@baconhound said:

You're right, to an extent, if by "talent" you mean first round picks.

Every single guy that makes it to the NFL is talented. You're telling me Kenbrell Thompkins, Danny Amendola, Aaron Dobson, Shane Vereen, Davante Adams, and Andrew Quarless are so much more talented than the group of WR's and TE's we have now?

The only talent differential that matters is the one behind center. The best QB's can get any WR the ball, as evidenced by Rivers' performance without any of his top wideouts. As evidenced by the Patriots being able to be consistently good regardless of who's lined up at WR. As evidenced by the fact that Aaron Rodgers can make a 65 year old James Jones into a top-10 WR like its 2009 again.

McCown is nowhere near that talent level, but he's effectively getting our guys the ball when they are open...and that's at least better than any QB we've had recently.

On the defensive side, we're chock full of "talent" and they can't put together a complete performance if their lives depended on it.

@tour2ma said:

You should play golf with me more often, then. You'll hear that term at least 8 times.

Also bounced one short pass that brought the description "worm-burner" to mind... a phrase that had not seen the light of thought for maybe two decades...

@mudfly said:

And their Coach, who people here also wanted, has waffled and pulled his QB after one game, then waffled and pulled his other QB and now is back to his first QB.....

O'Brien is sticking with Mallet as is starter.

@mudfly said:

Because Houston doesn't have a QB who can distribute. Mallet is forcefeeding Hopkins the ball (hey, which I love since I have him in fantasy) and defenses are keying to that. Since Mallet got the starting nod, Hopkins' targets have progressively increased - 11 targets against Carolina, 14 against Tampa Bay and 22 against Atlanta.

Houston is a prime example of what plenty of people on here have been saying - you can stock your team chock full of talent, but it's all for naught if you don't have a QB who can effectively distribute the ball. Hopkins is the only Texans receiver who has been targeted at least once in every zone of the field every single game since Mallet became a starter. Against Tampa and Carolina (games where they weren't instantly blown out), Houston attacked down the field 13 times...only 3 of which were caught. Hopkins was targeted 8 of those 13 times and only managed to bring down one of them.

If I were an opposing defensive coordinator, I'd key my gameplan around Hopkins and let the rest fall into place. Stack the box every play and force Mallet to think about audibling. Man lock on Hopkins with a safety shaded over him every single play. Off zone the opposite side. Zone blitz the rest of the team, If they're going to attack deep, they're going to Hopkins. If they don't go deep, you've got at least two of the three zone underneath zones covered.

With Houston, the logjam is at QB. Mallet has all of the athletic talent in the world, but his distribution isn't even. He's not finding open receivers, therefore his receivers' talent is rendered useless.

That defense knows the offense is going to be historically bad so they've already shut it down. They're in 2016 mode.

@baconhound said:

No doubt....the Texans were down 42 -0 in the third quarter....with Watt and Clowney(2 defensive gods? that every wishes we had)...Couldnt stop the run, so I guess they suddenly suck nuts and probably should clean house on these bums too....

And their Coach, who people here also wanted, has waffled and pulled his QB after one game, then waffled and pulled his other QB and now is back to his first QB.....

Its not just Cleveland folks......fans are crying and whining alllll over the place....Miami, Houston, Seattle, Philly, Detroit, Tampa, Buffalo etc etc etc.....

@mark-o said:

Rivers is an "old school" QB though. He knew he had to get it out quick and he did. If we had talent like the Texans and still stunk I'd be upset with the coaches.

@baconhound said:

Only 2 sacks against 3 backups is pretty sad in my opinion.

@mark-o said:

That isn't completely true. Rivers was sacked twice and threw the ball away 3-5 times to avoid the pressure. Big plays happen in the NFL, just does, Peterson on a 4th and 1 ran 48 yards to score yesterday. Just don't have the talent to compete for a whole game against good NFL teams.

@baconhound said:

My issue with yesterday (and the week before for that matter) is the number of big plays that we are giving up. The other BIG issue from yesterday is the Chargers offensive line was a concern in San Diego before the season and then they lose 3 starters and we still couldn't put any pressure on the QB at all.

@baconhound said:

A solid defense doesn't give up all the big plays this team gives up on a weekly basis.

@baconhound said:

Actually think the defense is solid but they lack 2 key pieces, that bad motherfucker ILB that can chase the outside and run up the middle destroying RBs and that pass rusher that makes a tackle shit his pants. Not the easiest guys to find but if the Browns can in the next 2 years they could be very, very good.

@mike-h said:

yeah i was one as well.....and? fixing the Dline WAS the number one priority and he WAS the #1 NT.....kinda makes sense don't ya think?

do you really want to break out the list of players you were crying for in the past?

cuz it could get really ugly up in here.

Sorry... could not resist. Tour

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

The BROWNS are important ! We're talkin *serious business*

@tour2ma said:

This gave me a good laugh. Thank you, Tour - I needed that.

@calfoxwc said:

Bitching about for freaking ever, and ever, and ever, is bs.

At least in this forum...

Sorry... could not resist.

@mike-h said:

Correlation does not always = causation. These stats are fine, but are not 100% correct because there's no context. A lot happens on a football play that can't be captured by "he ran left". Saying opponents can't run up the middle against a 3-4 defense is pretty useless... they are designed to force teams to run around their nose tackle. Danny has not been as disruptive as many thought he would be, although there were plenty of people saying to be cautious because he athleticism didn't show a Ngata type player.

But, continue using out of context stats to support Danny Shelton's massive impact on the Browns' rush defense. He's really helping... Actually, they got worse.

Danny and Starks are being asked to occupy and attack simultaneously because our ILB's are utter failures at filling.

If we can rush six on five and still be completely blocked, it should be telling about how incapable our LB's are at determining gaps and filling them.

As for your "edge" conversation, I feel we've had an equal distribution of off tackle runs bounced inside and out because our edge players are riding a block to the sideline in hopes that he'll get some backside fill help (which never ends up showing up).

The entire front seven is general is playing miserably - but I give a little leeway to Shelton and Starks because they're at least doing what they should be doing - eating up two blocks most of the time.