• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Cleveland Browns (Finally drafting Buckeyes)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Buckeneye said:
I wanted to let you know, I haven't forgotten about this and I have a detailed response to you I'm working on. One that charts the difference in target depth percentage, personnel groupings and route combinations. Because going off of straight YPC without further context was a head scratcher until I started watching more.
Click to expand...

@bigdog3300

Better late than never.

Went back and charted snaps from each of Watson and Flaccos first 4 starts on the season. And the reason why I initially suspect that YPC was a bad, single metric to use as overwhelming proof of Joe being the better option ended up holding true. I'll simplify why.

- The coaches knew we would struggle in pass pro as early as pre-season. Especially on the left side with Jed. He's been playing like a bottom 5 tackle since middle of last year.

- To compensate, and to bring the offense more "up to date" and in line with Watson's strengths, something they tried with Baker... We ran significantly more 11 personnel, 11 from the gun, and more empty under Watson than under Flacco. I'm at work without the numbers in front of me, but it was multiple percentage points in separation (higher for Watson) when I was crunching.

- Not only personnel and formation differences, but protection differences as well. The coaching staff would allow Watson more options and to work that space, especially the horizontal game, to negate pressure. So there were more 4 and 5 in the pattern. Where, with Flacco, the team went back under center and threw the ball from stronger action looks and used a lot more 2+leak and 3 man+chip designs, which tend to invite more vertical shots (calculated ones) So the coaches dealt with pass pro issues by handing the keys of the car to Watson and say "dealers choice" while bullet proofing the windows with Joe. Both experienced varied results.

- The differences in personnel, protection and formation also highlight why Flacco has a higher depth of target. Because the response was to bottle up pressure and let the big QB stand tall with more time. More time tends to mean more shots down field. This is also spelled out in the significantly fewer amount of empty sets the Browns would run under Flacco from 11 and 21 personnel, where they could use those same sets with Watson on early downs to catch defenses in "base" or nickel.



This really goes back to why I saw you use YPC as your argument metric. While you weren't wrong with the number itself, it's why I always say that numbers without context can be hollow. Flaccos turnover rate and near turnover throws were minimized by minor miracles and some favorable games and special plays. It wasn't a sustainable method of winning and it came crashing down, painfully and somewhat predictably, in the playoffs against a young but talented Houston squad.

Did this team magically rebound with Flacco? Not really, they were benefits of good fortune, solid coaching, defense generating turnovers and digging deep to keep fighting. I give Joe credit for his statesman like care and Dad like hand he stretched out over the team. I'm sure that meant a lot and the fans responded well to it. But that only carries you so far in a season in the NFL.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeneye said:
@bigdog3300

Better late than never.

Went back and charted snaps from each of Watson and Flaccos first 4 starts on the season. And the reason why I initially suspect that YPC was a bad, single metric to use as overwhelming proof of Joe being the better option ended up holding true. I'll simplify why.

- The coaches knew we would struggle in pass pro as early as pre-season. Especially on the left side with Jed. He's been playing like a bottom 5 tackle since middle of last year.

- To compensate, and to bring the offense more "up to date" and in line with Watson's strengths, something they tried with Baker... We ran significantly more 11 personnel, 11 from the gun, and more empty under Watson than under Flacco. I'm at work without the numbers in front of me, but it was multiple percentage points in separation (higher for Watson) when I was crunching.

- Not only personnel and formation differences, but protection differences as well. The coaching staff would allow Watson more options and to work that space, especially the horizontal game, to negate pressure. So there were more 4 and 5 in the pattern. Where, with Flacco, the team went back under center and threw the ball from stronger action looks and used a lot more 2+leak and 3 man+chip designs, which tend to invite more vertical shots (calculated ones) So the coaches dealt with pass pro issues by handing the keys of the car to Watson and say "dealers choice" while bullet proofing the windows with Joe. Both experienced varied results.

- The differences in personnel, protection and formation also highlight why Flacco has a higher depth of target. Because the response was to bottle up pressure and let the big QB stand tall with more time. More time tends to mean more shots down field. This is also spelled out in the significantly fewer amount of empty sets the Browns would run under Flacco from 11 and 21 personnel, where they could use those same sets with Watson on early downs to catch defenses in "base" or nickel.



This really goes back to why I saw you use YPC as your argument metric. While you weren't wrong with the number itself, it's why I always say that numbers without context can be hollow. Flaccos turnover rate and near turnover throws were minimized by minor miracles and some favorable games and special plays. It wasn't a sustainable method of winning and it came crashing down, painfully and somewhat predictably, in the playoffs against a young but talented Houston squad.

Did this team magically rebound with Flacco? Not really, they were benefits of good fortune, solid coaching, defense generating turnovers and digging deep to keep fighting. I give Joe credit for his statesman like care and Dad like hand he stretched out over the team. I'm sure that meant a lot and the fans responded well to it. But that only carries you so far in a season in the NFL.
Click to expand...
Unless you were my Chief who said, "Better never than late". Otherwise, I agree
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Browns unveil plans for $2.4 billion dome as team considers move from downtown Cleveland | FOX Sports

The Cleveland Browns appear poised to move out of their lakefront home, and the team has a preference to build a $2.4 billion done in nearby Brook Park, Ohio.
www.foxsports.com www.foxsports.com
Browns unveil plans for $2.4 billion dome as team considers move from downtown Cleveland

The Cleveland Browns appear poised to move out of their lakefront home.

While they're considering a $1.1 billion plan from the city of Cleveland to renovate their 25-year-old downtown stadium, the NFL team made it clear on Wednesday that its preference is to build a $2.4 billion dome in Brook Park, Ohio.

In a letter to season-ticket holders that included renderings, the Browns outlined plans for the a state-of-the-art facility, which they believe will allow Cleveland to attract and host other major events such as the Super Bowl and Final Four.

The team's lease at its current stadium expires after the 2028 season.

"Similar to other markets in the Midwest, this proposed domed stadium would catalyze our region in a major way," David Jenkins, chief operating officer of Haslam Sports Group, wrote in the letter. "The stadium’s year-round activity would anchor a large-scale lifestyle and entertainment district, including experiential retail, residential space, hotels and other unique products, drawing visitors throughout the year and driving substantial fiscal impact for our region.

"While significant work remains, the more we have explored the Brook Park option, the more attractive it has become."



Last week, the city proposed funding $461 million — splitting the cost with the Browns — to upgrade the current stadium and re-develop its surrounding property along Lake Erie.

The Browns have only been in their stadium since 1999, when they returned as an expansion team after owner Art Modell moved the franchise to Baltimore four years earlier following a squabble with city officials.

Mayor Justin Bibb has asked the Browns for a response by Aug. 12. He believes keeping the team downtown is vital to the city's identity and growth.

As part of a counter argument, Jenkins wrote the current stadium needs "substantial improvements" for sustainability. The Browns often cite traffic and parking issues among the main reasons to consider a new stadium location.

Jenkins said the team has considered other locations for a proposed dome, but Brook Park, about 12 miles south of Cleveland, makes the most sense. The team has an agreement to buy 176 acres near Cleveland Hopkins Airport for the project.

"The Brook Park site is the most compelling option for a dome for several reasons: its central location for our regional fan base, its proximity to downtown, the RTA and the airport, and its strong existing infrastructure," Jenkins wrote. "The large footprint is also ripe for major economic development and supports ample parking and optimized ingress/egress for our visitors."

Funding remains an obstacle. The Browns are seeking a public/private partnership for the $2.4 billion project. They're proposing bonds to cover the public portion.


.
.
.
continued
 
Upvote 0
BuckBackHome said:
Pretty sure that was Glenville area, which is east side. Brookpark is SW of Cleveland.
Click to expand...
Correct. Brook Park is a different kind of dump. Mostly small to medium businesses and blue collar homes. Read “cheap real estate.” It is the figurative and literal blank canvas the Haslams want to build a new city. Quite frankly, it’s a shrewd move but probably a good business decision. Browns fans don’t really care what city the Browns are in - some care but not enough to not show up for games. I’m sure they’ll have a sentimental version of the muni lot - of course owned by the Browns.
 
Upvote 0
Poe McKnoe said:
Correct. Brook Park is a different kind of dump. Mostly small to medium businesses and blue collar homes. Read “cheap real estate.” It is the figurative and literal blank canvas the Haslams want to build a new city. Quite frankly, it’s a shrewd move but probably a good business decision. Browns fans don’t really care what city the Browns are in - some care but not enough to not show up for games. I’m sure they’ll have a sentimental version of the muni lot - of course owned by the Browns.
Click to expand...
I live on the east side (Shaker Heights) and downtown was a lot easier for me to get to than Brook Park will be. Just hop on the rapid and you're there. Now I'll either need to drive and find parking or transfer trains downtown. Oh well.
It's not like I go to the games, anyway. The last time I went......... Maybe 10 years ago? So I don't really care too much. I'd much rather have a team that I'm excited to watch on Sundays than care if the fans in the stadium are comfortable.
 
Upvote 0
Zurp said:
I live on the east side (Shaker Heights) and downtown was a lot easier for me to get to than Brook Park will be. Just hop on the rapid and you're there. Now I'll either need to drive and find parking or transfer trains downtown. Oh well.
It's not like I go to the games, anyway. The last time I went......... Maybe 10 years ago? So I don't really care too much. I'd much rather have a team that I'm excited to watch on Sundays than care if the fans in the stadium are comfortable.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I'm spoiled watching it on a huge TV with no assholes in the room yelling and screaming, other than me, and cheap snacks. People have ruined those experiences imo
 
Upvote 0
Bestbuck36 said:
Honestly, I'm spoiled watching it on a huge TV with no assholes in the room yelling and screaming, other than me, and cheap snacks. People have ruined those experiences imo
Click to expand...
Yeah. I enjoy going to games, but not enough to really worry about the traffic, the bathrooms, the expensive drinks, snacks, etc. And the fans - that's a good point. The only fan behaving badly in my house is me, and security (my kids) know better than to try to kick me out.
 
Upvote 0
Have they been mathematically eliminated yet?

Oh, and I am calling my shot now. They take the Sanders kid in the draft and hire Deion for head coach/gm. It is the only option that makes sense for this mess of a franchise. (Sarcasm, except for the part that this franchise is a mess).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top