DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The Pressure is REALLY on Tucker

I expect Rogers and Williams to do for our DL what Thomas and Steinbach did for our OL.

I still don't think we're done upgrading this D...I'm talking draft day trade. Savage seems to be going all-in on this year like a man posessed, that and stuff I've been hearing on the radio makes me not cancel my day 1 draft day plans.

Oh and Vers...I know you keep saying you don't think people appreciate what Thomas has done enough. I have to respectfully disagree on that subject...everyone I talk to grins with excitement when they talk about big Joe...and that's even the casual fan.

It's also easier to key on Joe than on Pool over the TV, cuz you rarely get to see the safeties in coverage when you can watch an OT block on every offensive play.

Passan said this and he is absolutely correct...We will see many 4-3 alignments...And if Tucker's smart...Offensive Lines will have one helluva time figuring out who's coming where...

One of the things that must be done is change how they rush the OLB's..especially Wimbley..

If you've noticed they'll place McGinest all over the place and you never know where he's coming from..with KW..HE'S USUALLY on the weakside..with his hand down on..never standing up..hardly ever moved from one side to the other..
Teams will still know where he's coming from if they continue to do this.

Williams can go inside or out...Rogers can go inside or out...S. Smith can go inside or out...And as Passan suggested...How bout Wimbley with his hand down...The possibilities are endless...This is gonna be real interesting...

With Rodgers...it's all about attitude and desire..not about talent..I saw him in Detroit..when he wanted to play he couldn't be blocked...
If he really wants to play his impact will be seen immediately..
Williams is in the same boat..he's a run stuffer and can rush the passer..

My concern are the LB's and secondary...interesting but I don't know why I keep seeing the Eagles come to mind when I visualize our defense..

A few points:

--nc........it's true, if Peterson stays healthy, he might go down as one of the best RBs of all-time. On the other hand, I think Joe will go down as one of the great LTs of all-time. And if I had to choose between an all-time great LT or RB.....the LT wins. There are very few good LTs at any given time. There are always a slew of quality RBs. Give me the rarity. Joe Thomas is the rare find.


--Staying w/Joe..............Ammo, my point is that a lot of what Joe does for us is not something we can see w/our eyes. It has nothing to do w/his one on one or zone blocking. It's what he allows this offense to do. We ran formations and plays last year that we would have never dared attempt in the past. And no, it wasn't because Chud came in here. It was because of Joe.

Pool? Have you taped any games? If so, go back and watch some of them. Count how many times that Pool ever enters the screen. And if he does, how many times he is on the perimeter of the screen and is absolutely no factor in the play. Then........compare those numbers to Jones. And to make it very fair for Pool, only count the plays where we were in a two-deep or Cover 2. Let me know what you come up with. ............. I bet no Pool fan gets back to me on that one. *L*


---nc again: I think it is stretching it too far if you are comparing Williams and Rogers to Joe and Steiny. It's not a huge stretch, but it is a stretch. Let me try to explain:

Williams will be a huge upgrade at DE, and yes, he can even shift to NT for several snaps a game. I think he would wear down at NT if he had to play there too much, but he can be effective spelling Rogers, who will most certainly get winded and tired.

Rogers plays a very important role in the 3-4. And if we do run some 4-3, Rogers and Williams give us a very strong middle. My problem is that I don't see this guy staying in shape and being the factor that many think he will be. He has a history of being fat, lazy, out of shape, soft, a big baby, and a malcontent. Yes, he made the Pro Bowl twice. He is a guy w/unbelievable talent and he will make plays through the course of a season. He will make enough to get noticed. However, he will also hurt and compromise your defense too. He is the proverbial mixed bag. I still like the trade, because we desperately needed DL help........but he is not going to be as good as Joe was last year.

Furthermore........even if those two guys somehow make the contributions that Joe and Steiny did..........this D still won't be as good. The talent on the defensive side of the ball is just not as good. Many of you are raving about DQ, but I don't think he played better than Davis last season. And many of you want to run Davis out of town. *L* Methinks some of you see what you wanna see sometimes.


---Joe Haus: I agree w/you. That pressure up the middle will help big time on third downs. I also agree that our linebackers will be freed up to make more plays. I still think we are hurting at OLB and FS. Additionally, I think it is very risky to go into the season w/two second year corners.

This defense still has holes. Now...........stop and take a minute to think about why I am bringing all of these up before you guys get mad and question my love for the Browns....or even more importantly in your eyes........my loyalty to Savage and his ability to work miracles. Ask yourself why I am bringing all of this up? Think about the article that started all of this.

Guys.........heads must roll if the expectations exceed the ability of a team, or in this case........the defensive unit. The likely candidates are:

1. Andra Davis: It will be ALL his fault if teams still run the ball on us.

2. Tucker: It will be said that he wasn't ready to take over the coordinator position and that we should replace him w/someone who has experience as a d-coordinator on another team.

3. RAC will be criticized roundly because he was a former d-coordinator, yet his defenses in Cleveland have consistently "under-achieved." He will already be getting a crap-load of grief for not giving BQ a "fair chance." And what this organization needs now is continuity.......not upheaval.

As I said before..........I think the defense will be improved. However, it was a terrible unit that needed multiple upgrades. Two of those areas were upgraded, but a few have been unresolved. I think we should expect improvement, but let's give Savage another off-season to bring in more parts before we expect this defense to be a good defense.

Nah..........just 93%.

It won't be extremely hard to see where the weakness will be .
Even though these new guys will have to play together, the talent level has been upgraded..so the line will be scrutinized and backers will too..
At least for me, I'll be able to see what's what..

If the line plays weak..I'll see it..if the backers are the weak link it will be shown.

I wonder how much of our defensive improvement near the end had to do with scheme changes vs. bad weather, bad offenses and bad conditions.

I think it's something in between. The unit wasn't as bad as it was at the beginning of the year but not as good as it "looked" at the end. I expect us to be in the top half of the league though. Not top 10, not top 5, but top half of the league.

My thoughts may change on this if we pull off a big trade on draft day and draft a pass rusher and a DB. I think we're that close to going from average to good, then add an ILB next offseason and we're set to go.

Why do I keep seeing the weather used a factor why the defense improved??
It's a small factor in one or two games..but it never had the impact as people are trying to push out there.
It was more of defensive adjustments to what was exposing them in the early part of the season.

Quote:

---

It won't be extremely hard to see where the weakness will be .

---

LOL............There are weaknesses on this defense, rather than just a weakness.
And if Rogers doesn't change his ways, there could even be more weaknesses.

Quote:

---

And if Rogers doesn't change his ways, there could even be more weaknesses.

---

isn't it a little bit encouraging that the last report I read had Rogers showing up to off-season work-outs in pretty good shape?

I guess I am just always trying to see the bright side

The weather was a huge factor. Teams could not throw the ball in that wind. Jets, Bills, and Bengals. Three terrible weather games. Wind is the toughest element to overcome.

LMAO at the "defensive adjustments" angle. Dude, you act like you know a ton, but I wonder if you have any clue at all except for what you read on the pay sites. Defensive adjustments? Tell us........what were they? Can you name a single defense? Can you name the blitz packages? The coverages? Get real.

And before you go off about me attacking you..........everyone knows it is me who has brought the weather angle into play. So, if you wanna trade bullets....let the gun fight begin.

The weather was indeed huge in making our D look better. You can't throw effectively in the wind. I bet I can guess why you don't really wanna acknowledge this factor though. *L*

The second part of our D looking better was the fact that we played a bunch of teams who had QB problems in the second half of the year. They were either: too young, too old, or never-was. Teams like the 49ers, Jets, Bills, Cards, Texans, and Rats.

Finally, our offense became more conservative in the second half of the year. Teams schemed to take away our big plays. We started pounding the rock more w/Lewis. This chewed time off the clock and helped our field position. Games were more conservative in nature and airing out wasn't the way to go for either team.

Combine all three factors and you have your answer. That "defensive adjustment" crap is a joke. It has always amazed me how so many "adults" buy into the conspiracy themes around here.

Dude, I am hoping he is in shape too. And perhaps I was projecting some of my feelings on the majority. I have been assuming that he would be a HUGE upgrade. Perhaps other people aren't doing that. I don't know.........

I don't need to justify any of my comments to you.
This is too funny..the only pay site I ever had was the Sporting News..and I ended that years ago..

U always seem to comment about people attacking this person or that..always that from you.
Why U worry about that is beyond me.

Tell us........what were they? Can you name a single defense? Can you name the blitz packages? The coverages? Get real.



FYI..you aren't the only person in here who knows anything about football and/or coverages..we discussed coverages/schemes in here since I can remember so I don't have TO PROVE anything to you..

You're not the authority in here..no one is..and I SAID the weather wasn't as big a factor..three games with bad weather do not a season make.

When you can't throw, you run the ball more..if you can't stop the run..you're in trouble anyway..right??


If you're annoyed about what I post, well dude, you know what you don't have to do

I do need to address this..

Finally, our offense became more conservative in the second half of the year. Teams schemed to take away our big plays.
Thats VERY HYPOCRITICAL of you..U said a while back THAT never happened..Teams never schemed our big plays away..and when I and a few others said it you wanted to argue it..
Did you shed any knowledge about WHAT SCHEMES were being used against us when that was brought up to prove it wasn't being being done?

Nope..all you could say was DA was never schemed from going deep..now you spout it like it's a fact..why?
Did someone else change your mind..or you really didn't know? :

Now you say it and its a fact..Because Vers says so?

GMAB..find something else to fuss and complain about..seems you like to do that a lot anymore.

That "defensive adjustment" crap is a joke.
So are some of your posts..I'm sure in a short time you'll reverse it and claim weather had little to do with it..
Now before U tell me to never again to respond to U..just remember who inititated this skirmish..willynilly:
This place keeps me laughing..

Quote:

---

I don't need to justify any of my comments to you.
U always seem to comment about people attacking this person or that..always that from you.

---

Aren't you the one who said that the weather wasn't that much of a factor? I'm saying it was. I give reasons as to why the defense seemingly improved in the second half of the season. You give .....the above.

Quote:

---

FYI..you aren't the only person in here who knows anything about football and/or coverages..we discussed coverages/schemes in here since I can remember so I don't have TO PROVE anything to you..

You're not the authority in here..no one is..and I SAID the weather wasn't as big a factor..three games with bad weather do not a season make.

---

Never said I was the authority. What I said was that you act like you are an authority and your posts reflect something quite different.

Oh, and three games in the second half of the season do tell a lot about the second half of the season. *L* We WERE talking about the second half of the season.

Quote:

---

If you're annoyed about what I post, well dude, you know what you don't have to do

---

I wouldn't say I was annoyed. I just don't like it when people try to pass BS off as the truth.

Quote:

---

Thats VERY HYPOCRITICAL of you..U said a while back THAT never happened..Teams never schemed our big plays away..and when I and a few others said it you wanted to argue it..

---

I asked how did you guys know. And I followed it w/the point about our run game improving because of it.

Quote:

---

GMAB..find something else to fuss and complain about..seems you like to do that a lot anymore.

That "defensive adjustment" crap is a joke.
So are some of your posts..I'm sure in a short time you'll reverse it and claim weather had little to do with it..

---

Yeah Attack. I'll reverse it. And the Sam is an Inside Linebacker too.

Oh......wait a minute.......did you answer one question about those "defensive adjustments?" Or, did you just try to shift the attention away from you onto me? Hmmmm........oh yeah.............you don't have to justify any of your comments to me.

Was the weather bad in all 8 GAMES?
No..try something else man.

Oh, and three games in the second half of the season do tell a lot about the second half of the season. *L* We WERE talking about the second half of the season.

3 games in a eight game stretch in terms of bad weather don't tell the whole story..because even in bad weather other things can and do happen.
If you want to strickly debate about pass defense thats different but I'm not talking about just pass defense..
Get off it..the Bills/Bengals game are the real games anyone can speak about weather..

Oh......wait a minute.......did you answer one question about those "defensive adjustments?

Why don't U go dig up those archived posts about thje adjustments they made???

Is this your invitation to try and feed your ego to see if I know anything?
If you're hungry go think Arby's
Try that on some weak unknowledgeable poster.
Like I said..I don't have to prove anything to prove to U..
In the course of a discusson I don't have a problem talkin about schemes be it a stack-cover -odd man front- whatever..
But to just do it to so U can see if I have knowledge is rather silly..

Quote:

---

In the course of a discusson I don't have a problem talkin about schemes be it a stack-cover -odd man front- whatever..
But to just do it to so U can see if I have knowledge is rather silly..

---

It was in the course of discussion. You were the one who criticized those of us who said the weather was a factor. You said that was not true and that it was about defensive adjustments. In turn, I asked you........what defensive adjustments? How is that not w/in the course of discussion? Instead, you responded that you didn't have to justify yourself to me. *L*

Now............I gave you three legit reasons why the D "looked" better in the second half of the year. I still maintain that it is a combination of the three.

If you wanna educate us w/your vast knowledge of defenses........please do. I for one, would LOVE to know how our schemes were way different in the second half of the season as opposed to the first.

No it wasn't ..U added that to try to discredit me because I said it WASN'T AS BIG A FACTOR as some claim it was.
And it wasn't.
Weather was not a factor in all the games after the bye week.

It was fact that the coach said players were out of position and doing things they were not capable of..and U don't need a pay site for that.

All anyone had to do was watch and see the odd man fronts that began to show up..and the schemes were utilizing what they could do..not what they unable to do.
The safeties were not being positioned the way they were beforeand it showed..
So they weren't getting beat over the top like before.
That had nothing to do with weather but what they were asked to do.

If you wanna educate us w/your vast knowledge of defenses........please do. I for one, would LOVE to know how our schemes were way different in the second half of the season as opposed to the first.
This ain't a circus debate for onlookers..no you don't love to know anything..only thing U want is to see what I know ..or rather IF I ACTUALLY know anything..which actually I do..

Shark boy..and what guppy might U be??
FYI little fish, that 0tech with McGinest was used quite a bit in certain phases of the games as they got more creative with the alignments.

Oh.............I think Shark is more than a guppy. In fact, I think he knows quite a bit about football.

At least you actually used some football talk in your last post.

I disagree w/you that the weather was not a factor. I also think that we played a bunch of stiffs at QB in the second half. Furthermore, I think our offensive playcalling had a something to do w/teams not scoring as much in the second half. In conclusion, I believe that the combination of the three were all important and I think the "defensive adjustments" are a misconception that was fueled by a couple of guys who work for pay sites and the fans that believe everything those guys say.

I do think we cranked up the blitz more in the 2nd half of the year. I could have sworn we did.

But some of that may have to do with facing crappy QB's, since blitzing will harass them since they inherently hold the ball and don't handle the rush well.

The thing with us this year is that our d-line might actually be able to provide some pressure themselves. We may not even have to blitz a ton to get to the QB unlike other years. Don't get me wrong, I like to blitz, but it won't be nearly as necessary to do so this year. I'm liking it.

You found a way around that issue.

I'm smarter than I look..... THANK GOD

I think that its pretty hard not to be.

Good point