DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2018 NFL Season Looking Back: Browns 21 Steelers 21 Myles Garret

6 tackles, two sacks, two fumbles, and he kept blowing up the LT of Pitt.

Your thoughts on his performance today?

he was good, too bad he can't play OL or QB

Pro Bowl.

He was full motor too. Myles is a showpiece. Great performance.

He was a beast.

He caused about 4 holding penalties on top of the sacks.

Def player of the year.....then Khalil mack played on sunday night football...lol

but for real, he will be in the discussion if he stays on the field.

Wonder if we win today if we got Mack ...

First team All-Pro.

I think it wouldn't even have been fair if we got Mack.

I know Chi gave up a lot to get him, but man did he look worth every penny last night. If not for one of the top5 all time in my book last night, he single handedly won them that game.

On another note, He still has some work to do - but I was impressed with the local kid Trubisky last night. He looked like he has taken a big step forward.

IT WOULDN’T BE FAIR ... thats what i said ...

Could u imagine ... GOOD GOD MAN ...

I think they RAPED Oakland ...

Everyone says they gave up to much ... i don’t see it ... NOT EVEN CLOSE ...

I really hope Dorsey offered the same and they turned it down cause our pick will be higher than Chi-towns and he’s one step further away from them getting him out of the conference ...

Oh well ... i gotta get over this .. *L* ...

Mitch is my boy ... hes scaring me ... he looked like an all pro in the first two quarters ... he looked like the proverbial dear in the headlights when it mattered ... NOT GOOD ...

I don't think we did. If you want the HK episode after the trade, (see im gonna be nice to hue here) you can see when hes talking about it, that he was a little upset we didn't pull the trigger to get him. I could just tell in his voice talking about "oak gave up a lot", you could just hear that he wished we did.

Hes young, and on a HUGE stage he hasn't seen before SNF, against the best in the bizz right now.

Garrett played a real solid game. I know he wishes he could take back the block in the back that cost the Browns the win.

A 33 yard kick could be blocked like a 43 yard kick was. I'm not sure that the block in the back cost the game.

If anything, the roughing call on that 3rd and goal was bigger. We had them stopped and Garret lands on Ben. Pit scored a TD on the next play instead of a FG. 4 pt swing.

I don't think it cost us the win - a 42 yard FG is a chipshot by NFL standards. Keeping the same snapcount the entire game is what cost us. Sure it would have been nice to have been shorter, but it was still a high percentage kick. It was a dumb play for sure, but I don't feel it cost us the game.

That was a bush league call against Myles on the roughing the passer. The very next series, Watt did the same thing to TT, and not call.

The snap count had a larger effect on the blocked kick.

Not in that weather tho.

Boswell is about as money as they come, I think he had 4 or 5 game winners last year for Pitt, and he missed his.

As good as the NFL showed. Impressive. Pro Bowl candidate now in the mix. Stay healthy.

Great day for Garrett, even with lots of double teams.

Glad he's a Brown.

BEAST

I was watching on my computer during the final kick. We had an 89.6% chance to win the game. That number probably goes up to about 92% if we get that extra 10 yards. Not much, but still a factor.

I was there, it really wasn't that bad. It was raining, a bit of wind but I've been to a whole lot worse. The knowing the snap count was the biggest issue and really dumb on the coaching staffs part.

Oh I agree it was mainly the snap count, but I do give some credence to the weather since boswell missed his. I mean we will never know if that kick was going to be made or not, I am just saying that 43 yards in that weather is not a gimmie - as evidenced by Boswell who is by far a better K than Zane is at this point.

Not a bush league call at all. It's a bush league rule but the rule, as much as I hate it, was flagged correctly. It should have been called on Watt too.

I don't know, I was always under the impression they had to DRIVE the QB to the ground. Simply falling on top of them was not the way it was supposed to be interpreted. I may be wrong, but that's what I always thought. Myles fell on top of him, by no means did he DRIVE him into the ground.

Edit to add: just checked they changed the rule this year. Ok, cool. But then I still have a gripe that its bush league call since it was only called against us.

Question, the heck are you supposed to sack a qb now?

Grab his flag !

Myles IS as Advertised.

mondays be like ...



https://twitter.com/Browns/status/1039191064819712001

Hi Ben, I'm Myles.

It’s like eye candy. So sweeeeeeet.

Myles Garrett had said he worked himself into the best shape of his life in the offseason with the goal of staying on the field as much as possible. He played all 84 defensive snaps in the opener vs. #Steelers

https://twitter.com/ByNateUlrich/status/1039147126444490753

Officiating chief: Refs erred on call against Browns' Myles Garrett

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...s-myles-garrett

The NFL's head of officiating said Monday that officials erred when they penalized Browns defensive end Myles Garrett for roughing the passer, leading to a Pittsburgh Steelers touchdown one play later in the second quarter of Sunday's 21-all tie that extended Cleveland's long winless streak.

But Al Riveron, the NFL's senior vice president of officiating, told me in a phone call that four other flags thrown for players landing on quarterbacks -- on Atlanta's Grady Jarrett, Cincinnati's Carlos Dunlap, Minnesota's Sheldon Richardson and New Orleans' David Onyemata -- were correctly called as penalties under a longstanding rule that prohibits a player from landing on the quarterback with most or all of his body weight, which is an area of emphasis for officials this year.


Entering Monday night's games, 14 roughing the passer penalties have been called in 14 Week 1 games -- twice as many as in all of Week 1 last year and more than double the average of 6.8 per full slate of games over the past three seasons, according to NFL Research. Of those 14, 12 were correct, Riveron said, including four of five violations of the body-weight rule.

"The rule specifically says 'most, if not all, of your body weight,'" Riveron told me. "So we want that player to make an effort. And the last three or four weeks, we have pulled extensive video to show the clubs exactly what we're talking about, and we probably last week showed 5-to-1 or 6-to-1 of legal hits, or legal contact, as opposed to illegal contact. Because the question we get all the time is, well, what do you want our players to do?

"Well, they have to not put the weight on the quarterback. And this one (on Garrett) yesterday showed, even though there is some body weight on Ben, this is not what we would consider contact that rises to the level of a foul."

Five flags in Week 1 for putting body weight on the quarterback is particularly striking when considering only one was thrown for the new, much-discussed lowering-the-head penalty, on Kansas City Chiefs safety Ron Parker in Sunday's win over the Chargers.

The rule about landing on the quarterback has been on the books since 1995, with Rule 12, Section 2, Article 9 stating (emphasis mine): "When tackling a passer who is in a defenseless posture (e.g., during or just after throwing a pass), a defensive player must not unnecessarily or violently throw him down and land on top of him with all or most of the defender's weight.” This year, the word "and" was changed to "or" -- a subtle tweak that effectively outlaws any instance in which a player lands hard on the quarterback.

The body-weight fouls correctly called in Week 1 all were against the rules in past years as well, Riveron noted, adding that "a good portion of clubs" indicated on an annual survey after last season that body weight on the quarterback was an area they wanted the officiating department and competition committee to look into. That came months after Packers star quarterback Aaron Rodgers' season ended on a controversial (but legal, at the time) hit by Minnesota Vikings linebacker Anthony Barr.

Browns coach Hue Jackson gave officials an earful and repeated his disagreement with the call against Garrett after the game, and Riveron agreed after reviewing the tape. At least two of the players penalized in other games expressed similar frustration to reporters after their games.

"I planked and rolled off right away and I tried to let the referee know I was not trying to be malicious and drive him through the ground, because I know it's (Colts quarterback) Andrew Luck after two years (dealing with injuries), so they're going to call it tight regardless," Dunlap said. "So, I tried to do the next best thing. There was no other way for me to try to avoid him on the front side so on the back side I tried to keep my weight from driving him into the ground, which is the terminology they used."

Asked what he did to draw a flag on his hit of 49ers quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo, Richardson said, according to the Pioneer Press: "Play football. That's it. It wasn't dirty. (I) took a step and hit him, perfect form tackle. What else you want me to do?"

Of the other seven roughing the passer penalties, the only incorrect call was on New Orleans' Marcus Davenport, who did not make contact with Tampa Bay's Ryan Fitzpatrick as the official believed, Riveron said. Riveron said he had not reviewed other unflagged plays to see if more flags should have been thrown.

As with most safety-related rule changes, such as protection for defenseless receivers years ago, the hope is an initial spate of flags gives way to adjustments in technique, fewer penalties and ultimately a safer game.

"It's a combination of several things: the coaching, obviously the players, and then the officiating," Riveron said. "But I think at the beginning, because it has not been called the way it has been called or the committee wants it to be called now differently or a certain way, then it levels off and everyone adjusts to it."

For defensive players, that may not always be easy.

"You've just got to be conscious of it when it happens," Barr told me last week. "It happens fast. You're trying to make a play on the ball. You're not trying to cause a penalty or hurt your team by any means, and sometimes it happens in the heat of the moment. So, I think we're going to see a lot of that (call) this year. But again, it's the rule, so what you going to do? Play by it."

The rules are just getting to be a cluster.

They still don't know what a catch is, and now this. Hello NFL, check out the stands in nascar. Too many rules changes that are arbitrary, too much money involved, too many egos involved.

Ratings down?

Reap what you sow, I guess.

of course that call was wrong. it was terrible

That's been a real problem with defensive players we've drafted high...

I think the Browns really got that one right. I know it was a pretty obvious pick, but for a franchise that really needed it, they nailed it. Hopefully they do him right and continue to build an elite defense.

It's nice to have a guy on the team where you really want to focus your attention to. I find myself looking where 95 is lining up, and seeing what kind of damage he can do.

What would be really nice is being able to get this defense some leads, and seeing what kind of real damage Garrett, Peppers, Ward, and some of these other guys can do when they absolutely know the other team has to throw. Late in games, when players are worn down, it could get real ugly. I hope we can put some points on the board. It was amazing what Garrett could do late in that game when we did not have a lead, he just wouldn't stop.

Yeah Hue said it best in his post game presser. He didn't believe in the Garrett hit either and even said others. Nor did I.

It's a cluster indeed, not just for us either.

It was. I understand the intent of the rule, but it should have to be very obvious that the defender tries to elevate and then drop. If you just hit a guy and drive through him, like Garrett did, there is no way that should be a penalty.

Sometimes I think the refs don't consider that, even though Ben is a QB, he's 6'5" 250... Garrett is 6'5", 270.. that's not that big of a difference. It takes a man-sized hit to take Ben to the ground. I can't count the number of times I've seen defenders just try to grab Ben and have him spin out of it and make a big play..