MEGATHREADmania XXX | Page 10 | Barking Hard

MEGATHREADmania XXX

Status
Not open for further replies.
And to add to the changing plays thing-we also dont know if he was put in handcuffs by our beloved bald head coach.
Click to expand...
Then there's this quote to chew on BS:

"I think a lot of it is a function of how teams are playing us," coach Mike Pettine said. "A lot of our plays are double called (run-pass option). So it is depending on the look – what is being given to us. To me, we are a 'by any means necessary' team.
Click to expand...
Add to that Pettine's previously complimentary words about Manziel re: not having to change the playbook and its more likely to assume Manziel would have optionality versus not. But, again, that won't fit your perversely weird agenda.
 
Greythan said:
Not a huge Shaw guy but this is an interesting perspective that, SHOCKINGLY, I generally agree with:

http://www.cleveland.com/budshaw/in...land_browns_mike_pettine_13.html#incart_river
Click to expand...

I am not surprised that you would like an article that asks a vintage Grey question:

But that's not included in the present parsing of Pettine's words. A New York Post headline: "Browns Coach Seems Intent on Crushing Johnny Manziel."

Yes, because...sorry, why would a coach want to do that, let alone a coach who had lost 11 of his previous 13 games?
Click to expand...

That has been your story since last year. Heck, you could have written the entire article. :)

But do you wonder why the first play of the second half was a sideways route from the Cleveland 12 and then, after that single ill advised running play, we completely abandoned the run in the second half?

Do you wonder why certain players seem to disappear from time to time? (AO has mentioned Duke Johnson in the second half as an example.) Do you wonder if that is a conscious or unconscious decision and what the actual reason might have been?

Do you wonder why the Bengals were so successful keeping Manziel in the pocket in the second half when they were unable to do so in the first? (Note: as we both know, that was not an adjustment; it was an objective of theirs from the beginning.)
 
OldDawgCliff said:
Note: as we both know, that was not an adjustment; it was an objective of theirs from the beginning.
Click to expand...
Your favorite quote of the minute from Dre Kirkpatrick directly contradicts this.

Cincy made an adjustment in the second half. It was plain to see. Our offense did not react well to it.

As for the rest of your question, I refer you back to the point I just made in the other thread. You seem to LOVE Flip and yet when pondering these troubling offensive issues; you never question him but instead direct all blame to the head coach. Are we to believe that Pettine is directly over riding Flip only at times that things don't work or go bad? I'd love some evidence for that one.

Silly season is in full bloom here. That's about right as we head into the second half of another nasty campaign. ;)
 
Greythan said:
Your favorite quote of the minute from Dre Kirkpatrick directly contradicts this.

Cincy made an adjustment in the second half. It was plain to see. Our offense did not react well to it.

As for the rest of your question, I refer you back to the point I just made in the other thread. You seem to LOVE Flip and yet when pondering these troubling offensive issues; you never question him but instead direct all blame to the head coach. Are we to believe that Pettine is directly over riding Flip only at times that things don't work or go bad? I'd love some evidence for that one.

Silly season is in full bloom here. That's about right as we head into the second half of another nasty campaign. ;)
Click to expand...

Well, if they made an adjustment, it wasn't to keep Manziel in the pocket. That was the objective in first half as well as the game last year. Merely because Lewis said they needed to keep Manziel in the pocket after the first half didn't mean that they weren't trying in the first.

As for who is responsible for what you refer to as "troubling offensive issues," Pettine is the boss. Most people in an organization take instruction from their immediate superior. I would not expect DeFilippo to defy Pettine if Pettine gave him an instruction. Would you?

As for the silly season being in full bloom, we are now going into the second half of a "nasty campaign," as you say, with a 2-7 record with the expectation that Pettine will as soon as possible revert back to a boring 36 year old journeyman QB over a 22 year old quarterback who holds out the possibility of being the franchise quarterback we have been looking for for 16 years and who adds a measure of excitement to a game even when losing.

And, yes, I think the head coach typically chooses the starting quarterback. The idea that the OC might be overruling the HC is a new one on me.
 
OldDawgCliff said:
What evidence do you have that Hoyer is the source of Mallet's problems?
Click to expand...

My evidence is that he's not on CLEs roster for being a non-team player, especially in the QB room. Remember, he was brought up under the best. Roles reverse and change over time. The honorable thing to do was be as good a teammate once he assumed the lead role. Yet, he pouted when Johnny was in. And, Mallet pouted when Hoyer was in. The same undesirables followed him to Texas.
 
BoatShoes said:
Point being.. Dude loves his pet scapegoat.
Click to expand...

It's not a scapegoat. I gave Hoyer all the support he deserved as a fan and not as a media journalist. Sure, once the AFC North figured him out, his numbers dropped off. Now McCown is here because he only had a partial year of fame under the sun.

Now, no more Hoyer. He's not a guy who'd help you change your tire without a service station nearby. That's the perception he gives to me as a fan, not a media journalist.
 
Browns did a little worse than not adjust to the Bengals adjustment (as if they didn't already know that Johnny's deadly breaking contain)... they played right into it. They told Johnny to do what the Bengals wanted him to do. Several source in the locker room support that.

He had a 101.2 PR at the half. Then Pettine pulled a dick move. Let's live in reality.

The Browns are 2-7 and it's clearly Johnny Time. And yes, to some reasonable extent, you #letjohnnybejohnny. I feel like Flip knows how to do that.
 
If pettine would be fired and jim oneil too.....

We would finish .500 rest of the way. Pettine is clevelands biggest problem by far. Hes beeen huuge problem since being here people just now complaining manziel gilbert cooper campbell gaines and duke johnson arent playing near enough

Pettine is defying whole organization. He knows he isnt nfl head coach material. Hes exposed and in over his head. He isnt good dc material
 
twizbuck said:
I don't think my point is understood.
Click to expand...

Then perhaps you should explain your point. For reference here is the conversation

ODC: As for the silly season being in full bloom, we are now going into the second half of a "nasty campaign," as you say, with a 2-7 record with the expectation that Pettine will as soon as possible revert back to a boring 36 year old journeyman QB over a 22 year old quarterback who holds out the possibility of being the franchise quarterback we have been looking for for 16 years and who adds a measure of excitement to a game even when losing.

TW: Boring. Exciting. Why the hell are these words part of the discussion...

ODC: Well, for one thing, exciting is more fun than boring. And what is the purpose of sports if it isn't fun?

TW: Winning is fun. Before anything else.

ODC: Do you see any winning?

TW: I don't think my point is understood.
Click to expand...

I think I have understood your point. In the past you have mentioned that you would rather win in a boring fashion that to lose in an exciting fashion (or words to that effect).

I do not disagree with the sentiment. Indeed, I have acknowledged that winning in whatever fashion leads to excitement and fun. I would have no objection to boring play if it was winning.

But 1-6 is not winning. Neither is 1-1, of course, but at least the first half of the Cincinnati game was fun to watch. Even most of the second half was watchable.

And with Manziel, there is at least the likelihood of future improvement with added experience that might conceivably lead to future winning.

With McCown, you are doing nothing to make the future better.

Again, now, what was your point?
 
OldDawgCliff said:
Neither is 1-1, of course, but at least the first half of the Cincinnati game was fun to watch. Even most of the second half was watchable.
Click to expand...
The first half of the AZ game was fun to watch too. The second half sucked.

The first half of the Cincy gamew as fund to watch. The second half sucked. (You call zero first downs through 1.5 quarters and an imploding defense "watchable" by comparison?)

OldDawgCliff said:
And with Manziel, there is at least the likelihood of future improvement with added experience that might conceivably lead to future winning.
Click to expand...
Why likelihood? Interesting choice of words. I'd like to believe that but I have no evidence to term it a "likelihood" (i.e., probable) especially when looking at the long list of failed QB prospects in our franchise and across the league. Manziel's probably handicapped by the experts as having a likelihood to not end up a franchise leading QB at this point. Jury is out either way.

Of course it isn't a likelihood in that you can prove the outcome is "probable". Its just your opinion, which is fine. Its also my hope so I get that.

Point? Twiz was simply reacting to this notion that watching us lose, whether it be with old QB or young QB, is just inferior to winning no matter how it looks. Or at least that's how I interpreted it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom