DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Interview Knapp for OC

Do I hear whinning before this all shakes out? <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />
[color:"red"] How many years are you willing to give the FO to acquire offensive talent [/color]

Hmmm not trying to be smart but have not U read the posts?
We already have the players for all the pieces EXCEPT the Oline..and regardless of the scheme its going to take a few seasons to get top quality players to fix all our holes ANYWAY..
Quit boo-hooing before this even gets started..

LOL, two years...man they should be ranked 1st in defnese by now... <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />


Talent and depth dont' happen in two seasons bud. We had NOTHING sans Adra Davis up front to fit the 3-4

"We already have the players for all the pieces EXCEPT the Oline"

Says you.
We have Winslow,who will be a great player in any scheme.And we have JJ and possibly Droughns.I only include them,because they have been in the WCO before,not because they're great players.
If you guys could get away from your 49er's fantasies for awhile,you might realize that if this move is made,we've wasted the past two years,and this regime doesn't have that luxury.That's what I've been trying to say.
Oh,you can take that boo-hooing and stick it up your ass.

The past two years of what?

Great offensive performances? <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

The offense is TERRIBLE, let's give it some identity....

Passing on 3rd and 1....running screens on 2nd and long. <img src="/images/graemlins/plthumbsdown.gif" alt="" />

[color:"red"] If you guys could get away from your 49er's fantasies for awhile,you might realize that if this move is made,we've wasted the past two years,and this regime doesn't have that luxury [/color]

Oh then refer to me as WALSH then ..O.K? <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />
If U come out of your cry me the blues mood why not tell me what we've done offensively in the last two years?
Did it ACTUALLY look like we had a offensive plan?
Do U really think a lot was done in that time span?
You've spent the last several [posts whinning about the wasted years, getting all upset and yet U haven't laid down ONE FACT about what was wasted...

[color:"red"]"EO...so you place Davidson ahead of Knapp?"

[color:"orange"]Not so sure its cut n dry like that.

I saw execution positives out of Davidson. I also think a major, major reason Robo, Coates n Crennell III were shown the door might have been is cause the resisted Davidson and were Mo believers as there was a rift between Mo n Davidson.

I think its Davidson's job to lose - Knapp might be one of the few, few options that could sway Savage - RAC n Co.

But unlike the media who almost gasped when Savage said they were serious about hiring Davidson...I like Davidson. I would like to see him in complete control of the offense beginning to end. And FIX it starting with the OL. The media thinks they know all. They are simplistic. We didn't score so Davidson sucks. Then we will got through one OC a year...it aint the OC. But what it is needs to be fixed Davidson is ahead of the curve in identifying the talent here and what needs fixing.

Also as Savage mentioned we need a LEADER...I think that was what was missing most from MO he stunk as a leader. Knapp is a good pick cause I think he could garnish the respect needed to Lead.

Ummm...yeah think maybe Davidson is possibly a very talented coach. After all he has been coveted.

believe it or not some coaches are actually qualified. You want a better OL.
1. get better OLmen
2. have them sit in one place long enough to be coached...its called continuity.

JMHO

Paul Brown's Offense. it was ran here way before it was ran on the west coast <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> B

Actually we have wasted the last 4 years. Butch should have been fired after the 2003 season lol. Romeo should never have been hired in the first place. Hiring Knapp would be a good move.

The only fact is that we have benn horrible the past few years,we all agree on that.
You have the opinion that changing to a WCO would benefit the existing players,I donot.
Edwards runs bad routes,and has suspect hands,the wco won't help that,in fact it would magnify those problems.That's more of an opinion than a fact.
CF is not a very accurate qb,he has trouble hitting recievers in stride,the wco doesn't fix that.That's an observation of mine,not neccessarily a fact.
The one point I have been trying to make is this;
Changing over to wco will take more than one season.RAC doesn't have that,he doesn't produce next year,he's gone.If the plan has been to go the wco all along,then it should have been done last year or the year before.We have wasted the past 2 seasons and destroyed any chance of success RAC could have had.
Now that all my tears have had a chance to dry,let me ask you this,how many wco teams have beaten the ravens or the steelers recently?

Yes I do have that opinion..the offense gets a identity just like the D is a 34 .
This scheme spreads the D out and doesn't require long vertical passes..it is a offense that goes 5 -10 yards a pop..
It is also one the Browns can run out of if they get athletic blockers..
I've already stated what Frye has to improve on or he wouldn't survive in it..HOWEVER that doesn't stop the Browns from bringing in a QB who can flourish in it.
Edwards..he has to be able to adjust ..hey if the hardhead gets his fundamentals down and concentrates on running precise routes and not shortarming catches he can be productive in any scheme.
U say it should have been done a year or two ago..

Wow thats new to me cuze Mo was running something else..guess no one told him to runa scheme to take advantage of Dilfer/Frye..
HE'S GONE and they want a distinct gameplan to spring life into a medicore offense.
As far as the Browns running this against Pukesburgh and the Rats..that might be even better..it won't allow them to just JAM the middle and blitz us like crazy..they HAVE to respect the open seams over the middle..

your ? was how many WCO teams have beaten the teams in our division lately.

Just this year Denver beat all 3 and Atlanta and Tampa beat Cinci.

A little of subject here but, it sounds to me like we may have a prototypical WCO guard on the team already..

Fred Matua

Scouting Report

STRONG POINTS
Matua is a good athlete with the ability to get through the line of scrimmage to block linebackers well on the second level and can pull to lead block effectively on outside runs. Has the natural strength to drive defensive linemen down the line and can torque defensive tackles off their feet on straight-ahead run blocks when he gets aggressive. When he pass blocks with knees bent and punches defensive tackles aggressively, Matua has the strength to hold his ground against power rushers. Does a good job of sliding side to side to adjust well in a small area and shows alertness to switch off well with the offensive tckle against stunts and loops.

Article written before last years draft
http://colts.scout.com/2/520534.html

Fred Matua: "This Ain't No Walk in the Park"


Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images By Todd Taylor

Posted Apr 14, 2006

USC offensive guard Fred Matua is ready to do whatever it takes to succeed at the pro level. Learn more about his love for game and the fire that burns inside him on the football field.


USC offensive guard Fred Matua decided to forgo his senior season and enter the 2006 NFL draft. His decision is easy to understand when you realize all he has accomplished during his three seasons with the Trojans.

Aside from being a member of the 2003 and 2004 USC National Championship teams, Matua blocked for three Heisman Trophy winners: Carson Palmer, Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush. Matua admits he enjoyed Bush receiving the Heisman last year a little more than the others. In fact, he mentioned it as the achievement he was most proud of during his collegiate career.

“For a running back to get the Heisman, I think that speaks for the offensive line. A quarterback has to throw to someone so some credit could go to wide receivers, but when you’re talking running backs, he can’t run through holes unless he has a good O-line to open it up. That was a testament to our playing abilities,” Matua said.

At 6’3, 306 pounds, Matua could be considered undersized for an NFL guard. He makes up for it with his agility and quickness. Matua ran his 40-yard dash in 5.04 seconds, a remarkable time for an offensive guard.

“My ability to be quicker than the defensive lineman has been something that has been the key to my success…more so this year than ever. If you look at tape, there have been a lot of bigger guys that I’ve gone against, guys who were 6-foot-6, 300-plus, and the key for me has been to be quicker and beat them down quarter after quarter until they quit,” he said.

Offensive guard is his listed position, but Matua can also play center and is a very effective long-snapper. He played center during several games his junior season at USC, and some draft experts could see him playing the position as a pro. Matua doesn’t care where he plays, just give him a helmet and pads and he’ll be happy.

“For me, I just want to play. If they want me to play center, I’ll play center. It really isn’t a big deal. I just want to get in there and see what the team needs. If the situation tells me to play center I have no problem. If they want me to play guard, wide receiver, quarterback, whatever man…I just want to play,” Matua said.

Matua is hard to miss on the football field; he is well known for displaying his passion for the game. Sometimes this is done through celebrations, screaming or one of his favorite pastimes – trash talking.

“Some people think that trash talking is left to the defensive guys. I just feel that if you’re going to go against me you’re not just physically going against me, but also mentally. They have to be ready when they get beat to hear what I have to say…it’s not pleasant. It’s just something they have to go through; this ain’t no walk in the park or catfight. I’m coming out there to take some heads off,” he said.

Matua was among 19 draft eligible players that took part in USC’s pro day, and his performance was one of the highlights. Gil Brandt, NFL.com senior analyst, said of Matua, “For a guy over 300 pounds to run a 40-yard dash in a theoretical time under five seconds, he made a lot of money today and will shoot up draft boards.”

Matua believes his passion for the game will lead to a long, successful NFL career. “Beethoven knew how to play piano, scientists do their thing, teachers know how to teach, I feel like I just know how to play football and I love it. The key is, the love of the game is what keeps people in it and I have a love for the game that is very strong,” he said.

"Wow thats new to me cuze Mo was running something else..guess no one told him to runa scheme to take advantage of Dilfer/Frye.."

That is exactly the point I have been trying to make.
If the intention was to become a wco team,then it should have been implemented in the beginning,not in year 3.

I was being sarcastic <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />
It should be obvious the OC calls his gameplan and WCO wasn't in Mo's book but it's in Knapps..

Once more I don't need to get into sematics but the availablity of coaches was limited by the time Rac came on board..and the guys he selected weren't under that kind of scheme..
I want U to tell me WHAT was our scheme these last two years?

[color:"white"]
Not much has been done to try and stop Vick once teams realized he's never going to be a good passer. Teams have tried to stop their running attack, but have had little success in doing it. When teams have beaten the Falcons, they've stopped the run. To suggest that teams have allowed the Falcons to run the ball at will because they've chosen to focus on Vick isn't viable.

[color:"white"]

That's where the misconceptions show up.

The WCO isn't a "pass-first" offense. It uses the pass to control the clock, but it isn't a pass-dominated offense. That's a myth, and I'll tell you why that myth exists. Now there are some coordinators that CHOOSE to pass more than run, Reid is an example of that, but that doesn't mean such is the way the offense is supposed to be schemed. In fact, ever since Marty Morningwig took over the playcallilng duties from Reid, the Eagles have become a well-balanced offensive team, despite having Garcia back there.

One offensive theory is to pass to set up the run. Many of the old WCO dynamics such as scripting the first dozen or so plays is designed to open with the pass to set up the run. If you were to go back through history and look at the WCO teams, they run the ball as much as any offense, and in many cases, more.

[color:"white"]

Hardly. Vickers and Droughns both are the kind of back that are well-suited to the WCO. There isn't a specific type of back that is required which isn't required in any other offense. In fact, to be a WCO back, you have to be able to run, block, and catch, and those are things that Droughns does well. Same with Vickers, who isn't a one-dimensional FB.

Furthermore, if you're a good receiver in this league, you're a good receiver. Winslow can be a TE in any offense, and if Edwards is ever going to get his head on straight, he'll be good in any offense. We're going to have to overhaul the offensive line anyway, and we're going to overaul the offensive scheme anyway, so regardless of which direction we go, change is not only required, but inevitable. Furthermore, Shaffer succeeded in the WCO, so it can be argued that he's going into a system he's familiar with, which should help him. And since we're going to replace our guards anyway, replacing them to fit one offense is the same as finding guys to fit another.

Switching to the WCO is nothing like changing to the 3-4 since we have guys in place allready that can plug into that system.

[color:"white"]

They are going to have to start over anyway. The WCO, while more complicated, is a better offense. I see no reason to dummy-down an offense just to make a transition easier. Besides, the FO has interviewed Knapp. That tells me they are willing to make such a change. Maybe they won't go to the WCO in the end, but since they are considering it, well, they are considering it <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[color:"white"]

We missed the boat with Garcia, and miss the boat we did. We brought him here with the promise that we'd switch to an offense he's used to. Butch said he'd bring in Walsh to install the offense. He lied. Garcia was hung out to try. His attitude went South, as did the attitude of the fanbase. We had a good QB on our roster and we soured the milk. We're going to have to bring in a veteran at some point, or draft another guy. One way or another, we can't go into the year with Frye and Anderson as the 2 guys. I'd moaned several years ago when we went into the year with Couch and Holcomb on the same roster that it would implode, and it did. I'm now arguing that going into the year with these two and nobody else is a disaster waiting to happen. One way or another, we have to have a veteran QB or a promising youngster. Frye is on his last chance and Anderson isn't an answer.

Besides, regardless of what offense we change to, we'd need another QB anyway.

The bottom line is that we're switching systems. We might as well switch to one that's a proven winner and brought in by a proven guy. We have receivers and backs that can thrive in the WCO (don't forget, Droughns was in a modified WCO in Denver as well as in Detroit), and it's the only offense that Frye can possibly succeed in. Switching to that offense is as good as any other, and the transition isn't any harder when considering the personnel.[/color]

j/c:

I don't know if the WCO, or PBO as Mourg correctly calls it, would be a good move or not. And I won't make [censored] up. I will try to think on the run though concerning the possible move to the WCO.

But first........I must address a few things.

---For those of you blasting BCbrownie........his opinions are just as valid as yours. Believe me on that. Some of you ALWAYS seem to think bringing in new coaches will magically fix the team. Guess what.......it hasn't yet. So, don't get all indignant when someone questions the move.

---danglet.......I actually think Quinn would be better suited to the WCO than Russell is. By far.

---DC...........you're right, Savage and company will have a "new" ready-made excuse when the O sucks next year.

---tab........I agree, Garcia can run the WCO very well, but no way he comes back here after the unwarrented abuse he took.

To the WCO itself [if we decide to go that route].

[color:"white"] Positives: [/color]

+ K2 would excel in this offense, provided he learns the plays. He would run a lot of routes across the grain and he would be on the move.

+ Charlie might do pretty good in this offense. His mobility and being able to throw on the run would work. He would also be forced to get rid of the ball quicker.

+ JoeJ would be a good fit in this offense. Cutt would too, but we aren't keeping him.

+ Fraley has played in it and played well. He is very active and would prosper, provided we resign him.

[color:"white"] Negatives: [/color]

- Leon doesn't really like going across the middle and the wide receivers do need to run crossing routes.

- Leon and K2 didn't learn the current playbook in 2 and 3 yrs. respectively. How can they learn a more complicated playbook in a few months?

- I don't see Droughns as a prototypical WCO RB. Perhaps that is why Denver cut ties w/him after he put up 1,200 yds and replaced him w/unknown backs?

- Frye's accuracy problems would be a negative.

- The current OL is not nimble, other than Fraley. These guys need to be able to move. Lighter, quicker, more agile offensive linemen fit the WCO, not the plodders we have.

[color:"white"] Summary: [/color]
I think it will take time to get the type of players we need to effectively run the WCO. Will this regime have the necessary time to acquire those players? If history is an indicator, then one would have to say....no.

I want to add that some people think that the WCO is becoming a dinasaur. I don't know about that, but let me ask...........how many of this year's playoff teams run the WCO? I know Philly does. Who else? It's a legit question and would like an answer.

Finally, I really don't know if the WCO would be a good fit here in Cleveland or not. I'll keep thinking about it and will consider all input, provided it isn't slanted.

I recognize sarcasm when I see it,no matter how weak it is.(insert middle finger graemlin here)
Its hard to say what we have been running,it would be easier to say what we are not.We're not a smashmouth team,we're not a verticle team,and we're not wco.
I don't think you have to be any one thing.Take a few elements from all 3,execute them well,and call it what you want.
As far as coaches being available,maybe maybe not.He found a DC to run the 3-4,surely a wco coach had to be available.That's speculation on my part,and I would have no idea how to prove that one way or the other.

Oh.....I forgot to mention. Leon runs terrible routes. Always has. That is a no-no in the WCO.

I should clarify something. I am not saying we shouldn't bring in the WCO. I'm just trying to look at it and see how it matches up w/our current roster. For all I know......it might work here in Cleveland. I really don't know.

Vers, no ones bashing BC..but he 's reacting like the sky is fallin gif that WCO is installed..fact is we'll be starting over with a new scheme anyway..it was stated that when Garcia was here that SHOULD have been the scheme run to suit his abilities...yet no one complained at how complicated that would have been or not..
Now it's too complex to impliment?
No its not...they need to start somewhere and I see no problem if they GET IT RIGHT.

BC, you're right we haven't been ANYTHING..so how is this going to hurt? <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

well, the roster would be the only determining factor... I highly doubt that there is any valid case where it wouldn't work in Cleveland because it's Cleveland.

As far as the roster goes though, I think any scheme that hasn't been in place for 5 or more years is going to have players that aren't perfect fits... I think that's just the nature of today's NFL. Braylon.... he's probably not (currently) a prototypical fit for this offense, but K2, JJ and Wilson should do excellent (correct me, but I believe Wilson was scouted as having been a good route runner...if not, disregard).

Not every piece has to (or is going to) fit perfectly... I think we could do it, but I also tend to think with more emotion than merit when evaluating the team.

Good post vers

One thing with BE if he is ever gonna learn to run a freaking route this is the system where u either run it right or you are on the bench. There is no in between.

I think more teams run this scheme than most think. Saints, Seahawks, Eagles, Jets all run a variation of the offense. Some are more run oriented where others are more pass oriented.

Hell at times we run a bit of it as do the Bengals and Steelers.

It isnt a cure all but at least it gives us an idea of what we need. We would come into the draft and free agency knowing that we need mobile OL guys that have that quickness to slide and block.

I would be just as happy with a run the ball 60 times a game as long as we make a real commitment to do doing it. Know what you want to do and get players to do it.

Not sure why you typed that in response to me? All I talked about was the roster. <img src="/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />



I understand that. It is why I mentioned how long will this regime have? That's another legitimate question. Speaking of legit questions.......anyone know how many of this year's playoff teams run the WCO? I am curious about that.



As is your right to do. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Thanks.


Yeah.......the Seahawks definately run the WCO. I forgot about them. I know the Jets used to, but I thought they got away from it this year? I knew the Eagles did. Saints? I don't think so.


One more thing I should mention. I realized that I listed more negatives than positives, and I really am not against it. Just cautious. But, I will add another positive.

+ Provided Leon runs the correct route and runs it precisely and catches the ball.........he can run very well after the catch. He could break some long runs after the catch.

I think you missed his point on Vick.You don't play the Falcons.You play Micheal Vick and the Falcons.Human nature being what it is,the defenders are playing with half thier attention on MV,and the other half on thier individual assignments,as a result not doing a good job on either one.
Our gameplan was successful,because it gave the responsibilty of stopping Vick to one guy,Leon,allowing the other defenders to concentrate on stopping the remaining players.

In answer to you question Vers. I think that Denver, Philly and Seattle all run some form of the WCO. I think those are the only ones in the playoffs. It could be argued that teams like GB, Atlanta and to a lesser extreme SF just missed the playoffs. I would say that would indicate that the WCO isn't necessarily a dying bread.

Your right the real problem would be the personel. The way I see it the O-line would have to be addressed anyway no matter what O they decide on. That would leave me wondering about Leon (as you refer to him) and the QB. As stated above Droughns and Vickers are exactly the type of backs that you would look for. Good runners,blockers and recivers out of the backfield.

Actually I think BE would be a pretty decent fit in this offense.

Yeah he drops balls and sometimes lacks concentration, but what gets a WR with concentration problems focused? Getting him the ball early and often. The WCO would do that trying to establish the short passing game early.

Yes we have plodding guards, but they won't be here. Fraley and Shaffer played in the WCO in Philly and Atlanta. Tucker, if he comes back, would still be adequate in such a scheme.

Whatever happens, happens, but Knapp is the best candidate out there. Everyone knows the Falcons passing issues were due to runningback Michael Vick, and he has the credentials from San Fran to prove that.

Good post. You should post more. You are fair and have knowlege.

Yeah, I forgot about Seattle. I have to say that Denver did not make the playoffs this year.

I think Vickers might do good in the WCO. I like his skill set. I still don't see Droughns as a WCO type of back though. <<shrug>>

Your right Denver was meant to go in the list of teams that missed the playoffs.

As for Droughns he probably isn't the ideal fit but like I said in a post earlier. I've been watching the Packers for years and Droughns reminds me a lot of Edgar Bennet who was the back when the pack won the Superbowl. He would probably be a better FB in the system but would be an adequate back none the less. RB is also a position that we need to address in the future anyway regardless of what offense we run.

Well taking the current playoff teams of
San Diego - Schottenheimer / Cam Cameron
Baltimore - Billick
Indianapolis - Dungy / Tom Moore / Caldwell
New England - Belicheck / Weiss / McDaniels
Jets - Mangini / Schottenheimer
Kansas City - Edwards / Solari

Chicago - Lovie Smith / Ron Turner
New Orleans - Sean Payton
Philly - Reid / Morhinwig
Seattle - Holgrem
Dallas - Parcells
NY Giants - Coughlin / Hufnagel

According to the Bill Walsh chart below, the Paul Brown Offense is still running with the following playoffs teams:

Baltimore
Philly
Seattle

Billick runs the WCO, eh?

Billick = Baltimore = Savage.

The plot thickens further.

I think it'd be a good idea IMO. Guy has decent credentials... and we're not promoting a guy to take over... he's already been where he's been. But this being the Browns... people start yelling that they don't want a OC who's been promoted to the position... and when a good solid one is being talked to. They suddenly don't want 'em.

Thanks Shark for the info. I appreciate it.

I am not trying to be a smart-ass, but Baltimore's offense doesn't resemble the WCO at all, in my opinion.

Again..........I'm not dissing the WCO, but we should consider all the variables before we hook our wagons to it. For example, when I view a scouting report on a player, I ALWAYS look at the player's negatives before anything else. Some of those negatives are legit, some are not. But, I do know that the negatives are usually the determining factor in if a player makes it......or not.

Thanks again for the chart. That was cool.

Good post. One thing is we need to sign Fraley, because he is nimble as vers said to do the job. But do not forget about Schafer whos was at ATL, during Knapps tenure. So 2/5 of the line complete <img src="/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />, three more to go.

Based on what my perception of the WCO was, I didnt see Baltimore's offense as such either.

However he did fit into the tree apparently and must have taken something from his days there. I was surprised to see his name there. <img src="/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

That's why many preconceived notions about the WCO are myths. You can play smashmouth ball with it, you can throw downfield with it.

I didn't realize Baltimore ran the WCO either, I might add.

The Ravens aren't a wco.Rhodes,Lewis,Siefort and Fisher were defensive coaches,its stretching things to have them on the list.Wasn't Sean Peyton with Denver last year?He should be on the list.
I was under the impression that only 3 teams run a pure wco,Philly,the pack and seattle,could be wrong.

I thought he came from the Bill Parcells family tree. You might be thinking of Gary Kubiak?

The myth could be that they run the WCO.

Oh......and Shark, that comment was not intended to be disrespectful to you. You posted a fact. And I tend to agree w/you, perhaps Billick still implements some aspects of the WCO, even if he isn't currently running that style.

You're right,that's the guy.He's not there either.

I listed the saints because of how they use Reggie Bush and mix up the short game with a lot of the crossing patterns. Now as they grew more confident in Brees they began to go to more verticle.

I know its off the subject but did they give Brees a bionic arm in surgery. The guy has twice the gun he ever had before.