DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns reportedly outbid for Pierre Garcon and Josh Morgan

Look, the truth is probably closer to the middle ...... with some fault falling on the receivers, and other fault falling on the QB.

That being said, it is unlikely that every receiver is at fault on every play ..... and that really is what a lot of people seem to be playing as their ace regarding McCoy. "All of our receivers are just so bad that he can't help but struggle". That's almost certainly not true.

People started out on the OL ...... and how we need Steinbach back to have a good line ....... then the Browns let him go. (as I predicted they would)

Then people started blaming the lack of a running game, until it became obvious that the run game is more of an accessory in the WCO ....... then that argument quietly melted away as well. (and no, I am not saying that it is not important, it is just secondary to the passing game)

Now people are on the receivers, and they can't let go because it's the last remaining argument.

I look at how we played last year and it seemed like Shurmur really went pass heavy to start the year ..... and most likely because he really did trust McCoy, and he also wanted to force the development of the passing game. It looked like it might work in the first couple of games ..... receivers were catching the short passes and working them into 10-15 yard plays ...... but the deep opportunities on the outside were being ignored. Then defenses started cheating to take away the short passing game, or at least bottle it up, and left 1 on 1 on the outside. Shurmur saw that we weren't taking advantage of those 1 on 1 opportunities, and then we tried to go back to a run heavy offense ........ but then Hillis got sick .... then hurt ....... and it was just downhill from there.

The bottom line in the WCO is this though: everything starts with the QB. The QB has to make proper decisions as far as where to go with the ball, and he can't ignore 1 on 1 chances in order to follow some other progression which will be, by nature of the coverage faced, be covered.

I have read so much on the WCO since we installed it here, and it's not just a throw short deal. It is an offense meant to try and create a mismatch, and exploit it.

Those mismatches are not the underneath passes against zone. Those are the fallback options. The 1st read underneath stuff are the one on one slants, and other passes where the QB hits the target while getting to full speed, against that one on one cover. Against zone, the trees can be different ....... but again, there is generally a hot in every play, and often that hot is based on single cover on the outside. Most successful WCO QBs can hit the passes to the short and intermediate levels with strength and accuracy, inside and out. If the receiver on the outside is single covered, for example, the team may run a hitch. If that ball is thrown on time against single cover, it is damn near unstoppable. There are other routes like that against single cover that are simply almost impossible to stop ..... if the QB throws the ball.

This is largely why certain QBs bring their receivers up with them and other don't. If you have a Peyton Manning, for example, he is going to see that single, know that his receiver is supposed to run a 15 yard hitch, and that's where that ball is going. The receiver isn't running that route, stopping, waiting, waiting, and then having the ball come his way while the DB is now running at full speed waiting to kill him. That's the difference between this offense running as it should, and running as it is. That's why I say that it has far less to do with the receivers than with the QB. The receiver has to know that "If A, then 1, if B, then 2." Pretty straightforward stuff. usually it's just as simple as if zone, then run this route to this point and set down. If man, then run through this point on same route. So, if the receiver looks up and sees the CB parked on top of him he runs a slant down the field. If he sees zone, then he runs a slant to a spot just beyond the LB, and settles into that zone, waiting for the pass.

This is why I don't think that the fault is mainly on the receiver end of things. If the slot is covered zone, then he runs a little slant to the middle of the field and settle into the zone. if he is covered man, then he runs a slant through the middle of the field, looking for the ball while he's in motion. He might even be the primary read in that situation. These are not complicated equations. For the most part they are "If A then 1, if B then 2" type stuff. There may be a separate decision if a man is the hot blitz receiver.

So, these receivers are not being asked to do 10 different things on a particular play. They also are not being asked to consistently do things that require spectacular physical ability. That's why a team like the Colts can plug in B level receiver talent and have them be successful. They don't need super speedsters, or receivers who can win tremendous 1 on 1 battles all over the field. They need precision, and an ability to make a simple read more. (and yes, I know they have had Wayne forever, and while he certainly has a big place in their offense, having him didn't help when they lost Manning for the year last year)

Anyway ...... that's my take on this. I do wonder sometimes why I even bother typing this stuff out, but I feel that I should continue to try and explain why I think what I do about the team, the QB, and the WRs,

Yup, I agree that the truth is more in the middle than all on one side or the other.

Quote:

---

That being said, it is unlikely that every receiver is at fault on every play ..... and that really is what a lot of people seem to be playing as their ace regarding McCoy.

---

I don't think anyone said that EVERY receiver is wrong on EVERY play. I don't think anyone on this board said that McCoy is without fault either.

What most of us feel/think/believe or what have you, is that you take a rookie that was not supposed to see the field his first year. but, injuries force him into the lineup. he plays well enough to think there is hope for him.. Not enough to call him elite or anything mind you, but that there is hope. A reason to think he could be that guy..

Then you fire the HC, most of the staff. Hire a new HC, new staff, no OC and after about a one day or two meeting where you are handing a playbook, the NFL locks you and all your teammates out.

As the designated starting QB you try and get guys together to learn what you THINK the coaches are going ask you to do, but no real coaching from coaches.. Self coaching isn't anywhere near the same...

In the real games, some things are very clear,, Colt diidn't always know what to do. didn't know where to go, what to look for.. Clear as can be that he struggled.

Add in a RB by committee and not exactly lighting it up, receivers that, as you agreed, didn't always do what they were supposed to be, and weren't always where they were supposed to be.. and what you have is an offense that looks like it's being run by the three stooges (maybe the 11 stooges even)

If you can accept three things as possible then you may see what some of us have been saying..

1. No off season when your changing everything isn't going to make you better

2. For all the good effort, if you don't completly have command of the offense, you can't run it as it's intended

3. The obvious inability to catch passes that land where they are supposed to and the inability to have any semblance of a consistent running game.

Add all that to everything new, and you can see where maybe,, this could be a better year if they add the right folks at the right place.

And before you say it,,, Yeah, I'm a glass half full kinda guy.. and I'm damned proud of it.

And Ytown thought the WRs would be the final excuse.

Just kidding.
Those are valid reasons.I'm sure if someone where to have the energy,he could shot some holes into those as well.I'm not that person.
As with all good debates,some people will never change their opinions no matter the facts.

Here's another problem I had with McCoy .....

If you look at his final 3 games of the year, they were his worst 3 games of the year.

You would think that he would get better as the year went by ........ if a big part of the problem was that he wasn't able to learn the offense in the off-season ........

However, he actually seemed to struggle more and more as the year went by, as the line got better, and running game was relied upon more than it was earlier in the year ........

His final 3 games looked like this:

Cincinnati: 16-34 (47%) for 151 yards, 2 TD 1 INT
Baltimore: 17-35 (49%) for 192 yards, 1 TD 1 INT
Pittsburgh: 18-35 (51%) for 209 yards, 0 TD 2 INT

That's not acceptable QB play, especially when he should have been starting to "get it". he played his worst when he should have been getting the offense down.

He had Watson for all 13 of his games. Watson was lost in the game against Pittsburgh.

He had Smith for all 13 games. Smith was lost in game 14 of the season.

He had Norwood. Norwood was lost in game 14.

He didn't have Hillis for much of the year. However, Hillis did play against the Bengals, and ran for 65 yards on 19 carries. He ran 12 times for 45 yards against the Rats. He played against the Steelers, with marginal effectiveness, as did Hardesty and Ogbonnaya. Together they only totaled about 80 yards on the ground against the Steelers in game 13.

Then we changed QBs due to McCoy's injury, and Hillis exploded with 99 yards against a good Cardinals defense. He put up 115 against the Ravens, in his 2nd game against them in a couple of weeks. He only ran for a very minimal 30 yards against the Steelers, on only 10 carries. The weird part of this game was that the wind was horrible ...... we were in the game ...... yet we threw 41 times and only ran 12 "planned" runs. (Wallace also ran 3 times)

Anyway ..... Wallace played without Watson and Smith, and without Norwood for the final 2 games.

I didn't see a drop off in performance. The Steelers game was played in horrible conditions, and I have no idea what Shurmur was thinking throwing 41 times in that wind swept mess.

Again ... things that give me pause. These are the things I see that cause me to think that McCoy simply does not have the ability to significantly improve ..... because even with every day coaching during the season ... he didn't. He did well against a couple of lousy defenses ..... but he flopped badly against the big boys.

There's an old saying that you're either getting better ...... or you're getting worse. McCoy wasn't getting better late in the year.

So he struggled against the Bengals, Steelers, and Ravens. No one struggles against those defenses!

The Steelers had the #1 pass defense, the Ravens had the #4 pass defense, and the Bengals had the #9 pass defense.

I think we all know how this goes. Ytown is a leopard, and a leopard has spots, he ain't changing his spots

And we played the Ravens and Steelers again ...... the Steelers in a hurricane.

Look, we're going to have to play those team, no matter if they are #1, 0r 31 in defense.

Right. But to use those teams as the example of McCoy struggling is not fair as most QB's struggle against those teams.

But those guys didn't have to come in from the spread and try to learn reads and ......

Oh ..... never mind.

Steve Smith and AJ Green sure help as well... not arguing with ya.... but there's a lot that goes into it...

But the Panthers' defense sucked and they didn't win very many games, so Cam Newton must not have really been that good, right?

The problem is that you assume that Green would have had the same stats here, with this QB.

There is zero guarantee of that.

If the players were reversed, there is also a chance that we could be sitting here with people complaining about us taking Green, and him only putting up 700 yards, while the Bengals took some guy named Little who put up 1000 ......

Receivers do not operate in a vacuum.

Quote:

---

The problem is that you assume that Green would have had the same stats here, with this QB.

---

No, I wasn't assuming that at all..

One thing you fail to think about is drops.. Green had 65 receptions for over a 1000 yards.. If little hadn't dropped so many balls, he may have had similar numbers. (can't prove that of course, but I think it's reasonable)

Quote:

---

If the players were reversed, there is also a chance that we could be sitting here with people complaining about us taking Green, and him only putting up 700 yards,

---

I doubt that, he actually can catch a ball thrown to him,, Little had some issues with that.. and he was our best receiver last year..

that's pretty telling..