ATENEARS Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 It doesn't surprise me that the Run game is struggling ... the writing is on the wall. When Ben Tate suffered a knee injury in the second half of the Season Opener, it's been a miss handling of the position ever since. There was good in getting Rookies Terrance West and Isaiah Crowell some reps, but it has seemed to be nothing but negative vibes from the Browns brass ever since. I was surprised as hell when I picked up the Plain Dealer a few weeks ago and with the running game performing exceptionally well and there was a huge article about how the Browns declared Crowell the starter. I remember thinking to myself, "Why in the world would you start putting labels ("starter" / "back-up") on these two kids in the midst of them doing so well as a tandem?" That was a Huge negative to West and added pressure to Crowell. Why feel the need to declare anything at that point? Why not just ride the good vibe from the position? I do not even think that the Browns ever took the field with Crowell as this newly appointed starter, as Tate returned from injury and now was given the job back. Huge blow to Crowells psyche. It didn't stop there with playing with these young backs minds, as the Browns coaching staff then let it be known that they wanted one of the three-headed-monster to step up and secure the starting role over-overwhelmingly, so that they can toss the other two behind the shed for storage. Negative to West while the going was good he got labeled a failure/back-up. Negative to Crowell as they yanked the floating carpet out from under him when Tate returned. Negative to Tate as since his return the running back position went from the strength of the team to non-existent. Could this position have been handled any worse since about week #3? How about showering the rookies with praise, welcoming Tate back and ease him into the position while positively weeding the others out? How about finding some new roles for each? How about keeping it positive instead of caving into the 'salary game' and 'fantasy football game' where a player needs so many reps and such many stats. How about keeping it as a "TEAM", for the good of the TEAM? Next we will be trading one of them because it is too hard to have three good backs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I don't know how much the backs have to do with it, tbh. Tate had a career day in his first game back from injury, so saying the run game went to non-existant since Tate came back isn't very fair. I think the openings just aren't there like they were before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lodilobo Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 Where was Crowell yesterday? He is the best of the 3, in my opinion. I think he had 1 carry for 1 yard. They could all do well in the right system, but Crowell should be the primary r.b. here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 Where was Crowell yesterday? He is the best of the 3, in my opinion. I think he had 1 carry for 1 yard. They could all do well in the right system, but Crowell should be the primary r.b. here. Not sure, didn't see much of him. He's been our hardest runner I think - but he's gotta work on the fumbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unsympathetic Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 None of this is remotely relevant until next season. Without even a replacement-level C, we have no run game until Mack gets back. Hopefully one of next year's 1st rd picks is OT so that Schwartz is the first backup. Dallas owns the league right now.. bc their OL is dominant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I saw Crowell in there for one play. In any case, the RBs are not the problem. The O-line makes the running back, and our O-line is still struggling since Mack was injured. Anyone who thinks one guy can't make this much difference on the line needs to go back to see how all the Browns players reacted when Mack went down vs. the Squeelers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml1138 Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 No running game at all yesterday. I think Browns got like 40 yards or so? They activated Nick McDonald and put Greco back in at right guard. So obviously the brass has little faith in McQuistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaak Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 Not sure, didn't see much of him. He's been our hardest runner I think - but he's gotta work on the fumbles. He's fumbled once. How does that mean he has to work on fumbles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I mentioned earlier that I thought a 3 RB system could work, but I do agree the way it's being implemented is lousy right now. They keep saying they will go with the "hot hand" but that's no way to build rapport. Ben Tate, as of today, is the best all around back on our roster. If the plan is to run the ball 30-35 times, Tate should get at minimum 20 of those carries. If it were up to me, I'd then split the remaining as mostly Crowell with West sprinkled in. I don't even think West is bad, but Crowell is proving to be better. With Tate on a 2 year deal, there's no reason not to groom both guys now with Tate firmly the main ball carrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 problem is we can't run the ball even close to 30 times because A) the opposing defensive looks like it literally must line up in our backfield somehow because one of em is within ft of the handoff on every single running play. our defense isn't good enough to keep the score low enough to pound teams with the run. It's my preferred football philosophy, build a monster defense and an offense built around 3 yd avg with clouds of dust. But we aren't there yet. If we had a defense that could conceivably hold even the best of teams to 20 or less, than we can think about running the ball 30 times. We can't win with Hoyer having to start throwing deep balls into double coverage early. Maybe when Gordon comes back who knows. BUt not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 problem is we can't run the ball even close to 30 times because A) the opposing defensive looks like it literally must line up in our backfield somehow because one of em is within ft of the handoff on every single running play. our defense isn't good enough to keep the score low enough to pound teams with the run. It's my preferred football philosophy, build a monster defense and an offense built around 3 yd avg with clouds of dust. But we aren't there yet. If we had a defense that could conceivably hold even the best of teams to 20 or less, than we can think about running the ball 30 times. We can't win with Hoyer having to start throwing deep balls into double coverage early. Maybe when Gordon comes back who knows. BUt not now. I'm not sure what games you've been watching, but we've ran the ball 30+ in every game except yesterday, with three games running it exactly 30 times. It sure seems like that's what they want to do. http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/splits/_/name/cle/type/rushing/cleveland-browns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lodilobo Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 None of this is remotely relevant until next season. Without even a replacement-level C, we have no run game until Mack gets back. Hopefully one of next year's 1st rd picks is OT so that Schwartz is the first backup. Dallas owns the league right now.. bc their OL is dominant. No free agents worth anything available? What about a trade?....we could spare a running back. Maybe West....he certainly has some value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manzier Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I don't see the RB's as being mishandled at all. I saw them being the #1 running game in the league. Then I saw our #1 center go down. Then I saw the OL immediately stop producing. So are we saying that, after 5 games leading the league, the coaches all of a sudden screwed up the backs??? Bah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I don't see the RB's as being mishandled at all. I saw them being the #1 running game in the league. Then I saw our #1 center go down. Then I saw the OL immediately stop producing. So are we saying that, after 5 games leading the league, the coaches all of a sudden screwed up the backs??? Bah I think we were mishandling them after Tate's return. While Tate returned as the feature back, initially the backup role was split roughly evenly between West and Crow. Yesterday West was the clear #2 with 8 touches and Crow the #3 with 2 (1 carry, 1 catch). Compare to the JAX game where the touches were Tate 17, Crow 8 and West 6. Both West and Crow talked about how hard it was to stay warm/ find a rhythm with so little work . A clear #2 is how it needs to be. Who it is may vary week to week. As for fumbles... Crow seems to carry the ball more loosely than the other two, i.e., swinging it away from his body more. So far he's only been caught once in a game... so far... But all that said... the real run issue has been the line since Mack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 He's fumbled once. How does that mean he has to work on fumbles? Maybe but he's bobbled balls and got the right bounces. I'd like to see him take better care of it that's all. I think he's earned the spot as #2 over west though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 Kyle Shanahan's zone blocking scheme....the one his dad used to have 1000 yard runners like Terrell Davis, Orlandis Gary, Alfred Morris, etc. etc. may be on the order of the Mike Holmgren/Pat Shurmur West Coast offense. Defenders have seen it so much for so long that they now know how to defend it.....and it is not working. To get the run game going Shanahan is going to have to adapt.....to new defenses.....to running it without his Pro Bowl center. Now, I think, we will see what this OC is make of. He has met adversity. Will he adapt.....or go the route of the dinosaurs ala the Holmgren WCO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcam222 Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I saw Crowell in there for one play. In any case, the RBs are not the problem. The O-line makes the running back, and our O-line is still struggling since Mack was injured. Anyone who thinks one guy can't make this much difference on the line needs to go back to see how all the Browns players reacted when Mack went down vs. the Squeelers. I agree 100%. This is exactly why I get so frustrated when people bitch about 1st round offensive line draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATENEARS Posted October 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I understand Mack's worth to final numbers, but this Topic was about how "negatively" we've handled these guys ... when it was so easy to manage/coach them positively. I coached (baseball) for many years and there is an art to keeping your players "up" and have them playing confidently. It's not an easy task, but the way this coaching staff has approached this position is mind boggling. I understand that Tate was the featured back and had the starting job un-questionably secured heading into the season, and I understand Mack's worth, not just to the continuity of the line and blocking schemes, but to his teammates and locker room ... but how a coaching staff handles situations when those two guys go down injured says a lot and so far it's not been handled very well and it started to go South even before Tate's return and well before Mack's injury. Don't get me started feeding a feud in the press between Hoyer & Manziel and their long-term contracts or not. Complete assine to have that paraded out during the seasons high-peak to date. Professionals? ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwopdog Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 First of all, Im happy to get a win this past Sunday, but unfortunately the way we have been playing against struggling teams is not going to cut it in our competitive division. It's obvious we need to develop a running game to be more of a passing threat. Im angry about the substitution rotation with the backs. What is wrong with Kyle Shanahan if he want to live up to his fathers name, he is not moving in the right direction, Is it me, or people is oblivious to the talent we have in Isaiah Crowell. He runs with great intensity, he carries defensive backs for an extra yard or two. He had 52 snaps gaining 265 yards, averaging 4.9 yards per carry and only took one snap this past Sunday. Whats wrong with Kyle Shanahan we did not win because of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwopdog Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 Where was Crowell yesterday? He is the best of the 3, in my opinion. I think he had 1 carry for 1 yard. They could all do well in the right system, but Crowell should be the primary r.b. here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwopdog Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 I agree, he is the better back, and technically he had 1 carry for 4 yards, he average 5 yards per carry. Im a little angry with Kyle Shanahan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richiswhere Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 Look both Jacksonville and Oakland brought 8 men in the box pretty much the whole game on 1st and 2nd downs at some point Hoyer need to audible out of these runs into some deep passes or your just going to keep running into a brick wall. It will be interesting to see if Tampa does the same seeing as Lovie is a Tampa 2 guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBC mike Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 That is going to be the d we will face for the rest of year. Stop the run. You stop the browns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 That is going to be the d we will face for the rest of year. Stop the run. You stop the browns For the next three weeks ... then we add a weapon as good as any in the NFL ... things will open up big time. Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 Whats wrong with Kyle Shanahan we did not win because of him. I think he adapted well on the fly after we lost Cameron in the 2nd Q. Jim Dray, Gary Barnidge, Austin, Hawkins, Benjamin, & Gabriel are the receiving weapons. Those guys are solid, but certainly not all pros. You and others have rightly pointed out the impact of the Mack injury. Hopefully this week's starting O line is the same as the Raiders game, and we can gain confidence back in running the ball. I think we get down on coaching staffs because we are so used to failure. Give the staff a break for now & see how this pans out in the next 2 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 That is going to be the d we will face for the rest of year. Stop the run. You stop the browns Yea, but that's a good formula to beat a lot of teams. If we keep getting stuck in 3rd and 7-10 in Cincinnati that'll be a long 60 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 Yea, but that's a good formula to beat a lot of teams. If we keep getting stuck in 3rd and 7-10 in Cincinnati that'll be a long 60 minutes. Plus there's the reality that JAX did not load the box that much and so far OAK has done it once (I'm almost to the half). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 Plus there's the reality that JAX did not load the box that much and so far OAK has done it once (I'm almost to the half). Just curious, when you say "load the box" are you purely going by number of guys? Because I wouldn't be surprised if on some plays there were only technically 7 in the box, but they are right on the line of scrimmage to play the run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 I can't divine the intent of our opponent's D, I can only count bodies. The premise of the conversation has been that teams are loading the box to stuff our run. I'm counting players within 5 yd of the line and "inside the tackle box" at the snap of the ball. So even late, creeping safeties get counted. Inside the tackle box includes ultra wide DEs and LBs on our TE's nose... even if our TE is slightly split. I do not count CBs head up on a tight WR as they are there due to our offensive choice. A DB outside an OLB will get counted if he is head up on no one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted October 28, 2014 Report Share Posted October 28, 2014 So Tour...ur saying that oak and jax "did not" put more than 7 guys in the box and they still stuffed us that hard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.