Let's hear How Bad Daboll Is 1 More time...

[Vegasdogg]

Originally Posted by Flugel

1) Find me 1 offensive coordinator in Cleveland since 1994 that has won 4 games in a row here. Since that sounds extremely easy from your confident side of things - I'll expect an answer before the 12th of never.
Running the ball and having a one-dimensional offense is not what I would call an atta-boy for the OC, but ok. 4 wins in a row is a tip of the cap.

2) Replaced 9 starters in 2009 with finishing 8th in running the football as the team. How did this team get on a winning streak? He stopped messing with throwing the ball when there's only 10-12 catchable passes going through hands before hitting the ground (see 2009 Buffalo game)
Not being able to throw the ball in a passing league is not what I would say is a positive. No matter who you have back there, throwing 100 passes in 4 games? You would have to be playing some poor teams at the end of the season, in cold weather, who gave up on their coaching staff. Lucky for us that was the case.

3) Completely worked around inaccurate and incompetant QBs to the tune of winning 4 in a row in spite of them for the entire last month of football.
You said this already - twice. This makes it 3 times. So while I asked for 5, we'll count this as one.

4) Replaced 4 more starters in 2010 with HUGE boosts from McCoy, 1st time starter ever via non-injury induced - Peyton Hillis, Ben Watson and Billy Yates.
Who replaced 4 starters? Daboll signed Hillis? Watson? No soup for you here my friend.

5) The entire message board filled me in that Daboll's way of using Cribbs in 2009 is far better than the way Holmgren wants him used post fat contract smiles. We wouldn't be wanting that both ways now would we?
Did Cribbs help beat the Stoolers from the WC last season? His use of Cribbs as merely a decoy is an embarrassment. No way you get a point for this dude. No getting the ball in space, no use of Cribbs over the middle seams. No idea how to use Cribbs at all as a WR.

6) Young players like Mack, Moore, McCoy and others are showing improvement and promise while older players like Yates, Womack, Watson and Steinbach are quietly playing some really good football.
Uh, ok. Guys get better year after year, not sure I follow you but sure, I will tip my cap to Daboll on these guys. But I will temper it by saying this is a pretty weak point.

7) Every freakin channel covering the AFC is having fun showing us who the Cleveland browns offense is becoming the SAME week Holmgren says he's not changing Dabolls offensive design at all.
Huh? Holmgren is the reason Daboll is more creative?

I'll stop there...
- Tom F.

I truly thought you'd give me more than this, Tom. 2 points that I thought were weak, but ok. You found 2 out of 5 that support Brian.

And I have said I like Brian, and I want him to succeed. But my point was he deserves some criticism for his playcalling. If you are trying to defend him I am not sure you've done a good job.

[TheBestPlayersPlay]

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

Running the ball and having a one-dimensional offense is not what I would call an atta-boy for the OC, but ok. 4 wins in a row is a tip of the cap.

One-dimensional execution.

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

Not being able to throw the ball in a passing league is not what I would say is a positive. No matter who you have back there, throwing 100 passes in 4 games? You would have to be playing some poor teams at the end of the season, in cold weather, who gave up on their coaching staff. Lucky for us that was the case.

Dabs is not the QB.

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

Completely worked around inaccurate and incompetant QBs to the tune of winning 4 in a row in spite of them for the entire last month of football.

Definitely doesn't get enough credit for this.

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

Did Cribbs help beat the Stoolers from the WC last season? His use of Cribbs as merely a decoy is an embarrassment. No way you get a point for this dude. No getting the ball in space, no use of Cribbs over the middle seams. No idea how to use Cribbs at all as a WR.

Dabs is not the QB. The Wildcat is dead, and it can only work on rare occasion.

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

Every freakin channel covering the AFC is having fun showing us who the Cleveland browns offense is becoming the SAME week Holmgren says he's not changing Dabolls offensive design at all.

Thanks Holmgren, for making sure people understand this clearly. Otherwise Daboll would still be receiving hate ...oh wait.


It's all about a QB being able to read a defense in this offense. So far in Dabs tenure here, he's had 2 QBs that can do that. Jake Delhomme & Colt McCoy.

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

I truly thought you'd give me more than this, Tom. 2 points that I thought were weak, but ok. You found 2 out of 5 that support Brian.

And I have said I like Brian, and I want him to succeed. But my point was he deserves some criticism for his playcalling. If you are trying to defend him I am not sure you've done a good job.

Cool, you've reminded me exactly why I shouldn't ever shorten my points and examples supporting my arguement. In telling me this I guess you didn't want to challenge anyone to a game of chess where you only get to use pawns while allowing your opponent to use all the chess pieces. I mean that would be too much like walking in Daboll's shoes here so I understand why didn't want to put yourself in the position of looking dumber than you deserve credit for. That first group of 11 starters last September wasn't equipped with continuity or chemistry or competance or experience in the right places to be conducive for immediate success. If you don't WANT to get this I cannot help you - I'll continue to understand I'm up against denial in this one.

In the offense THE Mike Holmgren came from, stolen by Bill Walsh from THE Paul Brown, it was NEVER about who needed to be trickier from the sidelines. It was about who had the most chess pieces to attack the opponent with. It's alot easier to read through progressions when an improved running game opens up opportunities downfield. For instance, how hard is it to call a SLANT pass when your QB is Joe Montana instead of Derek Anderson/Brady Quinn with Jerry Rice being the target? When everyone's dream QB (Quinn) showed he's not NFL starting material it could ONLY be Brian Daboll's fault that Brady Quinn is now a 3rd string QB in Denver today. Hmmm. Geee, maybe RAC had reason not to be nearly as excited about Quinn as all those fans that never attend their football practices. I never ONCE read 1 training camp report from our fans excited to go see Quinn report they were feeling good about what they saw. This followed countless OTAs and offseason work with the receivers so there were expecting much better. Has anyone ever thought maybe we're LUCKY to be looking at Peyton Hillis today instead of a 3rd string QB posing as a franchise saviour?

The difference between Quinn facing a defenseless KC team and McCoy facing recent Superbowl defenses is that McCoy wasn't throwing the INTs on days his running game was treating him well enough for the passing perks. End result? Playcalling looks better. If we caught 7 of the 10-12 drops vrs Buffalo - the playcalling would have loooked every bit as good as it did vrs Detroit's pass defense. Point here? When the Browns were even up on talent wise - the playcalling always looked decent. People saying Daboll's first 2 gooid games were the last 2 weeks aren't even trying to see the whole picture.

Back to wonderful playcalling options Holmgren was gifted with in SF that opened up his doors for success later. On the rare occasions Jerry Rice wasn't the best option - Joe Montana/Steve Young could choose an All Pro TE, John Taylor, Dwight Clark, JJ Stokes or even TO later. He also had a Roger Craig capable of 1000 receiving yards to coincide with over 1000 yards rushing with arguably oine of the best receiving FBs Tom Rathman. WHERE does the OC need to outhink anybody in that utopian environment? Let's not pretend that was a tough gig.

FWIW, the genius of Mike Holmgren ran out of genius when he had to utilize the SAME type of QBs and roster in trasition we've seen leading up to Colt McCoy. Seems to me Daboll went 5-11 while Holmgren went 4-12 with equivalent offensive rosters. Understand guys like Holmgren and BB are just as capable of losing with backup QBs starting because they did quite often. The year Tom Brady took over NE started off 0-3 or 0-4 with Bledsoe.

Hopefully, I'm not overating you when I say I think you can understand my message about Daboll is he sure seems to look better with a little continuity and talent upgrades in the right spots. The alternative is slamming the brakes on our oline and running game prematurely to fire 1 more OC without ever having an X-factor WR in the house to see what could open up. We don't have Santonio Holmes here to open doors for other WRs yet. That said, wasn't there quite a few networks excited to show the progress of the Cleveland Browns? Didn't they repeat this when the Browns beat Pitt, KC, Oakland and Jax down the stretch of last year?

Do people understand Brian Daboll was brought he because he was Brian Schottenheimer's goto guy underneathe him in running that offense in NY. Is it ANY wonder why our offense looked alot like NY in terms of imposing it's will running the ball down the last 4 weeks of 2009? Where they had us in terms of balance was Dustin Keller was a better playmaker than Robert Royal was. Now we have Watson and a more seasoned Moore spelling him to even that up some.
- Tom F. (I'm hoping progress is steady but I think the Browns' offense is getting more love around the country than the people only deep enough for fire Daboll & throw da ball)

[Vegasdogg]

Tom you keep talking about QB play as the turning point and justification for Brian Daboll's genius crown. As I have stated many, many times, I like Brian Daboll. I don't think he is stupid or horrible. But lets face it Peyton Hillis is the straw that stirs the drink right now. I don't know what your argument is anymore because you're really writing way too much in these responses and I can't wade through it all the understand just what your point is.

Brian Daboll DESERVED the criticism he received. That is all I have said from the beginning. You're telling me he didn't deserve this criticism. Funny that you came out of the woodwork with post after post after post in support of Brian AFTER we beat the Saints and Pats.

Where were you when we were losing because of the offense????

And we were losing because of the offense.

[King of Kings]

Originally Posted by Flugel

LOL! Sick basterd! I got your mancrush right here TexMex! So much for the south will rise again.
- Tom F.

Remember tha Alamo Thomas F. Daboll!

[Tobalaz]

Originally Posted by Tobalaz

Dabs has had ONE good game, ONE decent game and SUCKED the rest.
That's 2 acceptable games out of 24 and that sure as hell isn't lighting the world on fire if you ask me.
We, as Browns fans, too often think that all it takes is 1-2 good games to "emerge" as elite, don't fall into that bs.

It's starting to look like that "good game" was a blind squirrel that found a nut.

[golfer704u]

Originally Posted by Tobalaz

It's starting to look like that "good game" was a blind squirrel that found a nut.

I'm going to post about this elsewhere, but I saw one problem with the offense yesterday and it had nothing to do with Dabol's playcalling. McCoy was getting prerssured a ton more than he had against the vaunted Jet's defense. The difference between the two games? St. Clair. End of story