|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
Quote:
Wow... really? This might be the most desperate attempt yet on your part to make others as miserable over the Browns as you seem to be. The Browns dominate the defending Superbowl champs and all you have to say is that we only won, in part, because Drew Brees' mind was on his newborn son instead of his job (for which he is paid serious coin to focus on when gametime comes around)?? Unreal.
Where would your mind be? Any good father worth his salt's mind would be racing and clearly distracted from his job be it football or whatever else it is for a short time after such a life changing event happened in his life. If Brees WAS NOT distracted because of it, then he wouldn't be human. Its only human to be distracted because of something like that.
I don't hate the Browns, and I am not trying to drag anyone down...but it is one of a few legitimate reasons Brees may have not played as well as he normally would have.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
Quote:
They rushed 18 times for 58 yds. with a long carry of 8 yds. That a 3.2 yd per carry average.In my opinion when you go down 20-3 you have to start throwing the ball.I see no indication that contuing to run the ball would have led to the Saints winning the game as they scored 0 points on the ground. And saying that Brees having a new born child is why we won is laughable.
Thats still no reason to panic and go into all out passing mode and attempt nearly 60 passes...there was plenty of time for the Saints coming after halftime to run the ball...they were only down two scores and a field goal..3.2 yards per rush isn't all that bad..had they stuck with their running game and scored..sudden;y they are only down 10 with plenty of time left in the 3rd plus the 4th quarters...its not a stretch..considering our Offense did nothing most of the game...
regardless im just happy to win..I just hope folks don't get too overly excited...I would love to beat the Pats as much as anyone else, but no way Bellichik makes the play calling mistakes Payton did...its also doubtful Brady throws 55+ times or throws a bunch of INTS
regardless, I am enjoying the win for now.
I will say...if we find some way to beat the Patriots...my tune may change from "same old Browns" to "hey wait a minute..we may have something here" If we can beat the Jets the thoughts of playoffs and my old happy self concerning the Browns just may resurface...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
Might be a little off of the current conversation ... but because the Giants have put Matthias Kiwanuka on the IR, and he will be a free agent ... what do you guys think about adding him? Fairly solid pass rusher .. only 27 (which is bout 5 years younger than most of our starters on the dline and some lbs ... ) And in 4 seasons + 3 games this year he has 55 sacks .. I would definately like to bring in a guy like that especially because he has solid production it seems, but he also has pass rushing ability to go with his youth.
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,217 |
He's the sort of guy that would be an outstanding add as an OLB for us. If we can get one like him and one stud ILB, we'd be world's better..... whether or not we truly need it will be clearer at the end of the season, however. The reason I say that is because the way the guys are playing lately vs how they were at the start of the season is already significantly different, and I expect to continue to see improvement. Based upon that, it's hard for me to say with certainty that OLB is a Need... but yes, Kiwi would be a nice addition for sure. Of course, it also remains to be seen whether or not there will even be a season next year to worry about signing him for 
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 65
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 65 |
Quote:
Quote:
Wow... really? This might be the most desperate attempt yet on your part to make others as miserable over the Browns as you seem to be. The Browns dominate the defending Superbowl champs and all you have to say is that we only won, in part, because Drew Brees' mind was on his newborn son instead of his job (for which he is paid serious coin to focus on when gametime comes around)?? Unreal.
Where would your mind be? Any good father worth his salt's mind would be racing and clearly distracted from his job be it football or whatever else it is for a short time after such a life changing event happened in his life. If Brees WAS NOT distracted because of it, then he wouldn't be human. Its only human to be distracted because of something like that.
I don't hate the Browns, and I am not trying to drag anyone down...but it is one of a few legitimate reasons Brees may have not played as well as he normally would have.
Maybe Holmgren had this planned all along....Man he is smarter than we all thought...  
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I prefer to look at yards per game AND points per game and put them into some context.. yards per game (gained or given up) can show how efficient/effective you are at moving the ball up and down the field and preventing your opponent from doing the same.... points per game shows how good of a finisher you are and how opportunistic you are... points per game, to me, is important because it more directly affects your record but considering yards per game is an indicator of how accurate that points per game is and how likely it is to continue... does that make sense?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
it does, but if you are going to look at yards in context, then I think you need to focus on YPC and YPA rather than Yds/Game.
that will tell you how good the offense/defense was and how efficient they were without as much having to directly do with how good the other was (for instance if the offense goes 3 and out every time, then the other team gets a lot more plays. but, if the defense keeps them to good yards per play then they did a good job anyway)
i'd add in turnovers too, but I think you could pretty well figure out those based on a combination of the other 2 stats (if you gave up big yards per play but didn't allow scores, odds are that you created some turnovers)
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum So close to having a top defense.
