Browns Road to the Playoffs

[The Gipper]

33 minutes ago, hoorta said:

We did get bailed out on what was initially called a Baker int to OBJ....  

Well...to be fair....it was a proper "bailout".  It was clear PI.

[Buck The Frowns]

This is a fun online toy that can be used to calculate any team’s chance of making the playoffs. It does not look good for the Browns. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/upshot/cleveland-browns-nfl-playoff-picture.html#ari-cle-15=loss&pit-buf-15=win&cle-bal-16=win&nyj-pit-16=loss&bal-pit-17=win&cin-cle-17=loss

[TexasAg1969]

6 hours ago, The Gipper said:

You didn't see my edit apparently. 

But don't get carried away.  Those guys may compare to him with height/weight.....but it is no disparagement to them to  say that:   No one compares to Jim Brown.

The size and speed of the DL and LB now compared to then is so very different. I think a George or a Henry could have done very well against the D players of that era too. So in that way they do both compare favorably. But there is no doubt that Jim Brown is the best that's ever been.

[Bob806]

19 hours ago, hoorta said:

 

I've  mentioned elsewhere I canceled my  plans to travel to  Arizona  for the  Browns game  after they lost to the  Steelers. Consider that a  no confidence  vote. 

I understand that a bit.We decided a long time ago we were coming out here no matter what. Obviously it helps when one of my 3 sons lives here.

We're out here for a week. Walking around yesterday, there was quite a few Browns fans here already. 

I brought 6 Browns t shirts, my jersey, 2 Zubaz pants and a sweatshirt. All I'm wearing is Browns gear, with a Tribe crooked C baseball hat.

I'm worried they can't contain K Murray, but we're going to have fun no matter what. Plus, we have a great tailgate planned.

[The Gipper]

5 hours ago, TexasAg1969 said:

The size and speed of the DL and LB now compared to then is so very different. I think a George or a Henry could have done very well against the D players of that era too. So in that way they do both compare favorably. But there is no doubt that Jim Brown is the best that's ever been.

Well, you know, the Committee that is putting together the Top 100 players of all time has not bought into the whole "well...those old guys couldn't play against today's bigger faster athletes"....because they recognize that, yes, in fact, they could.   They simply would have trained and used nutrition the same way as today's athletes do...and would have been able to compete just as well.

And likewise, I am not one that says:  today's athletes are so pampered, they never could have played in the old days because they were not tough enough.  So   yes, I believe that if they needed to be, they would have been tough enough.  So I agree that guys like George and Henry,  a 6'2 230ish could certainly have excelled back in those days.   JB had a little something more than all of them....but sure, they could certainly have competed.

[The Gipper]

Results we need this weekend:

A.  Jets play Ravens.    I guess it really doesn't matter.  Ratfuckers seem to have the division sewn up.  We just need those purple pukes to be ready to beat the Steelers in a couple of weeks.

B. Jags beating Raiders, and Saints beating Colts...will help us.  Even though we are ahead of each of them in the playoff standings, them losing means we would not have to look over our shoulders so much.  Saints over Colts is a good bet.   But the Jags, I have heard, have set some kind of record as being the only team now in NFL history to lose  like 5 games in a row by 17 points or more.    And I picked them to win that division!!

C. Bills beating  Steelers.   That gives the Bills the top WC spot....but it looks like we have to concede that to them anyway.  Steelers need to get killed in this game.

D.  Titans over Texans.    We have a better chance now of taking the WC spot if the Tits win that division, and if they beat the DumbAssTexans in the two games they have going forward. 

E. The other interesting game...though it has nothing to do with the Browns,  is the oldest league rivalry:  Bears vs. Packers. 

[The Gipper]

And since I am not doing the "If the Playoffs started today threads"  I will slip this in here:     Draft Order as the standing sit now:

PICK	TEAM	RECORD	WIN%	GB	SOS	STREAK
1	Cincinnati	1-12	.077	--	.575	Lost 1
2	NY Giants	2-11	.154	1.0	.462	Lost 9
3	Washington	3-10	.231	2.0	.483	Lost 1
4	Miami	3-10	.231	2.0	.490	Lost 1
5	Detroit	3-9-1	.269	2.5	.498	Lost 6
6	Arizona	3-9-1	.269	2.5	.550	Lost 6
7	Jacksonville	4-9	.308	3.0	.481	Lost 5
8	Atlanta	4-9	.308	3.0	.555	Won 1
9	NY Jets	5-8	.385	4.0	.466	Won 1
10	LA Chargers	5-8	.385	4.0	.512	Won 1
11	Denver	5-8	.385	4.0	.531	Won 2
12	Carolina	5-8	.385	4.0	.536	Lost 5
13	Philadelphia	6-7	.462	5.0	.445	Won 1
14	Oakland	6-7	.462	5.0	.478	Lost 3
15	Indianapolis	6-7	.462	5.0	.486	Lost 3
16	Tampa Bay	6-7	.462	5.0	.490	Won 3
17	Cleveland	6-7	.462	5.0	.541	Won 1
18	Chicago   OAK	7-6	.538	6.0	.505	Won 3
19	Tennessee	8-5	.615	7.0	.486	Won 4
20	LA Rams   JAX	8-5	.615	7.0	.543	Won 2

[Gunz41]

20 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Let me see....what was the score that last time we played what is considered an elite running QB...that Jackson guy? 

Cleveland 45  Ratfuckers 20...if I recall.

Now, that was then and this is now, but it has been proven that the Browns can defeat running QBs. 

40-25.

[hoorta]

38 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

And since I am not doing the "If the Playoffs started today threads"  I will slip this in here:     Draft Order as the standing sit now:

PICK	TEAM	RECORD	WIN%	GB	SOS	STREAK
1	Cincinnati	1-12	.077	--	.575	Lost 1
2	NY Giants	2-11	.154	1.0	.462	Lost 9
3	Washington	3-10	.231	2.0	.483	Lost 1
4	Miami	3-10	.231	2.0	.490	Lost 1
5	Detroit	3-9-1	.269	2.5	.498	Lost 6
6	Arizona	3-9-1	.269	2.5	.550	Lost 6
7	Jacksonville	4-9	.308	3.0	.481	Lost 5
8	Atlanta	4-9	.308	3.0	.555	Won 1
9	NY Jets	5-8	.385	4.0	.466	Won 1
10	LA Chargers	5-8	.385	4.0	.512	Won 1
11	Denver	5-8	.385	4.0	.531	Won 2
12	Carolina	5-8	.385	4.0	.536	Lost 5
13	Philadelphia	6-7	.462	5.0	.445	Won 1
14	Oakland	6-7	.462	5.0	.478	Lost 3
15	Indianapolis	6-7	.462	5.0	.486	Lost 3
16	Tampa Bay	6-7	.462	5.0	.490	Won 3
17	Cleveland	6-7	.462	5.0	.541	Won 1
18	Chicago   OAK	7-6	.538	6.0	.505	Won 3
19	Tennessee	8-5	.615	7.0	.486	Won 4
20	LA Rams   JAX	8-5	.615	7.0	.543	Won 2

And I  still  say if the Bungles wind up  with the #1 pick, they're  drafting  Joe Burrow. Young may be another  Kahlil Mack, but how many championships  has he or for that matter Dick Butkus won? Takes more  than one  great  defensive  player to win a  Super Bowl,  you have to  surround  them with  great  players  like Ray Lewis  with the  Ratbirds. If they manage to beat the  Dolphins  and fall  to #2, the Giants will be  poised to  get a haul of  picks, because they  don't  need a  qb. Bungles might  even flip  with  them to  guarantee they get their  guy. 

You're  about the  only person I know who  thinks the Bengals  #1 priority  isn't a  QB. 

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

40-25.

Ah....a little dyslexia does no one any harm!

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, hoorta said:

And I  still  say if the Bungles wind up  with the #1 pick, they're  drafting  Joe Burrow. Young may be another  Kahlil Mack, but how many championships  has he or for that matter Dick Butkus won? Takes more  than one  great  defensive  player to win a  Super Bowl,  you have to  surround  them with  great  players  like Ray Lewis  with the  Ratbirds. If they manage to beat the  Dolphins  and fall  to #2, the Giants will be  poised to  get a haul of  picks, because they  don't  need a  qb. Bungles might  even flip  with  them to  guarantee they get their  guy. 

You're  about the  only person I know who  thinks the Bengals  #1 priority  isn't a  QB. 

Well.  The Bengals #1 priority may be a QB....that does not mean they will take a QB.

I can think of another team that had their #1 priority as a QB.....and didn't take one.  Took the All World DE instead.

The would be the Cleveland Browns, 2017,  the year they took Garrett instead of taking Trubisky, Mahomes or Watson.

So...it happens.

[Icecube]

5 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Well, you know, the Committee that is putting together the Top 100 players of all time has not bought into the whole "well...those old guys couldn't play against today's bigger faster athletes"....because they recognize that, yes, in fact, they could.   They simply would have trained and used nutrition the same way as today's athletes do...and would have been able to compete just as well.

And likewise, I am not one that says:  today's athletes are so pampered, they never could have played in the old days because they were not tough enough.  So   yes, I believe that if they needed to be, they would have been tough enough.  So I agree that guys like George and Henry,  a 6'2 230ish could certainly have excelled back in those days.   JB had a little something more than all of them....but sure, they could certainly have competed.

Yes. "Nutrition." HGH is very nutritious. Henry would still be the all-time record leader is he played back then. Imagine Bettis if he played then - the biggest man on the field who was still fast. 

[Gorka]

On 12/9/2019 at 11:21 AM, The Gipper said:

How Pittsburgh keeps winning is wholly a mystery.   Either Tomlin is the best coach in history, or they made a deal with the Devil.  

 

Both are equally absurd. And why they keep winning is not a mystery.

Unlike you I am not a homer. I try to be objective and not let my opinions be swayed by the feelings I have toward that team and the Rats.

Reason #1 they keep winning is because they have talent believe it or not. Their D is #1 in sacks and #1 in takeaways and 6th overall.

Reason #2 they keep winning is because they've been beating teams with losing records...which they should because of reason #1.

You have been wrong an awful lot.

Recall you shared the same opinion about the Ravens as you did with the stealers. No talent. Unlike the Steelers, the Rats have beaten some of the better teams...the Pats, San Fran, Buff.

You also think how the Rats keep winning is a mystery?

The only fucking mystery around here has been the Browns. Just think about that for a moment.

[Footbalfan1962]

4 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Ah....a little dyslexia does no one any harm!

11-2 6-7

[hoorta]

On 12/11/2019 at 3:07 PM, The Gipper said:

Well.  The Bengals #1 priority may be a QB....that does not mean they will take a QB.

I can think of another team that had their #1 priority as a QB.....and didn't take one.  Took the All World DE instead.

The would be the Cleveland Browns, 2017,  the year they took Garrett instead of taking Trubisky, Mahomes or Watson.

So...it happens.

Based on what I've seen so far- Burrow has a better college pedigree than any of them. Starting with a near lock Heisman. No one had a clue Mahomes was going to turn out as good as he has in the pros. You re-do that draft based on current NFL production, and the Browns would have taken Mahomes over Garrett, and not thunk twice about it. Pat has gotten the Chiefs to the playoffs every year- and they don't have a defensive lineman anywhere close to Myle's ability. All things being equal, QB is always job #1. If you don't have your franchise QB- you're looking for one.

I you want rumors- it was widely circulated Cleveland was going to trade up with the Jets to take Trubisky- but the Bears stunned everyone moving up to #2 to get him. 

Secondly, the Bengals have Dunlap and Atkins on defense, though both the Bungle offense and defense suck- Mahomes has proven you can make the playoffs with a great offense and a so-so defense. The Bengals are a lot closer on O than D, assuming Green can come back healthy- or doesn't leave in FA because Cheapo Mike won't pay  the going rate. Dalton is as good as gone, and wazhisname isn't the answer either. Easier by far to take the franchise QB first- when he's staring you in the face, and worry about the swiss cheese holes on the defense later, they're way easier to fill. 

 

[gumby73]

On 12/11/2019 at 7:26 AM, Bob806 said:

We're out here for a week. Walking around yesterday, there was quite a few Browns fans here already. 

I brought 6 Browns t shirts, my jersey, 2 Zubaz pants and a sweatshirt. All I'm wearing is Browns gear, with a Tribe crooked C baseball hat.

I'm worried they can't contain K Murray, but we're going to have fun no matter what. Plus, we have a great tailgate planned.

Got any free time? We elect You & the Roadie Crew to start this weeks Gameday Tread 😎... Anytime Saturday before the pre-Tailgate Party begins.. 🍺 Go get us a WIN!!  

[TexasAg1969]

On 12/10/2019 at 9:12 AM, The Gipper said:

The key to that team is not the OK running by their RB......but the way their coach has gotten what he has gotten out of a QB who has been at best below average for the extent of his career.

Guess who the CBS FFL Start 'em player of the week (regardless of position) is for this coming Week 15. Here is a hint. He's a mediocre QB playing Houston at home this week. LOL!😂

He will need a healthy Henry to make his PA passing more effective. He at least has one of the best HC's going. I plan to watch that one since the Browns game is later in the afternoon this week.

[Bob806]

2 hours ago, gumby73 said:

Got any free time? We elect You & the Roadie Crew to start this weeks Gameday Tread 😎... Anytime Saturday before the pre-Tailgate Party begins.. 🍺 Go get us a WIN!!  

Lol yeah plenty of free time. Heading to Sedona now, I've never been there.

If I start a Gameday thread, it could be a neutral zone infraction😬. Can't over step fellow fans' territory.

I'm thinking the Browns will have to score a bunch to win. How about getting Chubb & Hunt involved in swing passes/ screens and Jarvis doing his thing.

 

Baker to our favorite hyphenated guy, Seals-Jones, for the W in the 4th Q. 37-33 Browns woof woofs.

I think I saw Wilks' defensive playbook blowing away on this trail😊

 

[Icecube]

On 12/11/2019 at 12:15 PM, The Gipper said:

Results we need this weekend:

A.  Jets play Ravens.    I guess it really doesn't matter.  Ratfuckers seem to have the division sewn up.  We just need those purple pukes to be ready to beat the Steelers in a couple of weeks.

B. Jags beating Raiders, and Saints beating Colts...will help us.  Even though we are ahead of each of them in the playoff standings, them losing means we would not have to look over our shoulders so much.  Saints over Colts is a good bet.   But the Jags, I have heard, have set some kind of record as being the only team now in NFL history to lose  like 5 games in a row by 17 points or more.    And I picked them to win that division!!

C. Bills beating  Steelers.   That gives the Bills the top WC spot....but it looks like we have to concede that to them anyway.  Steelers need to get killed in this game.

D.  Titans over Texans.    We have a better chance now of taking the WC spot if the Tits win that division, and if they beat the DumbAssTexans in the two games they have going forward. 

E. The other interesting game...though it has nothing to do with the Browns,  is the oldest league rivalry:  Bears vs. Packers. 

To simplify this: Browns need to win every game. There. All done. 

[Icecube]

18 hours ago, Gorka said:

Both are equally absurd. And why they keep winning is not a mystery.

Unlike you I am not a homer. I try to be objective and not let my opinions be swayed by the feelings I have toward that team and the Rats.

Reason #1 they keep winning is because they have talent believe it or not. Their D is #1 in sacks and #1 in takeaways and 6th overall.

Reason #2 they keep winning is because they've been beating teams with losing records...which they should because of reason #1.

You have been wrong an awful lot.

Recall you shared the same opinion about the Ravens as you did with the stealers. No talent. Unlike the Steelers, the Rats have beaten some of the better teams...the Pats, San Fran, Buff.

You also think how the Rats keep winning is a mystery?

The only fucking mystery around here has been the Browns. Just think about that for a moment.

Pitt is only beating lesser teams. They hung in there with some good ones (Balt. OT, SF close all game) but only beat weak teams (Cinci, Browns, Fins, AZ, LAC, Colts). And their D is not the hogwash their O is (top 5 and only allowing 18 ppg). 

[Gorka]

3 hours ago, Icecube said:

Pitt is only beating lesser teams. They hung in there with some good ones (Balt. OT, SF close all game) but only beat weak teams (Cinci, Browns, Fins, AZ, LAC, Colts). And their D is not the hogwash their O is (top 5 and only allowing 18 ppg). 

Am I hearing an echo? Yes. I clearly mentioned that they've beaten lesser teams, and their talent is on D.

Reason #1 they keep winning is because they have talent believe it or not. Their D is #1 in sacks and #1 in takeaways and 6th overall.

Reason #2 they keep winning is because they've been beating teams with losing records...which they should because of reason #1.

[The Gipper]

23 hours ago, Gorka said:

Both are equally absurd. And why they keep winning is not a mystery.

Unlike you I am not a homer. I try to be objective and not let my opinions be swayed by the feelings I have toward that team and the Rats.

Reason #1 they keep winning is because they have talent believe it or not. Their D is #1 in sacks and #1 in takeaways and 6th overall.

If you had paid one godamned bit of attention...you would have seen earlier at the beginning of the season that I thought the Spermsuckers had the second most talent in the division......but that was when they had BR/Conner/Smith playing.  Those guys are not playing.  They have a 3rd string QB and 2d string RBs.    Their talent has been depleted, particularly on that side of the ball.  They do have some talent on defense, sure.

Reason #2 they keep winning is because they've been beating teams with losing records...which they should because of reason #1.

Again, I thought the division would come down between these 2 teams.   So, no, overall, it does not surprise me that they beat the losers...I expected that.  I just expected that they would do that with the guys, like BR, that they lost. 

You have been wrong an awful lot.

Actually, I have been right about them:  I said it was a mystery...but there, again, you failed to pay attention.....because I said the mystery is solved because they are getting superlative coaching.

Recall you shared the same opinion about the Ravens as you did with the stealers. No talent. Unlike the Steelers, the Rats have beaten some of the better teams...the Pats, San Fran, Buff.

I said that their individual talent was not on par with the Browns or Steelers....and I still believe that if you take each player, you would come out with the fact that the Browns have better talent at more positions that the Ravens.

You also think how the Rats keep winning is a mystery?

Actually, again, no, you fail to pay attention:   I said that John Harbaugh is doing the best coaching job in the NFL this year, followed possibly by Tomlin

The only fucking mystery around here has been the Browns. Just think about that for a moment.

And that is NOT a mystery either.....for the same reason that it is not a mystery that the Rats and Squibs are doing well:  coaching.

They both have Super Bowl winning caliber coaches.   I do NOT believe the Browns have that.

Now...can you process all that in your brain?

 

[The Gipper]

22 hours ago, hoorta said:

Based on what I've seen so far- Burrow has a better college pedigree than any of them. Starting with a near lock Heisman. No one had a clue Mahomes was going to turn out as good as he has in the pros.

Better pedigree?  Burrows was an afterthought until this year.  No one had a clue he would do as well at LSU as he has done.  Nothing in his history showed he could do that.

You re-do that draft based on current NFL production, and the Browns would have taken Mahomes over Garrett, and not thunk twice about it. Pat has gotten the Chiefs to the playoffs every year- and they don't have a defensive lineman anywhere close to Myle's ability. All things being equal, QB is always job #1. If you don't have your franchise QB- you're looking for one.

Sure, all things being equal you take the QB.....but not all things are equal here.  The Bengals have always been gung ho on OSU players.  Given the opportunity (meaning that if it is not too far of a stretch)  the Bengals will grab the Buckeye player. 

I you want rumors- it was widely circulated Cleveland was going to trade up with the Jets to take Trubisky- but the Bears stunned everyone moving up to #2 to get him. 

Yes, that is indeed what I heard could happen.

Secondly, the Bengals have Dunlap and Atkins on defense, though both the Bungle offense and defense suck- Mahomes has proven you can make the playoffs with a great offense and a so-so defense. The Bengals are a lot closer on O than D, assuming Green can come back healthy- or doesn't leave in FA because Cheapo Mike won't pay  the going rate. Dalton is as good as gone, and wazhisname isn't the answer either. Easier by far to take the franchise QB first- when he's staring you in the face, and worry about the swiss cheese holes on the defense later, they're way easier to fill. 

Look, your argument is wholly logical....but I am simply predicting that the Bengals go with the emotional argument and take the highly rated OSU player. 

 

 

[The Gipper]

9 hours ago, TexasAg1969 said:

Guess who the CBS FFL Start 'em player of the week (regardless of position) is for this coming Week 15. Here is a hint. He's a mediocre QB playing Houston at home this week. LOL!😂

Don't know, don't care what any Fantasy League pundits say or think.

He will need a healthy Henry to make his PA passing more effective. He at least has one of the best HC's going. I plan to watch that one since the Browns game is later in the afternoon this week.

Well.....you are having your love affair with you Agbutts and with Henry......my belief in Vrabel is more specific:   his dad coached football at my High School.  

 

[The Gipper]

7 hours ago, Bob806 said:

Lol yeah plenty of free time. Heading to Sedona now, I've never been there.

If I start a Gameday thread, it could be a neutral zone infraction😬. Can't over step fellow fans' territory.

I'm thinking the Browns will have to score a bunch to win. How about getting Chubb & Hunt involved in swing passes/ screens and Jarvis doing his thing.

 

Baker to our favorite hyphenated guy, Seals-Jones, for the W in the 4th Q. 37-33 Browns woof woofs.

I think I saw Wilks' defensive playbook blowing away on this trail😊

 

No Saguaros up by Sedona. About halfway between there and Phoenix the climate changes and they don't grow that far north.

I will be in Sedona end of January.

[The Gipper]

5 hours ago, Icecube said:

To simplify this: Browns need to win every game. There. All done. 

Well....they are likely done of they don't..... so that is the minimum requirement.....but it is more complicated than that.  Not overly complicated, but more so than that. 

[Bob806]

16 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

No Saguaros up by Sedona. About halfway between there and Phoenix the climate changes and they don't grow that far north.

I will be in Sedona end of January.

Yeah that pic was from Picacho Peak State Park.

This one from Sedona @Dry Creek trail...

[TexasAg1969]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

Well.....you are having your love affair with you Agbutts and with Henry......my belief in Vrabel is more specific:   his dad coached football at my High School.  

So  you're letting your love affair with Vrabel and his dad influence your thinking. I happen to think it all applies. I believe in all 3 of 'em as a very well functioning team all on the same page the way it should be in the NFL.

[The Gipper]

19 minutes ago, TexasAg1969 said:

So  you're letting your love affair with Vrabel and his dad influence your thinking. I happen to think it all applies. I believe in all 3 of 'em as a very well functioning team all on the same page the way it should be in the NFL.

Not really.   But I do think that Vrabel is going to turn out to be a very good NFL HC.....

right now, his biggest competitor is another BB disciple:  Bill O'Brien.  The two of them are going mano a mano for the AFCS title.

[Icecube]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

Well....they are likely done of they don't..... so that is the minimum requirement.....but it is more complicated than that.  Not overly complicated, but more so than that. 

But if the don't win every game, it's highly likely nothing else matters. So, I was just cutting to the chase. 😉