DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2020 NFL Season Looking Back: Browns 6 Raiders 16 Post Game

I think you are one of the guys who try to be objective in your analysis along w/guys like oober, Tru, Cap, etc. So, I want to run something by you guys just to give you something to think about and watch for as we navigate the remainder of the season.

It's two-fold and involves both lines. I will start w/the DL.

I think we saw Ogunjobi getting moved on some of LV's running plays, but let's look at a bigger picture. What was our fear [both fans and coaching staff] coming into the game. Woods talked about having a plan to stop Waller. Many of us talked about it leading up to the game. We feared Waller and then Ruggs over the top. How do you slow that down? The obvious answer is to drop your linebackers in zone coverage and also commit at least one safety to cover the intermediate middle of the field. So, what area of your defense is compromised when you do that? The obvious answer is stuffing the run because you are outnumbered up front. My conclusion is that while we need more productivity and toughness on the DL, the bigger culprits are the linebackers and safeties because they are not adequate in either defending the pass or stopping the run w/a larger emphasis on their inadequacies in the passing game.

The second part involves the OL. Comments have been made about us not getting a push. However, the Browns have faced more seven man fronts than any team in the league. Teams are stacking the LOS because we were leading the league in rushing for most of the season. The question is how do you defeat loaded LOS boxes? I think our passing game needs to step up and make the opposing defenses pay for committing so many men to the box. That should open up the running lanes again. Do we have the right guys in place to be a good passing team?

Something for some of you to ponder...

Your point about our defense’s focus is really valid. We certainly didn’t want to let Waller and Ruggs beat us, which makes sense. You gotta pick your poison.

My only gripe would be that, IMO, we needed to adjust after the game had started. The weather and THEIR game plan were both well known. Short, quick passes and the run game. I don’t think Gruden trusted Carr yesterday any more than we trusted Baker. I would have liked to see a bit more of us making them beat us through the air once the variables were known.

I don't disagree with anything you say. I do have one question, though.... It's truly an honest/sincere question, but at the same time I think you can see where I'm going with this.

If our Oline/RB is truly a strength, wouldn't we be able to still run it some even with them dialed up to stop it? If so, are we really that banged up to where our strength isn't one until we get people back?

I, personally, don't buy the explanation that Chubb coming back will cure all (or even most) of our problems. His backup is a rushing title holder that is still in the midst of his prime years. We've lost 1 guy on the line. OBJ being out also frees up some defensive attention, but we've still got guys that can get open and do damage.

Thanks Vers. Those are good lines of thought. I'll attempt to tackle them both:

On the DL and the LBs: Like you, I think they are both at fault. My inference from reading your post (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are putting more onus on the LBs than the DL. I think I put them more on level ground in being at-fault. Like you, I imagine that Woods' initial plan was to stop Waller and Ruggs over the top. Oddly enough, on a couple passing downs, I think that plan was executed well. I remember we showed blitz and then only rushed 3. I think the play either ended in pressure on Carr and either an incomplete or near-INT. However, I have to imagine, in light of the weather and the early successes that the Raiders had running the ball, Woods adjusted his scheme to focus more on stopping the run. In that scenario, we saw the DL get pushed back with LV's OL at the second level within 2 seconds of the snap, which was just demoralizing. I do not think that that LB's are great in either coverage or stopping the run. In this case, however, they had very little help from the DL in terms of eating up blocks.

I feel like we have DTs who are more "penetrators" when it comes to attacking opposing OLs. They aren't adept at taking up blockers. I felt like what I saw yesterday was the Raiders running a man-blocking scheme that squared up with our DTs and pushed them back. Once the RB made it to that level, the OL had already started taking on the second level of our LBs who also struggle with shedding blocks.

So, to answer your question on the first point, I think the initial scheme was the zone that you had described, but that had morphed due to the weather and due to the Raiders' early success running. When the Raiders did pass, we saw them exploit weak links like Takitaki and Sendejo, almost as though Carr's reads involved looking for either one of those two.
Sadly, I don't think we were able to execute either our coverage or run-stuffing effectively. So, pretty much the entire defense, except our outside corners failed at what I would say was an equal level of failure.

To your second point, I think our OL - outside of Wills - did a fine job yesterday. I definitely think we are at the point where defenses have adjusted to our early running success and our passing game needs to step up. The drops yesterday killed us. I will never even pretend to be a better play caller or scheme developer than Stefanski, but I would like to see us take more advantage of the defenses honing in on the run. More boot legs and more quick play action. More RBs coming out of the backfield and/or screens. We just struggle to get into a rhythm there. It seems like we were hitting guys in some of the intermediate routes, but they just dropped them.

I would like to focus on scheming for more 5 routes to Higgins and PA 1 or 2 routes to Landry to try and get into a rhythm. Also some 6 routes to our TEs, like the one Njoku dropped yesterday that could have really helped. Getting defenses to creep up on the run and then executing those routes I think would go a long way to getting a balanced, effective offense that keeps the D more honest. Those routes don't take an excessive amount of time to develop and our OL has shown, on average, that they can give Baker all the time he needs to hit those receivers.

My thoughts are somewhat jumbled in my head trying to break all this out. If we keep the convo going, hopefully I can continue to lay them out more clearly.

To your point, I think one of the most dominating things a team can do to another team is run the ball when the other team is expecting you to run it and scheming to stop it.

I still think you need to have some element of a passing game to keep the other team honest, though, for those times when your run game isn't as potent as you want it to be. If your run scheme is effective against 7 or 8 in the box, keeping the defense honest in terms of playing the past would make your run game an even more potent threat.

He had the ball in his hands both times...until he didn't.

It's easier just to say he dropped them though.

I would hope the one where he got sandwiched in mid-air doesn't count as a drop. Baker got him crushed.

The diving one in the endzone that was reversed was a ball that Landry catches (and secures) usually. Dude is getting paid the big bucks for a couple reasons, and that's one.

The first one was totally a drop.

Thanks for responding w/a thoughtful post.

Browns gotta start getting off the field on 4th down this season. Opponents 13-14 now.

I think Stef just couldn't figure out what we could do decently in that weather against that team. Success on anything we tried was very hit & miss, and unfortunately, just a couple of misses - or a couple of ill-timed penalties - in that weather is a killer.

We couldn't get any consistency at all and then the defense did us no favors.

Typically, this year, the defense has been good for coming up with at least one turnover or more. Stopping a drive and turning it into an opportunity for us. That didn't happen yesterday.

None of our playmakers made a play.

Everyone, raise your hand if you expected them to convert that 3rd & 18.

(yeah, yeah, they had to convert the 4th & 1, but close enough)

One he did a full extension jump to get, one he got speared in the back of the head.

Great post Vers.

I was one of the ones who thought Waller was going to have a career day. I noticed that we did contain him a lot better than I expected, and forgot to mention that in my post-game thoughts. Thanks for the reminder.

In taking away that threat, it makes sense we exposed something else. We are not at the level where that won't happen. Stop the biggest threat and try to deal with the next.

and, I quote myself from another post: "opportunistic hot garbage"

When they stop getting takeaways, they're just "hot garbage".

That's a great point (as someone else also said) about focusing on Waller and co. I forgot about that.

Where else was Baker supposed to put the ball in that wind tunnel? Jarvis had both hands on the ball...until he didn't. That's a drop.

He's Jarvis Landry...not Damion Ratley...he needed to hold on to the ball. We see stud receivers make that play all the time...we see Landry make tough catches all the time...but he did not on those two plays...and it was very costly.

And no...I do not want to trade him.

The answer to your first question is to someone else, or through the goal posts. Landry was all kinds of covered.

The 2nd drop, IIRC, was double coverage, and while Jarvis had both hands on the ball, the DB reached up between his hands and dislodged the ball.

When Porter Gustin is your highest-graded D player... that just about sums it up right there (I like him, but he's a backup).

I think Vernon's grade is inflated from his 2 sacks. Didn't those come on the same drive and I believe that drive still ended up netting the Raiders a FG.

I know Ogunjobi isn't playing well, but that grade is BAD.

Curious how Landry graded out. Thought Mayfield might grade out a little higher.

I don't know why anyone ever punts against us. Wait, they don't ...

Ooof ... not a good look for Larry O or Mack Wilson or Wills

I thought Mayfield put that pass where Landry got crunched the only place he could have. I recall another TD on that exact same play where Landry made the catch, but that was without 2 cracked ribs. The other diving catch that got overturned was a catch, period, and should have been upheld. Great catch, great throw. Refs hosed us.

And that pretty much mirrors my post game thought.

I think most realistic fans were thinking the same thing before the season. I think we knew the defense was going to have a higher learning curve than the offense as well (regardless of injuries). How poorly the defense has played...well, I know I was sort of crossing my fingers that it wouldn't be quite this bad.

I guess this is why I'm not terribly surprised or outraged about yesterday. It's played out about the way we thought it would. At least for me.

Hell, I'm just glad that we're going to have 16 games this year. I was a bit more pessimistic about that than anything else.

I know that we were "built to win now" on offense in particular. But, still too many pieces missing in other facets of the team.

What does bother me (and has since the return, as many other posters have stated) is that we truly lost our identity as a bruising, tough home field team in '96. Yesterday's loss was a reminder of that.

Throw was where it needed to be. Landry has to make that catch.

The first hit the ground and moved - no catch.

I didn't see it move. I think its a catch, at the very least as much of a catch as Renfrow's TD. The NFL is wearing me out with these endless reviews involving what is a catch and what isn't.

We make those catches we win ...

PFF considers five drops for Browns. I’m willing to bet they weren’t counting the second ball in the end zone.

Drops by players

Landry 2
Hunt
Njoku
Janovich

The Njoku one was the worst IMO ... and I forgot about the Janovich. It was 3rd and long and actually a good playcall with a convoy in front

The NFL screwed up the whole catch thing with their stupid interpretation of what constitutes a catch. Hits the ground but receiver possesses and does not move, but does not use the ground to assist in the catch, makes a football move consistent with the game, blah, blah, blah. All crap.

Simply put, it should be like baseball. If the ball in any way, shape, or form hits the damn ground, it is NOT a catch. Brown on ground = no go at this station. Easy, peasy.

The overturned Landry TD was by far the worst.

both were killers.

Choosing which was worse fot that game is like trying to decide which is worse for dinner; cat feces or dog feces.

There is no choice. One was a TD that would have given the Browns the lead.

To claim that a first down drop is in the same category makes no sense.

The dropped interception should be in the running.

It was a way tougher catch though. Yes, he could have caught it and looked like he did. But Njoku’s was to extend a drive and all but guarantee us points. When he dropped it our chances to win decreased significantly. At least when Landry dropped it we still tied it

.

We will have to agree to disagree on many counts.

The most worrisome thing about that loss is that they manhandled us in the run game.

That is why we lost.
The Njoku drop lingers, though. That was not clutch. The total opposite of that, and btw did we trade him yet?