isn't for'im or agin'im. We're only for the Browns, not any one player, right? I like a lot of what I've seen from McCoy. The game's not too big for him. He's smart, which is my favorite quality in a quarterback. He's got some leader in him. But let's not act like acknowledging the obvious -- that he doesn't have a lot of arm -- is unpatriotic or something. That's for the amateur boards.

And you can stop worrying about Mallett. The Browns won't draft him.

@hoss said:

No matter what Holmgren said in the presser on Monday, I think his first and only priority is to install a HC and OC who understand the WCO. We have had defensive HC's for a long time, from Butch Davis through Eric Mangini. I think now you see Holmgren as President (WCO), one of his senior advisers in Gil Haskell (WCO), Tom Heckert his GM (WCO), and his FA QB Seneca Wallace (WCO) all versed in the offense he has spent his ENTIRE career in the NFL developing and nurturing.

He kept Mangini here this season, thus buying himself and Heckert/Haskell time to evaluate the roster, determine who to keep as the core and who to deal/cut, and then whoever takes over as HC will have a front office in place to feed him information. Now if you would have fired Mangini last season, that meant you'd have a President/GM/HC all blindly looking through the roster, game tape, practice tape and so on trying to determine who to keep, while also trying to study other NFL rosters, as well as get the draft up and running, not to mention install offensive and defensive systems.

So I think we are set up for the WCO pretty well.

@hoss said:

He kept Mangini here this season, thus buying himself and Heckert/Haskell time to evaluate the roster, determine who to keep as the core and who to deal/cut, and then whoever takes over as HC will have a front office in place to feed him information. Now if you would have fired Mangini last season, that meant you'd have a President/GM/HC all blindly looking through the roster, game tape, practice tape and so on trying to determine who to keep, while also trying to study other NFL rosters, as well as get the draft up and running, not to mention install offensive and defensive systems.

So I think we are set up for the WCO pretty well.

LOL DesertDawg. Makes sense.

He kept Mangini here this season, thus buying himself and Heckert/Haskell time to evaluate the roster, determine who to keep as the core and who to deal/cut, and then whoever takes over as HC will have a front office in place to feed him information. Now if you would have fired Mangini last season, that meant you'd have a President/GM/HC all blindly looking through the roster, game tape, practice tape and so on trying to determine who to keep, while also trying to study other NFL rosters, as well as get the draft up and running, not to mention install offensive and defensive systems.

So I think we are set up for the WCO pretty well.