10 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

That was TB, history now. I hope Dart doesn't chop us up on a short week. We have a 3 man O line a C and 2 T's LOL

History of our brilliant O design this season

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Be more specific

Find a trash can. Place play design inside. Put at curb for garbage disposal…so it’s never seen again.

6 hours ago, mattwill said:

What solution do you propose, or are you simply complaining for the sake of complaining.

Solution can only be upgrading with a more capable CB option.

26 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Solution can only be upgrading with a more capable CB option.

That is generic. It doesn't solve the problem. It only looks to the future. What is your solution NOW? Where do you get that more capable CB? What specific players do you have in mind?

17 minutes ago, mattwill said:

That is generic. It doesn't solve the problem. It only looks to the future. What is your solution NOW? Where do you get that more capable CB? What specific players do you have in mind?

Originally Isaiah Rodgers. Now we’ll need to look through who is available. Newsome CB for the Browns would be great.

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

The passing game which we FINALLY saw should have opened up the running game which was all but abandoned when we need it most(with a 21-3 lead into the 4th). Hurts hit on it. There is a difference from being conservative, to being mediocre. IMO if you "execute" conservative(aka vanilla plays) you will be ok, If you can't you are mediocre and are no longer dominant and subject to being overtaken. Even the 4 wins were sloppy, ugly with some defense and luck added in. As I said IMO(which accounts for nothing except my opinion) The time to bish about the play calling was TO PATULLO DURING THE GAME and ask him "where did the run plays go?". Post game is not the time to ask these questions. Besides the O not functioning in the 4th, Fangio's D gave up the lead too. Or at least this time his D couldn't bail us like other games with blocks and scoop and scores. I said not to rely on those. Eve the mighty Q got burned. When we all(and the players and fans) clamored for a passing game, it wasn't with the idea of abandoning the run game, it was supposed to be in ADDITION to it. But facts are the running game is not the same. It was average and adding even an "average" passing game would compliment it. Passing helped get us the 21-3 lead. I will assume Patullo figured that would continue all game. But if you don't execute you are punting and not killing off the clock. Patullo needs to learn to adjust on the fly. It's very difficult to do and very few master it. Sean Peyton is one of those masters. It took him 3 1/4's but he found his answer. I will tell you a short story next

So much in this to correct. You still clearly not a believer in needing any O mind coaching. Most desire scheming players open…good playcalling…at least trying to generate favorable matchups. Then you go on talk about Fangio D….but talk about ST play….which is a whole other phase coached by Clay instead.

I leave it at this ultra short version

1 hour ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Find a trash can. Place play design inside. Put at curb for garbage disposal…so it’s never seen again.

Says nothing

Riq Woolen, Denzel Ward could be possibilities

18 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So much in this to correct. You still clearly not a believer in needing any O mind coaching. Most desire scheming players open…good playcalling…at least trying to generate favorable matchups. Then you go on talk about Fangio D….but talk about ST play….which is a whole other phase coached by Clay instead.

I leave it at this ultra short version

First, you need a solid O line for ANY of this. Dickerson has not been at 100 and Toth is not cutting it either. I can scheme and draw plays up all day. if I don't have the personnel, I may as well doodle. Blocked kicks/scoop and scores are defensive plays in my view whatever label you want to put on them. Clay was responsible for Q getting spanked by Sutton?? The kick blocking unit is mostly your D players, so I count that as a defensive play not a ST play. If you want to view it as ST that's up to you. Depends on your viewpoint I suppose

26 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Originally Isaiah Rodgers. Now we’ll need to look through who is available. Newsome CB for the Browns would be great.

The assessment by the Defensive Coaches and Howie was that Rodgers was good at tracking the receiver, and as a result being in good position to defend the pass, but severely deficient in his ball location skills. He had not shown any proficiency in being able to turn back toward the Quarterback, locate the flight trajectory of the incoming pass, and then compete with the receiver for control of the ball. As a result receivers were regularly able to pluck the ball out of the air just above Rodgers' head. In addition, failure to turn and locate the ball is a huge invitation for pass interference penalties on any ball that is underthrown, because the receiver is obstructed from coming back for the underthrown ball by the defender who hasn't turned.

The coaches and Howie may have been wrong in that assessment, or Rodgers may have been an old dog learning new tricks since arriving in Minnesota, but the video tape of Rodgers filling in for Slay in the 2024 games confirms (provides clear evidence of) what the coaches and Howie had concluded. So the Rodgers ship sailed six months ago.

With that said, what would you be offering Cleveland in exchange for Newsome?

25 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

You still clearly not a believer in needing any O mind coaching.

Where did I say this??

1 hour ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Originally Isaiah Rodgers. Now we’ll need to look through who is available. Newsome CB for the Browns would be great.

Saying Rodgers after 5 weeks is not giving an answer lol even though find it funny you were calling for Ringo all of last year and this off-season but now that he see that he sucks you are back tracking to Rodgers.

29 minutes ago, mattwill said:

With that said, what would you be offering Cleveland in exchange for Newsome?

Going to say it would cost something around a 4th or 5th for Newsome

2 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

The passing game which we FINALLY saw should have opened up the running game which was all but abandoned when we need it most(with a 21-3 lead into the 4th). Hurts hit on it. There is a difference from being conservative, to being mediocre. IMO if you "execute" conservative(aka vanilla plays) you will be ok, If you can't you are mediocre and are no longer dominant and subject to being overtaken. Even the 4 wins were sloppy, ugly with some defense and luck added in. As I said IMO(which accounts for nothing except my opinion) The time to bish about the play calling was TO PATULLO DURING THE GAME and ask him "where did the run plays go?". Post game is not the time to ask these questions. Besides the O not functioning in the 4th, Fangio's D gave up the lead too. Or at least this time his D couldn't bail us like other games with blocks and scoop and scores. I said not to rely on those. Eve the mighty Q got burned. When we all(and the players and fans) clamored for a passing game, it wasn't with the idea of abandoning the run game, it was supposed to be in ADDITION to it. But facts are the running game is not the same. It was average and adding even an "average" passing game would compliment it. Passing helped get us the 21-3 lead. I will assume Patullo figured that would continue all game. But if you don't execute you are punting and not killing off the clock. Patullo needs to learn to adjust on the fly. It's very difficult to do and very few master it. Sean Peyton is one of those masters. It took him 3 1/4's but he found his answer. I will tell you a short story next

6 rushes for 30 yards

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

That is generic. It doesn't solve the problem. It only looks to the future. What is your solution NOW? Where do you get that more capable CB? What specific players do you have in mind?

That's Howie's job.. not ours.

10 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Going to say it would cost something around a 4th or 5th for Newsome

If he only costs a 4th or 5th, is he really better than Ringo?

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

That's Howie's job.. not ours.

Job, yes. But speculation about possibilities isn't Howie's job.

If we don't speculate about possible solutions all we are doing is being Negadelphian complainers.

9 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

6 rushes for 30 yards

Waste of Barks talent,but we have O line woes

19 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Going to say it would cost something around a 4th or 5th for Newsome

Oh, I think it would take a 3rd for him JMO

11 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

6 rushes for 30 yards

See that scrub bum Gainwell was the guy we had that could break up the running/ Passing game. IDK if Shipley can. With 1 play I doubt you would know

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

See that scrub bum Gainwell was the guy we had that could break up the running/ Passing game. IDK if Shipley can. With 1 play I doubt you would know

Gainwell is so bad I added him to my fantasy bench for now 😀

47 minutes ago, mattwill said:

If he only costs a 4th or 5th, is he really better than Ringo?

Do I think Newsome is better yes not even close dude is starting on a pretty good Browns D…. But I don’t think the Browns are going to be able to move Newsome for much more then a 4th maybe a conditional 4th that can become a 3rd.

I think Riq Woolen is a good CB to but I also think he would only get the Seahawks a 3rd or 4th rounder at best similar to Newsome.

Mind you Darius Slay only cost us a 3rd back in 2020 and he was still regarded as one of the better CB in the league during that time

Denzel Ward could be had for maybe a 4th

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

Job, yes. But speculation about possibilities isn't Howie's job.

If we don't speculate about possible solutions all we are doing is being Negadelphian complainers.

So saying a trade is a possible solution...is being negative unless we actually name players who we are clueless about their availability because we don't work in the NFL?

We have to act arrogant enough to name a player...otherwise just saying " this is a possible solution " is negative?

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Waste of Barks talent,but we have O line woes

5 yards per carry is " woes"?