|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523 |
St.Claire is a cream puff with sloe feet.Not exactly what you look for in a guard.
The guy is bad.If he is forced to start anywhere along that line,it will be bad for them and us.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Slow feet is better at guard than tackle.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Quote:
Slow feet is better at guard than tackle.
Now theres a compelling argument ... not sure how anyone can argue with that .. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I finally said something good. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
Besides the Giants game, I have trouble thinking Tucker can still play RT. Sure he was good in that game, but I've been looking back at some old games from the past couple years, and at RT he was beat a lot by speed guys around the edge.
I recall that when he was moved to RG many thought that was the best place for him. IMO if he is as good as it gets at RT we have a problem.
I want him at RG, there he is a beast, I'm just hoping one of the other guys can man the RT spot.
I hope he changes my mind, because looking at these old games, his feet are slow. But, it may have been due to some nagging injury or something else, since he did do quite well against the Giants.
The thing is with Shaffer at RT and him at G, the line was pretty good. If one of these guys can play at least as good as Shaffer, which ain't saying much, Tucker at gaurd would be the way to go IMO.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
despite what some on here are saying.....St. Clair can at least play as well as Shaffer at RT.
Just hope Tucker is healthy enough to play RG because the OL looks better with a healthy Tuck in it...
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165 |
Quote:
I think Mangini and Kok have seen enough to know we don't need any 1 year fixes and only need to look at parts to the puzzle that can be viewed in 5 year chunks.
The last coach to stay HC for five years was Marty from 84-88.. That's 21 years ago...
These guys had better be asking themselves "who can make the team better this year?" because there's no guarantee they ever see their fourth let alone fifth year.
I really have to question this signing. I don't know if he can even make the team. While Jansen has more milage he could have come in and started for us at RT. Our right side is starting to look like Butch's old lines..... And there's no way this roster/team consistantly runs the ball to the right without another starter. JMO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
Quote:
Foster should add some depth and spell the end for Sowells (finally)
Don't be so quick to right off Sowells, he could suprise some people on this board.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850 |
Sorry.. But Sowells is done..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
I believe that St. Clair is a better option, only because he's more versatile, being able to switch from guard to tackle. There's no proof that Shaffer can play guard, and in fact, I never thought he could. I also will favor the upward trending player 9 times out of 10.
That is why they brought St.Clair in because of his versitility...he's more of a drive blocker than Shaffer was..yet his pass protection is just as bad..
I argued for years Tucker is better on the inside..and now in this stage of his career he is...
So I would see the lineup as possibly this:
LT-Thomas
LG-Steinbach
C-Mack
RG-Tucker
RT-St. Clair
You've sealed the rookie with two experienced vets on both his sides...Whatever other bum U name is bench fodder..well experienced fodder...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
With what we've heard about Hadnot taking reps at LG, would it be possible that we could run with a line-up that went someting like this:
LT: Thomas
LG: Hadnot/Fraley
C: Mack/Fraley
RG: Tucker
RT: Steinbach?
I believe that Steinbach has some experience at the tackle position and def has the speed to work on the outside.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165 |
Quote:
That is why they brought St.Clair in because of his versitility...he's more of a drive blocker than Shaffer was..yet his pass protection is just as bad..
Keep in mind that Chicago let St Claire go and "upgraded" with Shaffer. Tough to believe that after a good long look at St Claire that they were so easy to let him go if they saw any "upward trending".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165 |
Quote:
RT: Steinbach?
A 290 lb RT? What is this- 1982 ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Well, didn't Gini mandate that he bulk up?
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936 |
I'm pretty sure Steiny has added at least 10 lbs this off-season. Can't remember where I read it, but I thought it was in some article posted on this board.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
It is "possible" that Steiny plays tackle, but I don't consider it at all likely. You want a big, strong right tackle who is a great run blocker, in other words, you want the Anti-Steiny. Mangini likes big offensive linemen and I think he is more likely to have a small one at left guard, as opposed to right tackle.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
With what we've heard about Hadnot taking reps at LG, would it be possible that we could run with a line-up that went someting like this:
LT: Thomas
LG: Hadnot/Fraley
C: Mack/Fraley
RG: Tucker
RT: Steinbach?
Absolutely not. Mangini was only looking at players at different positons to see what they have..he ought to be looking at Hadnot as backup center..
Did you see Hadnot play?
HAD-NOT ..Hasnot skills to pass protect..will get your QB destroyed...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
But last year Hadnot was surrounded by Fraley who had a very sub-par year, and a revolving door at RT. I think he played well during the Giants game when he had Tuck lined up next to him.
And placed between Thomas and Mack (assuming he is ready to start), he may have a better year. Just a thought.
This is all speculation here, and no one really knows but Gini. I was just thinking of ways to fit this thing together that might contribute to discusion.
I think another possible line-up would put Womack at RT, I believe he started there for Seattle for awhile---and during some decent seasons too.
Then we would be looking at
Thomas
Stein
Mack/Fraley
Tucker
Womack.
The only positions I am TOTALLY sold on right now are Thomas at LT, Mack/Fraley at C, and I see Tucker fitting in somewhere on the right side assuming he stays healthy. But I think those are the only certainties with this bunch as of right now.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Quote:
Our right side is starting to look like Butch's old lines..... And there's no way this roster/team consistantly runs the ball to the right without another starter.
Yes it does..and I don't like it but the only thing is that you hope it holds up and they can get some younger players next year..always next year.. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
That is why they brought St.Clair in because of his versitility...he's more of a drive blocker than Shaffer was..yet his pass protection is just as bad..
Keep in mind that Chicago let St Claire go and "upgraded" with Shaffer. Tough to believe that after a good long look at St Claire that they were so easy to let him go if they saw any "upward trending".
I agree with Attack here.
And realize that we moved first....we signed St. Clair and released Shaffer. Only then did Chicago sign Shaffer.
I know that all the Chicago fans and media want to paint it that they got an upgrade...but they really haven't watched Shaffer in awhile (IMO). I would give a slight edge to St. Clair between the two and obviously Mangini and Kokinis agree (as they had the choice between the two).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
That is why they brought St.Clair in because of his versitility...he's more of a drive blocker than Shaffer was..yet his pass protection is just as bad..
Keep in mind that Chicago let St Claire go and "upgraded" with Shaffer. Tough to believe that after a good long look at St Claire that they were so easy to let him go if they saw any "upward trending".
They didn't let him go. They tried to re-sign him.
Once they lost him, the next-best option became Shaffer.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
Quote:
Sorry.. But Sowells is done..
Sowells can play LT, RT, or guard, and at 6-3 320 has the size. He is going into his 4th year, and he could suprise some people.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558 |
Only if he comes to camp in a clown suit.
#gmstrong
Live, Love, Laugh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
(check)
I got down for would be suprised.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
That is why they brought St.Clair in because of his versitility...he's more of a drive blocker than Shaffer was..yet his pass protection is just as bad..
Keep in mind that Chicago let St Claire go and "upgraded" with Shaffer. Tough to believe that after a good long look at St Claire that they were so easy to let him go if they saw any "upward trending".
They didn't let him go. They tried to re-sign him.
Once they lost him, the next-best option became Shaffer.
The Bears offered St. Clair a 3 year, 4.5M contract. They offered Shaffer a 3 year, 8M contract.
It's pretty clear to me from watching about a half dozen games with St. Clair and a few dozen of Shaffers that the Bears upgraded here rather than the Browns.
Actually I'll now be surprised if St. Clair makes the team now that we signed Foster.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Quote:
It's pretty clear to me from watching about a half dozen games with St. Clair and a few dozen of Shaffers that the Bears upgraded here rather than the Browns.
*LOL* ... bra ... all we did was SWAP CRAP ... there both crap ... they just smell a little different is all ... 
discussing who made out in the Shaff for Suck Claire swap is like discussing who made out in the latest tax hike .. NO ONE REALLY WON .... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
The Bears offered St. Clair a 3 year, 4.5M contract. They offered Shaffer a 3 year, 8M contract.
Right. But you aren't telling the entire story. Your omitting the sequence of events:
February 23: Bears offer St. Clair a contract
March 12: Browns release Shaffer
March 17: Browns sign St. Clair
March 25: Bears sign Shaffer
Using the dollar amounts doesn't tell anyone anything about which guy the Bears would rather have. In fact, since St. Clair didn't sign his offer, the Bears didn't have him under contract. The Browns released Shaffer, so did the Bears drop the contract offer to St. Clair and give one to Shaffer?
No.
Only after we signed St. Clair did the Bears make an offer to Shaffer. That tells me they wanted St. Clair more than they wanted Shaffer. It's a far-better indicator than the money, which is subject to incentives anyway.
Quote:
It's pretty clear to me from watching about a half dozen games with St. Clair and a few dozen of Shaffers that the Bears upgraded here rather than the Browns.
You could be right. I've no qualms with your opinion based on your eyesight, though I think it's kinda like trading one marginal player with another. It's my belief that even though St. Clair is older, he's playing better ball at this point in his career than Shaffer is, which is why I'm happier with the player who's performance has been on the rise instead of the one that's not.
Quote:
Actually I'll now be surprised if St. Clair makes the team now that we signed Foster.
Foster was signed as a backup. St. Clair was signed to be a potential starter. It's possible that Foster's light may finally come on and he beats out someone for a job, but if Foster was viewed as so-much a better player, we'd have gone after him first instead of St. Clair.
Sowells and Hadnot are the guys who need to fear for their jobs. Not St. Clair or Pork-chop.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523 |
"but if Foster was viewed as so-much a better player, we'd have gone after him first instead of St. Clair."
Stop reaching,you view st.clair as an upgrade,fine.Say so and leave at that.
BTW,Foster was on the Lions? roster until recently,making it difficult to go after him.
Shaeffer,Womack,St,Clair,Foster,there're all marginal players.Arguing over which is better is a moot point.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165 |
Quote:
they just smell a little different is all ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 14
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 14 |
I just don't see Foster as an upgrade. Just hope St. Clair is an improvement over Shaffer. We need a solid anchor on right side. Tucker can't be counted on for entire year HOPE I AM WRONG. The guys we signed are journeymen at best. Made we can get by this year. Mangini has made some good moves.
I like Mack as solid starter B/4 the year is over.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
I'd say you're telling your side of the story, all in the realm of looking at it as St. Clair an upgrade over Shaffer, omitting other facts that are important that don't support your case. And that's fine.
Like the fact that the Browns tried to get Shaffer to sign a new contract before releasing him. But whatevs.....
I think you'd have to agree that Shaffer is more physical than St. Clair. I don't think that's debateable.
So that leaves pass protection...something that a lot of Browns fans give him grief about...and somewhat rightly so.
But.........
Do you know how many sacks St. Clair gave up last year? It's a scary scary number.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Quote:
Quote:
Foster should add some depth and spell the end for Sowells (finally)
Don't be so quick to right off Sowells, he could suprise some people on this board.
Sowells surprises me every season.
He surprises me that his ass makes the roster.
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
I think you'd have to agree that Shaffer is more physical than St. Clair. I don't think that's debateable.
So that leaves pass protection...something that a lot of Browns fans give him grief about...and somewhat rightly so.
But.........
Do you know how many sacks St. Clair gave up last year? It's a scary scary number.
I'm not Toad, but I've seen St. Clair play.
I agree with you on St. Clair not being a LT (which Chicago forced him to be). He cannot handle speed rusher...let alone handle them 1on1 (which Chicago made him do often as they liked to use Greg Olsen like we used Winslow).
Ok, now that that's out of the way...I don't know which of Shaffer or St. Clair is more physical because I haven't gone and lifted weights with them. But, I do know that St. Clair has much, much better run blocking form than Shaffer did. He is the better run blocker.
On pass blocking...both of them are poor...Shaffer a bit better, but it is not saying much. Here's the good news though....at RT, St. Clair won't have the other teams best speed rusher as often. And, with all the blocking-TEs that we have on our roster, one would imagine that he is going to get some help.
can't believe we're having such a lengthy discussion on 2 middling OL guys, but I guess it helps pass the time in June.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,165 |
Quote:
can't believe we're having such a lengthy discussion on 2 middling OL guys, but I guess it helps pass the time in June.
You have another part of the roster you want to discuss for the next week or so? Foster, Sowells, St Claire, etc..... Literally half these guys will be cut. Our roster is roughly 90 bodies right now plus ST on top of that. Plenty of these names are going to be gone in 80 days. Here's roughly how our current roster is stacked: (unsigned rooks are + "x")
DB's 14 +2
DL 11 +2
LB 13
OL 13 +1
TE 5
RB 4 +1
FB 2
QB 4
WR 10 (-1 DS) + 2
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
Quote:
Plenty of these names are going to be gone in 80 days.
I think 85 days but who's counting?
Sept 1 is cut down to 75
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622 |
THREE PAGES ON THE FOSTER SIGNING.....
who'd a thunk it???? I'm so ready for some Football and REAL News.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
"but if Foster was viewed as so-much a better player, we'd have gone after him first instead of St. Clair."
Stop reaching,you view st.clair as an upgrade,fine.Say so and leave at that.
BTW,Foster was on the Lions? roster until recently,making it difficult to go after him.
Shaeffer,Womack,St,Clair,Foster,there're all marginal players.Arguing over which is better is a moot point.
Yeah, I did kinda miss the fact that Foster wasn't released until the 1st of this month
Now what's this about saying something and leaving it at that? That isn't how it's played around here.  Moot points are all we have for the next couple of months.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
Quote:
Sowells surprises me every season.
He surprises me that his ass makes the roster.
Like I said he could surprise some people.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288 |
Alright GM...do you know something on the inside? Twice now you've made that post...I hope it is so as we will only be a better team for it. Sowells has bounced around the OL - supposedly as we never really saw the guy in action - and was under the RAC development program.  Was he a LT at IU? It wouldn't be the first time that it took an OL a few years to find his way.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns sign George Foster
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
