That defense has playmakers? Then why is it so terrible now? They've allowed 30+ points 7 times in 14 games. They have an excellent chance that they'll allow 400 points this season. Playmakers don't let that happen. The offense is not as good as it looks, and it's uninjured at the moment.
Hard to do much to disrupt an offense when the O-line has been shutting teams down all year. I dont think Anderson has been sacked 20 times this year. It's especially hard to shut down an offense with an elite O-line, an elite TE, an elite WR, and a QB who knows and sticks to the system. Considering that all of their best players are pre-prime and most are well under 30, I don't see that offense getting shut down. So...despite the fact that Wimbley (25 next year), Kelley (27), Bodden (27), Jackson (25), Pool (24), Jones (26)...form their core and all are pre-prime...you see regression? My problem is that this is that your arguments are all based on conjecture and looking at stats without context (talent level rising, young players, offense is up and coming and already nasty). The thing about football thats important is that you need to get talent on the field. I was one of the people calling them a sleeper team in the AFC because Edwards was entering the magic 3rd season, Winslow had just broken out, and their O-line was just nasty with the Thomas pick and Steinbach signing. Last year's offense was 30th in points scored, but the talent was all in place for a breakout. Same could be said of their D...Wimbley as a rookie had 11 sacks...Jones broke out last year and has played damn well this year...Pool has improved significantly this year...Kelley has actually been a decent NT...Bodden is one of the better corners in the NFL...Wright has played very well as a rookie... I'm a pro-stats guy, but you can't see it all with stats. Football is just one of those sports where you'll spend years piling a bunch of athletes who fit yourself system together and one day it just clicks. THAT happens all the time too.
Okay, you ignored my first point, about film being out on the current O and QB, and the regression that more often than not comes with that in the QB's second season as a starter, so I don't know why I'd respond to your rebuttal. Again, you either misread, or ignored what you quoted... I said that the Browns aren't likely to do much to strengthen their D, and that the D at its current level (or even with a little improvement) isn't near good enough for them to win games if their offense takes even a baby-step back.... I don't know why you bother to quote my post, point for point, and ignore everything I said.... Seems like a waste of everyone's time...
I didn't ignore it, I addressed it. The best way to beat the Browns is to pressure Anderson, and even when the Steelers did that in Week 10 they put up 28 points. You're highly unlikely to have guys who can shut down both Edwards AND Winslow. If the Browns were the kind of team who only had one talent in one area...sure I'd say that offense is likely to fail. But when you build an O-line that can pass block better than most, have two young and elite targets, a QB that knows the system, and a damn good O-coordinator (Chudzinkski). Why are they unlikely to do much with their D? You can say they're unlikely to do it all they want...it's conjecture and not a real argument. Then stop pretending I'm not addressing your points. "The Browns aren't likely to do much to strengthen their D" is not an argument to me...it's telling me something you think is true with nothing to back it up.
well if he has been shown the proper way, he doesnt exibit it. he obviously wasnt there long enough to learn how to make halftime adjustments, as we seem to lose leads. mangini makes some of the stupidest play decisions i have ever seen, is this the work of a master craftsman? he made stupid decisions last year, not only this season. maybe mangini can be considered a journeyman, not a craftsman. in a year or two mangini will be journeying somewhere else, bet on it.
I backed it up with the fact that they have only regressed defensively under Crennell.... Additionally, that most of their D is relatively young, means they're very unlikely to 'clean house' and replace the players despite their ineffectiveness.... Remember before, when I said " Except for in the secondary, young defensive talent doesn't take as long to develop as offensive talent.... If the players are largely talented, and the defense stinks in all aspects it usually is a product of bad coaching." Everything I said I backed up somewhere in this thread.. You just choose to ignore it... As for the offense, as I've said more than once in this thread, with a year of film on the current O, and Anderson, Defenses will be more readily able to gameplan against the tendencies that are harder to catch on to with limited time/resources.... This happens with the vast majority of first year starting QBs as they move into their 2nd season... The same goes for the OL... A small step back is always very likely after a young O has a breakout season
What? Did you know their offense was 30th ranked in '06? This was an offense with Winslow and Edwards too. Young players who have been productive (as the guys I listed are/have been) are more likely to grow than regress... Why would they "clean house" on young guys who have shown improvement or have enormous upside? Should they have cleaned house last year when their offense was 30th? No. They went and fixed the O-line instead. Should they have cut Winslow and Edwards last year cause the offense wasn't elite soon enough? So...you would actually cut Wimbley and Kelley (amongst others)? You're not making any sense. Not really...I just don't buy it....and I've explained why. The '04 Chargers "came out of nowhere" unless you take into account that they had a kickass TE added, a QB that fit the system, had an elite RB, built an O-line... 1. Anderson has started before. And like I said, if Anderson was the whole offense I would be like "OK, they might regress." But they have to stop Winslow, Edwards, and Jurevicius too, and thats not easy to do is it? 2. Teams know how to stop the Browns...pressure Anderson....they just can't do it because of the O-line. 3. Why is their O-line likely to regress? You keep saying these things are "likely" but why? The only reason is injury. If anything, there's the chance they get better if Bentley comes back to play G. Thomas is a rookie...Steinbach is and has been one of the best G's in the game...Fraley is solid...McKinney and Schaffer are solid players...what reason do we have for them to regress?
Dude, are you freakin serious? #1) I said the DEFENSE has only regressed under Crenell, not the offense.... And, because they are a relatively talented unit, and defensive players usually develop faster than offensive players, the defensive problems are most likely COACHING not personnel. Thus my opinion that they are not likely to improve. READ THE POST BEFORE YOU RESPOND TO IT Anderson's play, and the OL's play is likely to regress because of TRENDS. Things in the NFL are likely to happen because the future tends to imitate the past. And I've said as much, but you don't seem to get that. 2nd year starters almost always take at least a small step back if they had breakout first seasons... It happens... Tendencies are exposed, and adjustments need to be made to continue having success... Usually it results in a slight sophomore setback.... Let's review: The defense is not likely to improve because: A) They are a relatively young talented group, and because of such, the CS is not likely to replace a lot of players looking for better results. B) Since they are a young talented group, their problems most likely have to do with COACHING, not talent C) They have only regressed as a unit under Contrell The offense is likely to have a slight setback because: A) This is Anderson's first year as a regular starter. With a year of film on him, he is more than likely to have a small adjustment period, and subsequently fall into a bit of a "sophomore slump" like most 2nd year starters.... B) This is the offensive line's first year together, and Joe Thomas' first year in the league. What's true for Anderson is also true for the OL and Thomas in particular. The combination of a not-much-improved defense, plus any small set back on offense will be much fewer wins.... This defense is not good enough for the Browns to even be IN games if the offense isn't putting up major yardage/point totals...
Yes. My point is that JUST LAST YEAR their offense was 30th in the league, BUT the fact was that they had two guys (Winslow and Edwards) with ridiculous upside, and they went and built an offensive line this offseason. Their D has more than a few guys with ridiculous upside (Wimbley, Jones, Wright, Pool, Bodden) that has sucked because the D-line sucks. See where I'm going? Talent is piling up, and the more talent that piles up the more likely it is to be a good unit. This year all they need is a RB for the offense...meaning they can focus on D. Simple. Um...what TRENDS? Always? Even offensive linemen? Micheal Roos and Jason Peters didn't regress...are veterans such as Steinbach, Fraley, and Schaffer going to regress? Why? All are in their primes, why would they regress? Theres only ONE rookie on that O-line. And he was an elite prospect playing next to an elite LG. Why is he likely to regress? Because it's happened before? What about Joe Thomas makes him a likely candidate to regress? Why would they WANT to replace any of these guys? I would never think of replacing Wimbley or Jackson if I were them. They may want to replace McGinnest, but they're very likely too and he's not exactly young is he? So then would they want to cut them? And what about the D-line? When your best D-line player is Ethan Kelley, you're probably having problems. Coaching is probably a problem, but I'd say the coaching staff looks alot better with a good D-line. Statistically...sure. But the '03 Chargers looked pretty damn bad...then '04 changed all that. The Browns O in '06 was 30th, this year its 5th. The Colts went from 3-13 in '98 to 13-3 in '99. They let their talent build up, and eventually it exploded...THAT happens all the time too. Hard to regress when you're not the key cog to the offense. And it's hard to do when you can't get to him. This doesn't even make sense. Why are they likely to REGRESS with more time and more experience together? Huh? When has that ever been true of any O-line? Except its highly unlikely to happen unless the O-line sees injuries next year...and theres the small chance Bentley comes back and actually improves the O-line. Sorry...but football isn't baseball. Teams rarely trend up before improving...look at us in last years second half compared to this years second half...usually its just you pile on talent for years and then boom...one day it clicks. Seriously...I'm wondering how you see an offense with a 25 year old Kellen Winslow Jr. and a 24 year old Braylon Edwards regressing...especially when the guy throwing those guys the ball is protected by arguably the best pass blocking unit in the NFL. ESPECIALLY since every single key player on that offense is either in the early stages of their prime or a couple years away from hitting it. Not only that, but they run one of the best offensive systems in the NFL...the same one Cameron ran in San Diego...run by the TE coach that oversaw the development of Antonio Gates... And I'm wondering why you're actually suggesting a defense that has been piling up talent for years is likely to continue regressing in the future...especially since so many teams have done the same thing and jumped up the rankings in one season (a couple examples in this post). Like I said...I'm a big believer in stats but you're relying on them and a bunch of conjecture based theories to make an argument...doesn't work well. Got to love the theory that they're unlikely to improve because they won't try to improve because the guys are so young that they're scared to cut them. Cause I'm sure the Browns are dying to cut their young defensive players...there'd be a line going around the NFL block if they cut some of their young defensive players. I do agree that the problem might be coaching...but it's mostly because I'm not a huge fan of the Parcells/BB 2-gap 3-4 because it takes away the natural aggressiveness of a football player. If the Jets had a pass rusher like Wimbley...two CBs like Bodden and Wright...safeties like Jones and Pool...and ILBs like Jackson and Davis/Thompson...and a solid player like Peek across from Wimbley...wouldn't you say they're more likely to improve if they focus on fixing in the DL? And considering the Browns have a ton of cap room and guys like Corey Williams, Albert Haynesworth, Randy Starks, and Tommy Kelly are all set to be FAs...AND the draft has guys like Moore, Balmer, Langford, Pressley, Dykes, Hayden, and Norwell who can play 3-4 DE...why can't they improve?
BB would be a middle of the pack coach if he never made the deal with the devil for a 6th round michigan pretty boy.....
