Quote:
Originally Posted by Brown Warrior  Thanks, Tom. You know that goes both ways no matter how much we disagree. It's just football... and agreeing all the time is fucking boring.
That said, Daboll's offense or playcalling really do NOT call for bad route running. I don't like his offense and was sick we kept running it last year with Holmgren, Heckert, and Haskell in the building (uh... WCO maybe?)... but he's been in the business a while and got another OC job.
It's my opinion that Cribbs has not learned any of the WR tools of the trade, hasn't learned the craft, doesn't seem to be natural to it. He's a great guy, a great athlete, and I think he has pretty good hands. The rest has been disappointing. My (not at all) humble opinion.
But apparently I'm an epic ass clown, so what do I know? I need to start telling everybody. They all seem to think I'm fucking awesome to the point it embarrasses me.
THAT is ass clownery! KaBLAM! |
Thanks Shep! The Daboll Offense comments were aimed at Masters based on his 2010 rants. Masters constantly fussed about the DESIGN of the Daboll passing game and the Pop Warner introductory to football receiving routes that didn't lend themselves to beating professional DBs/athletes. When he showed up on a witch hunt to confront any/all fans excited about Cribbs this year - I reminded him he blamed Daboll's system for a lack of success for our WRs in 2010. In the Cribbs thread, he was getting very full of himself to the point of being dishonest about what he actually said about system vetoing WR success in 2010. He condascendingly told me he didn't blame Daboll and the only things he complained about was Cribbs and MoMass not being able to run routes. That's why your buddy Flugel brought back some of Master's old comments about Daboll's system vetoing WR successes like this:
"
The favorable match up you hit on though is one of my harps about CLE's O. They rarely create favorable match up. I know the talent isn't elite on CLE O, but there is talent and match ups can be created, and Dabs pretty much fails weekly at creating them imo. He has a challenge, but everyone in the NFL doesn't have the best of the best. Where he fails imo is to use what he has. Put guys in a position to succeed, not put them into positions where they fail. Ask them to do what they can do, not what they can't."
That was very astuteful on his part in 2010 and the very reason WHY Holmgren wants a WCO mind here. Pointing out specifically where Daboll failed is eggs-actly where Holmgren projects better for Cribbs and others. Here's another one where Masters was doign a terrific job of blaming the SYSTEM last year; BUT it completely contradicts him telling me this week he only complained about crappy route running of Cribbs and MoMass:
"
Take Dion Branch as an example. He went to SEA, seemed like he couldn't run a route or get open to save his life. He returns to NE and suddenly he looks like the guy he was who got that big contract from SEA. Look how Mark Clayton looked in BALT then how he looked this year after getting sent to STL. It's the same as taking a defensive player from one system and jamming him into another and expecting the same results."
Sound like a guy that wasn't saying system was vetoing WR success? And Branch was a vet right? Those examples above are eggs-actly the point of alot of people getting excited about the possibilities and projections of Cribbs in a better system that guys like Wes Welker, Mark Clayton, and Deion Branch needed to succeed. It's very relevant to why ALL our WRs are being viewed with different projected values by Heckert, Holmgren and the guy (Shurmur) who made Mark Clayton better. To date, our WRs haven't looked well trained for success. The brass knows this. If someone doesn't know how to run a route and it continues for 16 consecutive weeks - how can you tell me his training was wonderful? You can't - especially when every possible alternative looked just as lost.
It seems that you are unregistered. Please register with us by clicking here.
07-31-2011
Linear Mode
