Hortons defense was better than this...
-
I am more than willing to concede the point if we get some talent on the d-line and get people healthy yet still see dogshit run defense. I will be the first to apologize to you. I just know in the time I watched that the d-line was getting pushed around at will.
Dansby said that about himself? I fucking hope not.
-
I feel bad that a couple dumb asses turned this thread into a rant/on rant/off fuck circle...I really wanted this thread to be a serious discussion about why exactly we were soft cunt against the run this year. But couple you guys just can't seem to get over the fact that it's a joint problem amongst several positions and may also include scheme. But the people who are probably football smart enough to know exactly why the Browns defense was soft against the run this year are probably not going to comment in here, and thanks for that you asshats.
I originally brought up our run stats cause, well, we were worse against the run...which is what this thread is about anyway. For this thread I didn't care that we were 6 points better scoring, which might have meant something if we were even marginally effective against the run. We lost multiple games because of our run defense and would have lost many more if it weren't for our early season offensive success. I think we can all agree that if this run defense persists next year, than it's going to be another long ass year isn't it? But let's hear more about 6 points better scoring. For sure let's hear more.
-
Sure enough he did haha. Oh boy.
-
I am more than willing to concede the point if we get some talent on the d-line and get people healthy yet still see dogshit run defense. I will be the first to apologize to you. I just know in the time I watched that the d-line was getting pushed around at will.
Dansby said that about himself? I fucking hope not.
I am more than willing to concede the point if we get some talent on the d-line and get people healthy yet still see dogshit run defense. I will be the first to apologize to you. I just know in the time I watched that the d-line was getting pushed around at will.
Dansby said that about himself? I fucking hope not.
"I'm the best right now, the best by far". Aug 5th, 2014
-
Yeah I looked it up. Guy is an idiot.
-
I am more than willing to concede the point if we get some talent on the d-line and get people healthy yet still see dogshit run defense. I will be the first to apologize to you. I just know in the time I watched that the d-line was getting pushed around at will.
Dansby said that about himself? I fucking hope not.
I am more than willing to concede the point if we get some talent on the d-line and get people healthy yet still see dogshit run defense. I will be the first to apologize to you. I just know in the time I watched that the d-line was getting pushed around at will.
Dansby said that about himself? I fucking hope not.
My original question in this thread though is why was the run defense so bad with the exact same front line this year? If it's scheme I wanted to know what exactly it was. But dudes coming in here saying "we've been over this it's the DL" blah blah blah. It ain't all the DL and I know that cause I played. I ain't gonna hear any nonsense about how our LB'ers were just fine it's the DL that gave up the poosy. That's fucking low rent bullshit from people who don't know football. Last year we all talked about how this was the best d line in all of football. Maybe Hortons scheme fitted these guys better? So it comes back again to what did Horton do with our guys that was so much different than Oneil?
And yeah that's a hoot little quote from Dansby isn't it? I watched Chris Borland in two games against Seattle go 1 up with the beast and for the most part, got the better of Lynch. Fucking rookie Chris Borland against the most physical RB in the NFL.
-
I feel bad that a couple dumb asses turned this thread into a rant/on rant/off fuck circle...I really wanted this thread to be a serious discussion about why exactly we were soft cunt against the run this year. But couple you guys just can't seem to get over the fact that it's a joint problem amongst several positions and may also include scheme. But the people who are probably football smart enough to know exactly why the Browns defense was soft against the run this year are probably not going to comment in here, and thanks for that you asshats.
I originally brought up our run stats cause, well, we were worse against the run...which is what this thread is about anyway. For this thread I didn't care that we were 6 points better scoring, which might have meant something if we were even marginally effective against the run. We lost multiple games because of our run defense and would have lost many more if it weren't for our early season offensive success. I think we can all agree that if this run defense persists next year, than it's going to be another long ass year isn't it? But let's hear more about 6 points better scoring. For sure let's hear more.
I feel bad that a couple dumb asses turned this thread into a rant/on rant/off fuck circle...I really wanted this thread to be a serious discussion about why exactly we were soft cunt against the run this year.
No... Your own words say it. You wanted to discuss how many reasons why your conclusion was right. As best I can tell that conclusion was DQ's departure accounted for it a decline, or all except some small slice of Khalil Mack is better than Kirksey.
It never occurred to you someone might disagree with your conclusion let alone your premise... despite the above, awesome display of football prowess.
I saw only one dumbass here...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
I feel bad that a couple dumb asses turned this thread into a rant/on rant/off fuck circle...I really wanted this thread to be a serious discussion about why exactly we were soft cunt against the run this year.
No... Your own words say it. You wanted to discuss how many reasons why your conclusion was right. As best I can tell that conclusion was DQ's departure accounted for it a decline, or all except some small slice of Khalil Mack is better than Kirksey.
It never occurred to you someone might disagree with your conclusion let alone your premise... despite the above, awesome display of football prowess.
I saw only one dumbass here...
No... Your own words say it. You wanted to discuss how many reasons why your conclusion was right. As best I can tell that conclusion was DQ's departure accounted for it a decline, or all except some small slice of Khalil Mack is better than Kirksey.
It never occurred to you someone might disagree with your conclusion let alone your premise... despite the above, awesome display of football prowess.
I saw only one dumbass here...
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
-
No... Your own words say it. You wanted to discuss how many reasons why your conclusion was right. As best I can tell that conclusion was DQ's departure accounted for it a decline, or all except some small slice of Khalil Mack is better than Kirksey.
It never occurred to you someone might disagree with your conclusion let alone your premise... despite the above, awesome display of football prowess.
I saw only one dumbass here...
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...
Riiight. Makes total sense now..
-
No... Your own words say it. You wanted to discuss how many reasons why your conclusion was right. As best I can tell that conclusion was DQ's departure accounted for it a decline, or all except some small slice of Khalil Mack is better than Kirksey.
It never occurred to you someone might disagree with your conclusion let alone your premise... despite the above, awesome display of football prowess.
I saw only one dumbass here...
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
you got everyone else's opinions and they all disagreed with you. if you can't grasp that the dline injuries hurt us then you can't grasp the basics.
-
I know scheme was mentioned. It seemed there was a big time emphasis on building this defense to stop the pass.
Some idicators: drafting 2 cbs, Kirksey was supposed to be a better coverage LB than run stopper, and l remember the reports in camp about how they were trying Mingo in coverage. He was drafted l thought because he was a savvy pass rusher.
I don't claim to be a football guru but it seemed evident to me the defensive emphasis was on stopping the pass.
-
woefully wrong. I gave my opinion about why "I" think the run defense sucked this year, and gave some empirical evidence to back it up. Yet I still acknowledged that I may be wrong and wanted to hear from people who actually knew how the game of football was played. Those of you, including yourself, who say it's the d line stupid.....clearly show you don't know how the game is played. That's not me saying "I'm completely right and you're all completely wrong"...but there's certain facts to football you can't get around. One of those being that if you're getting gouged on run defense up the middle you have to look at what your LB'ers are doing wrong. If you dont' understand that you really don't know the game of football. Now exactly why those LB'ers weren't doing their job...is what I was trying to get at in this discussion. How much of it was scheme and how much of it was on them. Said plenty of times I'd like to hear what Oneil was doing with our LB'ers that was so different than Horton was.
Woefully inept analysis of someone's else's writing. Really. You can agree or disagree with someone but at least grasp the basics.
you got everyone else's opinions and they all disagreed with you. if you can't grasp that the dline injuries hurt us then you can't grasp the basics.
you got everyone else's opinions and they all disagreed with you. if you can't grasp that the dline injuries hurt us then you can't grasp the basics.
Of course the d line injuries hurt us, but as I've provided we were equally as bad against the run healthy as unhealthy this year. And last year was this d line not "EXACTLY" the same? So SOMETHING changed and it isn't just due to injuries. If you can't grasp that than the basics of football escape you. For the umpteenth time I'm open as to what was done differently this year. What I'm not open to is that it's ALL on the D line as it isn't ALL on the LB'ers. But what I've said from the beginning of the season and what anybody who's played organized football on the defensive side of the ball knows, final accountability for run defense falls on the LB'ers. Last year we were better against the run with the exact same D line but different linebackers. WHY? What, if anything, did we do drastically different with the d line and/or lb'ers. That's the discussion I wanted to have.
-
cuz we switched to 3-4 from 4-3?
i don't like the fact that we switched total schemes. i think we (i mean the browns of course) have positives in both schemes. we gave up the run yards but held the opponents to less points. sheard didn't produce as mcuh because he was delegated to playing olb and put into a coverage scheme as well as mingo and krueger. i think those 3 guys would gel as hands in the dirt DEs. but i'm not the HC or DC.
maybe someday someone will figure out how to run a hybrid scheme that utilizes each player to their utmost ability. i'm tired of new coaches coming in and deciding players that could be on a pro-bowl path don't fit into their scheme and either cutting them or trading them to draft a player they think will do what they want.
-
cuz we switched to 3-4 from 4-3?
i don't like the fact that we switched total schemes. i think we (i mean the browns of course) have positives in both schemes. we gave up the run yards but held the opponents to less points. sheard didn't produce as mcuh because he was delegated to playing olb and put into a coverage scheme as well as mingo and krueger. i think those 3 guys would gel as hands in the dirt DEs. but i'm not the HC or DC.
maybe someday someone will figure out how to run a hybrid scheme that utilizes each player to their utmost ability. i'm tired of new coaches coming in and deciding players that could be on a pro-bowl path don't fit into their scheme and either cutting them or trading them to draft a player they think will do what they want.
cuz we switched to 3-4 from 4-3?
i don't like the fact that we switched total schemes. i think we (i mean the browns of course) have positives in both schemes. we gave up the run yards but held the opponents to less points. sheard didn't produce as mcuh because he was delegated to playing olb and put into a coverage scheme as well as mingo and krueger. i think those 3 guys would gel as hands in the dirt DEs. but i'm not the HC or DC.
maybe someday someone will figure out how to run a hybrid scheme that utilizes each player to their utmost ability. i'm tired of new coaches coming in and deciding players that could be on a pro-bowl path don't fit into their scheme and either cutting them or trading them to draft a player they think will do what they want.
well "technically" the 3-4 is supposed to stop the run better cause the edges are OLB types that when standing can anticipate the blocking schemes for that play better thus being able to position themselves better to make a play on the ball. Which anymore I think is rubbish but I don't work in the NFL. I agree with everything you said in the above post except for that Kruger and Sheard did any coverage work. Those guys hardly ever dropped into coverage, it was spot duty at best. Which is why I cannot understand not putting their hand in the dirt. If all you're basically asking of them is to rush the passer and set the edge, both guys do both of those jobs better with their hands down. If the defense knows the guy is coming, why bother standing him if you're hardly ever going to drop him. A guy like Clay Matthews is a legit threat to drop back and be "very" competent at pass coverage. But Sheard and Kruger? C'mon.
I too would love to switch to a 4-3 but I'm not sure we have the LB'ers to do it. A 4-3 mike has to be one tough physical son of a bitch....is that guy on our team right now? A 4-3 mike is often required to blow up the lead block so that the OLB'ers can flow unimpeded to the ball. Actually, even in a 3-4 at least one of the ILB'ers is a guy that's more built to blow up the lead blocks so the other guy can make the play....that also hardly ever happened this year. Both of our guys would kind of try to "feel" their way to the ball carrier. The only guy that started to play like a true ILB'er was Robertson. He was the one that started to blow up some plays on his own towards the end of the season.
But it's not gonna happen they're not moving away from the 3-4. So the same scheme is going to prevail next year and I would still like to know what exactly, if anything, Pettine's scheme does with the ILB'ers and the DL that made them shit the bed against the run this year. Why is it other teams get all kinds of injuries and still remain comepetent? How is that SF loses both of their all pro LB'ers and a rookie can step up and man up to Marshawn Lynch? They also had injuries on their d line, plus didn't some guy slap his woman around again and get a timeout or something?
-
cuz we switched to 3-4 from 4-3?
i don't like the fact that we switched total schemes. i think we (i mean the browns of course) have positives in both schemes. we gave up the run yards but held the opponents to less points. sheard didn't produce as mcuh because he was delegated to playing olb and put into a coverage scheme as well as mingo and krueger. i think those 3 guys would gel as hands in the dirt DEs. but i'm not the HC or DC.
maybe someday someone will figure out how to run a hybrid scheme that utilizes each player to their utmost ability. i'm tired of new coaches coming in and deciding players that could be on a pro-bowl path don't fit into their scheme and either cutting them or trading them to draft a player they think will do what they want.
well "technically" the 3-4 is supposed to stop the run better cause the edges are OLB types that when standing can anticipate the blocking schemes for that play better thus being able to position themselves better to make a play on the ball. Which anymore I think is rubbish but I don't work in the NFL. I agree with everything you said in the above post except for that Kruger and Sheard did any coverage work. Those guys hardly ever dropped into coverage, it was spot duty at best. Which is why I cannot understand not putting their hand in the dirt. If all you're basically asking of them is to rush the passer and set the edge, both guys do both of those jobs better with their hands down. If the defense knows the guy is coming, why bother standing him if you're hardly ever going to drop him. A guy like Clay Matthews is a legit threat to drop back and be "very" competent at pass coverage. But Sheard and Kruger? C'mon.
I too would love to switch to a 4-3 but I'm not sure we have the LB'ers to do it. A 4-3 mike has to be one tough physical son of a bitch....is that guy on our team right now? A 4-3 mike is often required to blow up the lead block so that the OLB'ers can flow unimpeded to the ball. Actually, even in a 3-4 at least one of the ILB'ers is a guy that's more built to blow up the lead blocks so the other guy can make the play....that also hardly ever happened this year. Both of our guys would kind of try to "feel" their way to the ball carrier. The only guy that started to play like a true ILB'er was Robertson. He was the one that started to blow up some plays on his own towards the end of the season.
But it's not gonna happen they're not moving away from the 3-4. So the same scheme is going to prevail next year and I would still like to know what exactly, if anything, Pettine's scheme does with the ILB'ers and the DL that made them shit the bed against the run this year. Why is it other teams get all kinds of injuries and still remain comepetent? How is that SF loses both of their all pro LB'ers and a rookie can step up and man up to Marshawn Lynch? They also had injuries on their d line, plus didn't some guy slap his woman around again and get a timeout or something?
well "technically" the 3-4 is supposed to stop the run better cause the edges are OLB types that when standing can anticipate the blocking schemes for that play better thus being able to position themselves better to make a play on the ball. Which anymore I think is rubbish but I don't work in the NFL. I agree with everything you said in the above post except for that Kruger and Sheard did any coverage work. Those guys hardly ever dropped into coverage, it was spot duty at best. Which is why I cannot understand not putting their hand in the dirt. If all you're basically asking of them is to rush the passer and set the edge, both guys do both of those jobs better with their hands down. If the defense knows the guy is coming, why bother standing him if you're hardly ever going to drop him. A guy like Clay Matthews is a legit threat to drop back and be "very" competent at pass coverage. But Sheard and Kruger? C'mon.
I too would love to switch to a 4-3 but I'm not sure we have the LB'ers to do it. A 4-3 mike has to be one tough physical son of a bitch....is that guy on our team right now? A 4-3 mike is often required to blow up the lead block so that the OLB'ers can flow unimpeded to the ball. Actually, even in a 3-4 at least one of the ILB'ers is a guy that's more built to blow up the lead blocks so the other guy can make the play....that also hardly ever happened this year. Both of our guys would kind of try to "feel" their way to the ball carrier. The only guy that started to play like a true ILB'er was Robertson. He was the one that started to blow up some plays on his own towards the end of the season.
But it's not gonna happen they're not moving away from the 3-4. So the same scheme is going to prevail next year and I would still like to know what exactly, if anything, Pettine's scheme does with the ILB'ers and the DL that made them shit the bed against the run this year. Why is it other teams get all kinds of injuries and still remain comepetent? How is that SF loses both of their all pro LB'ers and a rookie can step up and man up to Marshawn Lynch? They also had injuries on their d line, plus didn't some guy slap his woman around again and get a timeout or something?
obviously it's going to be up to the coaching staff and farmer to decide what's best moving forward. it's just a shame when i thought i've seen potential in certain players but they don't fit into a certain scheme, will be cut and go on to do great things with other teams.
just the way the ball bounces.
-
If ray Hortons defense were as good as the defense we've had this season Brandon Weeden would still be the quarterback. Think about that. If we held the lead in the games that we blew we'd have been in the playoffs.
And if we then upgraded the run game and offensive line as we did this year we be in the Super Bowl.heh well maybe ...
(probably I guess you can go to your computers and parse that)
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
If ray Hortons defense were as good as the defense we've had this season Brandon Weeden would still be the quarterback. Think about that. If we held the lead in the games that we blew we'd have been in the playoffs.
And if we then upgraded the run game and offensive line as we did this year we be in the Super Bowl.heh well maybe ...
(probably I guess you can go to your computers and parse that)
WSS
If ray Hortons defense were as good as the defense we've had this season Brandon Weeden would still be the quarterback. Think about that. If we held the lead in the games that we blew we'd have been in the playoffs.
har dee har har har.
you should throw down the pick and just write comedy from here on out.
-
I think we've established the number of games in which we blew the lead. We were 4 and 12. If there were only 5 of those games we have been 9 & 7.
You do the math and explain to me why that wouldn't have been acceptable.
WSS
-
I think we've established the number of games in which we blew the lead. We were 4 and 12. If there were only 5 of those games we have been 9 & 7.
You do the math and explain to me why that wouldn't have been acceptable.
WSS
I think we've established the number of games in which we blew the lead. We were 4 and 12. If there were only 5 of those games we have been 9 & 7.
You do the math and explain to me why that wouldn't have been acceptable.
WSS
Then add the Bitonio West and the crow to that lineup...
-
If ray Hortons defense were as good as the defense we've had this season Brandon Weeden would still be the quarterback. Think about that. If we held the lead in the games that we blew we'd have been in the playoffs.
And if we then upgraded the run game and offensive line as we did this year we be in the Super Bowl.heh well maybe ...
(probably I guess you can go to your computers and parse that)
WSS
If ray Hortons defense were as good as the defense we've had this season Brandon Weeden would still be the quarterback. Think about that. If we held the lead in the games that we blew we'd have been in the playoffs.
And if we then upgraded the run game and offensive line as we did this year we be in the Super Bowl.heh well maybe ...
(probably I guess you can go to your computers and parse that)
WSS
I'm of the opinion that if it wasn't for the secondary this year, the numbers...scoring and otherwise...would have been much worse this year. Our front 7 was better last year, I think that's pretty much unquestionable at this point no? They were better against the run and had more sacks last year. Plus the defense was likely on the field a whole lot more last year as well, another contributing factor.
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