I had the night sweats as a Viking fan watching that game. Too much in common with both teams.
I was rooting for Stefanskis team last night...But that noose was tightening on em, I was expecting the choke, to their credit they didnt.
Call me crazy, and I acknowledge Brownies were missing a lot of players last night...But I am not impressed with Mayfield or that team that much.
Few shiny pieces I do love (both RB's, Garret, the entire OL)
I think they get absolutely smoked @ KC
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
I had the night sweats as a Viking fan watching that game. Too much in common with both teams.
I was rooting for Stefanskis team last night...But that noose was tightening on em, I was expecting the choke, to their credit they didnt.
Call me crazy, and I acknowledge Brownies were missing a lot of players last night...But I am not impressed with Mayfield or that team that much.
Few shiny pieces I do love (both RB's, Garret, the entire OL)
I think they get absolutely smoked @ KC
Probably, but I expect a pretty good game. Chiefs haven't exactly been killing teams. I was just going to say if the line is over 7 or so, I might take the Browns to cover. Just looked: it's 9.5.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ mblack said:
Second quarter and Browns up 28-0.
I can't believe what I am watching.
Someone pls explain this to me. It cannot all coaching and preparation or is it?
I discount drafting because most of these players have been around without much team success until now
Since 2010 Cleveland has had SEVEN top 10 picks. In 2017 and 2018 they had two straight #1 overall picks. They've had a very talented roster now for about two or three years and have been a very trendy playoff pick each of those years. That roster of young, 1st-contract talent--including the QB, Myles Garrett, Nick Chubb AND Kareem Hunt, plus one of the best OLs in football--is now hitting its 3rd and 4th season together. That's the biggest reason for their success.
I think Stefanski is a very smart guy and he's probably getting more out of Mayfield than most coaches would, so I don't want to take anything away from him, but he moved into an emerging situation that required only one thing: a coach who wasn't a bumbling idiot.
Wait a minute. 4 of their top 10 picks in the past decade (Joe Haden, Trent Richardson, Barkevious Mingo, Justin Gilbert) are off the Browns' roster or out of football. They had16 first-round picks in the last decade but only 5 are still on their roster - fewer than the Vikings. Almost every pick prior to 2017 was wasted. Browns do have some talent, but let's not exaggerate.
Are you saying they have collected more talent for Stefanski to use than Spielman and Zimmer have assembled? That's pretty sad since Spielman is supposed to be an awesome GM and has had a decade of control, 13 first-rounders since 2010, and a supposedly great coach who helps pick and develop those players for 8 years.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ mblack said:
Second quarter and Browns up 28-0.
I can't believe what I am watching.
Someone pls explain this to me. It cannot all coaching and preparation or is it?
I discount drafting because most of these players have been around without much team success until now
Since 2010 Cleveland has had SEVEN top 10 picks. In 2017 and 2018 they had two straight #1 overall picks. They've had a very talented roster now for about two or three years and have been a very trendy playoff pick each of those years. That roster of young, 1st-contract talent--including the QB, Myles Garrett, Nick Chubb AND Kareem Hunt, plus one of the best OLs in football--is now hitting its 3rd and 4th season together. That's the biggest reason for their success.
I think Stefanski is a very smart guy and he's probably getting more out of Mayfield than most coaches would, so I don't want to take anything away from him, but he moved into an emerging situation that required only one thing: a coach who wasn't a bumbling idiot.
Wait a minute. 4 of their top 10 picks in the past decade (Joe Haden, Trent Richardson, Barkevious Mingo, Justin Gilbert) are off the Browns' roster or out of football. They had16 first-round picks in the last decade but only 5 are still on their roster - fewer than the Vikings. Almost every pick prior to 2017 was wasted. Browns do have some talent, but let's not exaggerate.
Are you saying they have collected more talent for Stefanski to use than Spielman and Zimmer have assembled? That's pretty sad since Spielman is supposed to be an awesome GM and has had a decade of control, 13 first-rounders since 2010, and a supposedly great coach who helps pick and develop those players for 8 years.
No, they haven't drafted as well as the Vikings, and in fact they've been among the worst drafting teams in the NFL until recently. But all those picks (not just 1st rounders, but high picks in subsequent rounds) eventually form a fairly solid foundation. And because they've drafted poorly, they've had a ridiculous amount of cap space to add other players like Tretter, Conklin, Hunt, Richardson, etc. Take that foundation and add some good recent drafts (Wills, Chubb, Mayfield, and Garrett, in particular) and you have a pretty good team.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
Can anybody explain the reason for the rule of not covering up a receiver at the LOS? Honestly what difference does it make if there are 4 eligible receivers in the same side at the LOS?
Dumb rule IMO.
The defense has a right to know which players are eligible.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
Can anybody explain the reason for the rule of not covering up a receiver at the LOS? Honestly what difference does it make if there are 4 eligible receivers in the same side at the LOS?
Dumb rule IMO.
The defense has a right to know which players are eligible.
does that even ring true when you can have unbalanced lines and other goofy shit? I never really bothered to look at who was on the LOS and who was a step off. I identified the formation and knew my assignment from there. seems it was probably one of those rules that was implemented at another time in the game and doesnt really apply to todays game much. you never see defenders crying about a guy was or wasnt on the LOS at the snap so I doubt they pay attention to it either.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
Can anybody explain the reason for the rule of not covering up a receiver at the LOS? Honestly what difference does it make if there are 4 eligible receivers in the same side at the LOS?
Dumb rule IMO.
The defense has a right to know which players are eligible.
does that even ring true when you can have unbalanced lines and other goofy shit? I never really bothered to look at who was on the LOS and who was a step off. I identified the formation and knew my assignment from there. seems it was probably one of those rules that was implemented at another time in the game and doesnt really apply to todays game much. you never see defenders crying about a guy was or wasnt on the LOS at the snap so I doubt they pay attention to it either.
until that tackle eligible scores on them. Why bother with making the linemen actually be on the line. Perhaps they identify as a WR? Why bother making sure only one man is in motion. Or that get players are set? They are all just archaic rules as well. Or that only one forward pass is allowed?
Why? because if they didn't, some coach would start using that to his advantage and put the defense in more of a bind. I guarantee that someone on defense is watching who is on the LOS. Maybe a safety, or someone that is responsible for that extra person running a route.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
Can anybody explain the reason for the rule of not covering up a receiver at the LOS? Honestly what difference does it make if there are 4 eligible receivers in the same side at the LOS?
Dumb rule IMO.
The defense has a right to know which players are eligible.
does that even ring true when you can have unbalanced lines and other goofy shit? I never really bothered to look at who was on the LOS and who was a step off. I identified the formation and knew my assignment from there. seems it was probably one of those rules that was implemented at another time in the game and doesnt really apply to todays game much. you never see defenders crying about a guy was or wasnt on the LOS at the snap so I doubt they pay attention to it either.
until that tackle eligible scores on them. Why bother with making the linemen actually be on the line. Perhaps they identify as a WR? Why bother making sure only one man is in motion. Or that get players are set? They are all just archaic rules as well. Or that only one forward pass is allowed?
Why? because if they didn't, some coach would start using that to his advantage and put the defense in more of a bind. I guarantee that someone on defense is watching who is on the LOS. Maybe a safety, or someone that is responsible for that extra person running a route.
That tackle eligible reports so that you know that lineman number is a receiving threat. So then as a safety I know I have to defend him as a TE or other potential ball carrier. I dont need a WR on or off the LOS to find a TE or identify. I really just don't see that receiver off or on as anything with all the pre snap motions and shit.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
Can anybody explain the reason for the rule of not covering up a receiver at the LOS? Honestly what difference does it make if there are 4 eligible receivers in the same side at the LOS?
Dumb rule IMO.
The defense has a right to know which players are eligible.
does that even ring true when you can have unbalanced lines and other goofy shit? I never really bothered to look at who was on the LOS and who was a step off. I identified the formation and knew my assignment from there. seems it was probably one of those rules that was implemented at another time in the game and doesnt really apply to todays game much. you never see defenders crying about a guy was or wasnt on the LOS at the snap so I doubt they pay attention to it either.
until that tackle eligible scores on them. Why bother with making the linemen actually be on the line. Perhaps they identify as a WR? Why bother making sure only one man is in motion. Or that get players are set? They are all just archaic rules as well. Or that only one forward pass is allowed?
Why? because if they didn't, some coach would start using that to his advantage and put the defense in more of a bind. I guarantee that someone on defense is watching who is on the LOS. Maybe a safety, or someone that is responsible for that extra person running a route.
That tackle eligible reports so that you know that lineman number is a receiving threat. So then as a safety I know I have to defend him as a TE or other potential ball carrier. I dont need a WR on or off the LOS to find a TE or identify. I really just don't see that receiver off or on as anything with all the pre snap motions and shit.
If a TE is covered, the he is ineligible and the safety/LB don't have to worry about his route. That would probably make a difference in how it is played on D. It may seem archaic, but football is a game of complex rules. Could ditch them and just play rugby.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
Can anybody explain the reason for the rule of not covering up a receiver at the LOS? Honestly what difference does it make if there are 4 eligible receivers in the same side at the LOS?
Dumb rule IMO.
The defense has a right to know which players are eligible.
does that even ring true when you can have unbalanced lines and other goofy shit? I never really bothered to look at who was on the LOS and who was a step off. I identified the formation and knew my assignment from there. seems it was probably one of those rules that was implemented at another time in the game and doesnt really apply to todays game much. you never see defenders crying about a guy was or wasnt on the LOS at the snap so I doubt they pay attention to it either.
until that tackle eligible scores on them. Why bother with making the linemen actually be on the line. Perhaps they identify as a WR? Why bother making sure only one man is in motion. Or that get players are set? They are all just archaic rules as well. Or that only one forward pass is allowed?
Why? because if they didn't, some coach would start using that to his advantage and put the defense in more of a bind. I guarantee that someone on defense is watching who is on the LOS. Maybe a safety, or someone that is responsible for that extra person running a route.
That tackle eligible reports so that you know that lineman number is a receiving threat. So then as a safety I know I have to defend him as a TE or other potential ball carrier. I dont need a WR on or off the LOS to find a TE or identify. I really just don't see that receiver off or on as anything with all the pre snap motions and shit.
If a TE is covered, the he is ineligible and the safety/LB don't have to worry about his route. That would probably make a difference in how it is played on D. It may seem archaic, but football is a game of complex rules. Could ditch them and just play rugby.
Soccer is way better
|
