Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Gipper

No Veterans on Special Teams

Recommended Posts

The Gipper    1,172

I heard this discussion on the Radio or TV:

One of the problems the Browns may have had on their Special Teams on Sunday is that they did not have any kind of veteran presence there.  On that specific punt...they used Matthew Dayes as the "protect" man...and he failed miserably.   Apparently that role had been held by veteran Calvin Pryor during the preseason...but since he was cut they had to find someone else to fill that spot...and they chose Dayes. Not sure why.  Why would not say, the team's fullback, Dan Vitale be in that role.

Also, the special teams essentially lost their "Captain" when Tank Carder went down. I don't know if he was or would have been the designated ST captain...but I suspect so.  His experience would have helped.   So, while it is all great to be a young and learning team, sometimes you need a steady veteran hand.  The offense has that with a couple of players. The defense has it with a couple of players.  ST could use it too....but there is really no one on this team really that fits that role.  They are not going to put JT on punts, or Collins or McCourty.  At least I don't think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tour2ma    1,430

Lost a longer response, but sounds like Sports Talk filler...

It's really a focus on the Punt Cover unit's failure. I'm sure FG units include some vets. Return units are probably young, but so long as the returner(s) are sure handed we're fine... may miss some yardage opportunities, but we're fine. Kick off team? I'd expect an issue to show, but not due to vets.

One thing I mentioned back during fnal cutdowns is that our final roster distribution is light in prime ST areas... namely LBs and DBs. STs return and cover teams tend to pull form those first and then fill in tabbing RBs, TEs and WRs... and we are even light in the fill in groups as well.

Regardless I don't think we have the depth to risk our vets... or the rationale because we are not contending for anything at the moment.

 

I am not sure the punt block is on Mayes. Post-snap it's clear that Devalve failed to seal his inside gap. Pre-snap? It's possible that Mayes should have shifted to the left side where the Steeler stack was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Gipper    1,172
28 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

Lost a longer response, but sounds like Sports Talk filler...

It's really a focus on the Punt Cover unit's failure. I'm sure FG units include some vets. Return units are probably young, but so long as the returner(s) are sure handed we're fine... may miss some yardage opportunities, but we're fine. Kick off team? I'd expect an issue to show, but not due to vets.

One thing I mentioned back during fnal cutdowns is that our final roster distribution is light in prime ST areas... namely LBs and DBs. STs return and cover teams tend to pull form those first and then fill in tabbing RBs, TEs and WRs... and we are even light in the fill in groups as well.

Regardless I don't think we have the depth to risk our vets... or the rationale because we are not contending for anything at the moment.

 

I am not sure the punt block is on Mayes. Post-snap it's clear that Devalve failed to seal his inside gap. Pre-snap? It's possible that Mayes should have shifted to the left side where the Steeler stack was.

I am not sure that I "blame" it on Mayes.  I only pointed out that until just a few days earlier a veteran, Calvin Pryor, was the one that occupied Maye's position....and that he had more experience likely on STs.   I do still think it is good to have a leader on STs.   Certainly Josh Cribbs was that when he was here.  Tank Carder, I think, has been able to stick around because of his ST contributions.

Other than that blocked punt I don't think the Browns STs were too bad....but they are still very inexperienced.

I would think/hope that if Peppers begins to cut loose some returns, by osmosis he could become an ST leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gumby73    300
20 hours ago, The Gipper said:

One of the problems the Browns may have had on their Special Teams on Sunday is that they did not have any kind of veteran presence there.  On that specific punt...they used Matthew Dayes as the "protect" man...and he failed miserably.   Apparently that role had been held by veteran Calvin Pryor during the preseason...but since he was cut they had to find someone else to fill that spot...and they chose Dayes. Not sure why.  Why would not say, the team's fullback, Dan Vitale be in that role.

No Matthew Dayes has never played that spot at NC State..but the role could also help his backfield pass protection..The front 5 from L to R was Burgess,Devalve,Hughlet,Bello,Alexander(now captain).The rush came straight thru Devalve & Hughlet. Hughlet goes slightly forward at #54 when he should have pinched with Devalve on Gap..Safety valves behind line were Campbell,Dayes(yes he should have read play better) what was weird was, what was Kindred doing wearing #26 & not #30? Never saw who the gunners were, but here's the nucleus Tabor has decided on..   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tour2ma    1,430
2 hours ago, gumby73 said:

... but here's the nucleus Tabor has decided on.. .

... of those that were made available to him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alkid3    37

I'm not too worried. If this continues though it will suck. Can't had special teams tds against us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PoeticG    182

That was a very uncharacteristic blocked punt. It was the first game though for these guys. In pre season that special teams unit was titties. I think it has a lot to do with the fact that a lot of the players have changed since the off season. Maybe chalk that first game up to gelling and let's see where he are next week. I would reckon it's gonna look a whole heck of a lot better. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tour2ma    1,430
8 minutes ago, PoeticG said:

I think it has a lot to do with the fact that a lot of the players have changed since the off season.

... or preseason. Good point...

A lot of players on STs that may not have seen much action there with a 90-man roster. And this the cut was all at once for the first time.

Still not an excuse, but is a reason for optimism...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×