DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Dorsey and Freddie

Before we made any of our offseason acquisitions, I was looking at the teams we play this coming season and saw little reason we couldn't get 12 wins.

With the acquisitions, primarily the defensive, I think it is an exceptionally realistic goal; not "expectation", but goal.

Best time to play them. Hope it's true and I will be there...

Like I said, when I first heard it might happen, I was excited for it,,, if you wanna be the best, you gotta beat the best,,, they are the best.

Oh that sounds great in theory. But let's touchdown back on planet earth and think that process through.

We are a very young team. We will have a new DC, a new OC and a new HC. This group in all likelihood should get better and form cohesion over the course of the season. The system will take some time to be fully implemented on both sides of the ball.

So is the first game of the season really the best time to play against SB winners and the best team in the NFL? Really?

I agree to be the best you have to beat the best. Bet let's not fool ourselves into believing we will be ready for that challenge game one.

I think a far more realistic goal would be to once again start the season against the Steelers. It's a better chance for a victory which a young team could feed off of and a division win to start the season off right.

A loss against the best team in the NFL does nothing positive. It is an unnecessary risk to take that early on.

The Rams were mired in mediocrity and worse. They went 4-12, and fired Jeff Fisher. They then hired Sean McVay, and went 11-5 and 13-3 ... and went to the Super Bowl.

The Colts went 8-8, 8-8, and 4-12. (with an injured Luck) Last year they brought in Frank Reich, and went 10-6.

Teams turn things around all the time. The Browns actually started this process last year with the additions of Baker, Chubb, Ward, Avery, Landry, Randall, and Robinson, (who was an important add) and then this off-season we have already added some major talent, and we haven't even hit the draft yet.

It is getting harder to bump starters out of place on this team. We will probably have more draft picks sitting this year ... only playing special teams, or situationally, as opposed to jumping into starting roles.

I can see 4 spots that could see rookies challenging .... LT, OLB, SS, and CB. More likely than not, though, they will start as backups, working in specialized roles, and perhaps becoming starters down the road. I know that some fans will go nuts if we don't have a couple of starters out of this draft, but that really isn't realistic anymore. This is a young veteran team, that learned how to win last year. I look for them to make a big step forward this coming year.

What does any of that have to do with starting off the beginning of the season playing the SB champs? You are seriously missing the message here.

So are you saying our young team, with a new HC, a new OC and new DC, a QB staring less than 16 games, wouldn't be better prepared and have more continuity in week 12 than in week 1? Because that's all I'm saying here. And anyone trying to say otherwise has seriously flawed logic.

NOBODY can try to make an argument that an entire new coaching staff having such a young team wouldn't be better by week 12 than they would in week 1 under those circumstances. It's common sense.

I thought that the numbers were insanely high; we are stacking up talent like cordwood and the youngsters will be "seasoned" (pun intended). I am excited to play, and I believe you might be right on the money.

Hope you are right. And, ye gods of pigskin, I love that kinda talk. Just win, baby. This group can find a way to win many more ways than last year's club IMHO.

You go, Purp!

If you have a destination in mind, you need to set the road map.... In order to figure that out, you need to know where you are starting from.

Yeah, I'd like them to play the Pats first. I don't expect to win, but I'm thinking it would be competitive.

That can lead to learning where we are weak and we have time to fix it.

So, while we don't agree, the bottom line is we both want the team to improve, we just disagree on how to view the climb

How did the Pats start off last year?

Well, they were 1-2 after 3 games. Then they went on a tear.

We have a real advantage in that we are not completely starting over with a new coach. Freddie was already here. His offense will still be here. Sure there will be some new pieces, but the bulk of the offense isn't going to change.

The defense will be different, and we have added a couple of new pieces, but they are veterans. Both guys are naturals in the 4-3. We have a lot of veterans on defense. While they will have to learn some plat call language, I think that veteran players usually do that fairly quickly.

We will also have extra training sessions.

I am not worried about the team somehow being a shambles in week 1. I think they'll be structured, and ready to go ... especially on offense. On offense, the biggest changes will be the RG, OBJ, and our 2nd TE. The offense will still be, at the very least, based strongly on Freddie's offense. Barring injuries, they should be ready to hit the ground running from the 1st snap.

The Pats usually start out slower then they finish. Would you rather face them in game 1, and maybe steal a win, or face them in week 16 or 17, when you need to win out, and when they typically have hit their stride?

You crack me up. You talk about the Pats but refuse to talk about how much more ready we would be to face them later in the season.

Nobody said anything about them being "in shambles". I'm just telling you that even a small child can figure out that such a young team with an entire new coaching staff will be far more competitive later in the season than in game one.

I'll just back off now and let you keep drowning yourself.

You talk about "an entirely new coaching staff" .... but that's not true.

Freddie has worked, and succeeded with this offense. He will still be the primary designer of the offense, and the play caller. We still have our WR coach. We have added an incredibly respected OL coach, and a successful OC, who will contribute to, but not run, the offense.

On defense we brought in Wilks, who is also a respected guy. He's a change, no doubt. However, our defense wasn't all that good last year, and we will have added at least 2 very important pieces to the defensive puzzle, in Vernon and Richardson.

As important as adding pieces is, we have not really lost much in the way of starters. We traded away Zeittler and Peppers, and cut Collins. Of those, only Zeittler is a big loss, and we have a plan in place for that spot. Many team lose a number of starters. Last season, the Pats had no real idea who their receivers were going to be, and they had a number of real questions on their roster. It's not like our situation.

I would also just add, as I have to get out the door, but the Pats routinely have to replace coaches, because they often get raided for their coaches. They just reload, keeping enough of their scheme that players are not thrown into chaos trying to figure things out. Wilks uses a very attack oriented scheme. I don't think that there will be much confusion when he tells the DL "Get him!", as he sends them after the QB, play in and play out.

j/c:

Y'all argue a lot.

And this one isn't even a good one.



It makes zero sense on many levels. Freddie has never been a HC before and that's the only string he can hang from.

I've known YTown since Jesus was a corporal. I'm pretty sure he doesn't take it personally.

I am not going to disagree. My only point is we have to have realistic expectations for what our O can do. We aren't simply going to have to pour on the points to win. I am somewhat concerned with the D's ability to limit points.

and you know who the head coach was EO - that's right, Mangenuis.

Most of Belicheck's assistants who became head coaches have done pretty good against him. Vrabel, Mangini, McDaniels, Patricia. O'Brien and Crennel not so much

Mangini was the biggest turd to ever reside in the Browns head coach office... it is that simple. The tore down the roster and replaced it with aged, slow, good character guys that would carry his water bottle. And he was a scumbag.

I agree 100%. Had we stuck with Mangini, I have no doubt we would have started winning and probably gone to the playoffs. Lerner wanted instant results, but Mangini knew he needed to get the team in position first. A 1-11 was the catalyst for changing of the guard at the top. The hiring of Holmgren was the absolute worst thing this franchise ever endured. Despite the Patriots and New Orleans wins, if we had to go through that experience again, I'm not sure I could handle it...

That seems a bit harsh. Chud was by far the most incompetent coach and it's not close.

Mangini's problem IMO is that he never developed his own identity as a coach. He was trying to be Belicheck.

Also, he's a guest on some sports talk shows occassionally. He's completely out of touch with today's NFL.

Yeah as Eric M needs to transfer to being a broadcaster. And does seem out of touch as he is old school.

I hope we don't regret not giving Williams the HC gig.

I think we would have regretted giving him the job.

The day they announced the hiring of Mangini,I burned,or destroyed every piece of Browns crap that I owned.It took several years before I could stomach that pile of steaming dawg crap called the browns.
Mangini is a despicable human being,plain and simple.

That formation you described is called the Swinging Gate.It was part of the play book of every wing-T offense.I'm sure that idiot Daboll appreciates you giving him credit for it.That will be the only time someone credits him for anything.

Charger called him a scumbag. You called him despicable. Are you guys referring to him as a coach or did he do something off the field I don't remember?

I should have not said anything.
There was an incident with someone who was dear to me while he was with the Jets,that he could have handled in a mature fashion.Instead,the little fat sawed off blob had to whip out his Napoleon complex,which is his way of over compensating for a little pecker,to prove to everyone in the room that he's a big tough guy.
Go Browns

Maybe you should just tell us how you really feel?

Yeah, that was over the top.

.

Whoppty hell, Kitchens new catchphrase.

It describes the struggles of trying to keep a $300 car running.

I think I butchered the spelling. Whooptie hell. He was talking about how good the roster is on paper for those who didn’t hear his presser

Anyone got a link to the presser(s) ... it would be appreciated if some one does ....

LETS GOOOOOOOoooooooooooo