Sgt Schultz

Here's the thing about Snow: He's spent 34 years coaching at the college level. Prior to the Panthers, he had 4 years at the NFL level, all with Detroit. With that pedigree, it is just possible he can't transition to what schemes, adjustments, and personnel it takes to run an effective defense in the NFL. 34 years is a long time and a lot of instinct to have to overcome. Honestly, with that level of college experience, it is probably not realistic for him to ever accomplish that. When the dung hits the fan, people revert to what they know. I'm 61 and have over 33 years experience in my specific branch of the industry I work in. I'm not sure I could transition to one of the other branches, and I think the similarities between them are a lot more plentiful than the similarities between NFL and college defenses and tactics.

We didn't really establish any reason for them to bite on it early. It is one of those things you have to set up, and given the expectations coming into the game, it would have only taken a few more early runs (especially if they gained yardage) to give them a pause. As it was, we were sort of like having Dan Fouts run play action with the Chargers. Yeah, great, but everybody knows you aren't handing the ball off. People are mentioning Christenson, and part of what people miss is even the best young OL develop, usually both in technique and physically. Well, the ones that don't last may not, but everybody else does. BC is not an idiot, mouth-breathing pure mauler, so he probably knew prior to being drafted what he needed to do on all counts. The fact that he did it should not be a surprise. Perhaps the extent, but not the fact he did.

You do realize he will probably be driven off the board and maybe the entire internet for that approach.

Good job, TheCasillas The OL is probably the most encouraging part of our team right now. A lot of people were (stupidly) declaring Ickey a bust because MG was a mad man, but MG is pretty much always a mad man. It was his first game against a beast....what did we think was going to happen? And let's face it: our OL has not been a source of encouragement for a loooong time. A lot of us have been hoping Shi would step up. Let's hope they use him. We know Mayfield works well with play action, yet we did little to set that up. That is game planning.

Of course we can beat the Giants. In theory, we could beat the Bills. The NFL works that way. Add that while they are in the same state (barely), the Giants are not the Bills. The challenge is that based solely on last week, the Giants put up a lot of yards on the ground and we gave up a lot of yards on the ground. They gained 238 yards at 7..4 a carry, and even if we remove the 68 yard run, that is still 170 yards and almost a 5.5 yard clip. We gave up 5.6 yards a pop over 39 carries. Depending on your outlook, those things either don't mesh well or mesh perfectly. The other problem is while the Giants didn't remind anybody of Air Coryell, they were efficient in the passing game. If we don't generate some pressure on the QB, they may be efficient again. They are far from unbeatable, but we are going to have to step up especially on the defensive side. It's either that or turn it into a track meet early. We certainly can not afford another start where the offense is inert. Given the defensive challenges, the offense is going to have to hold their own. Finally, when they had the chance with a tad over a minute left, they went for the win, big time (going for 2 after a TD brought them within 1). If it comes down to a test of nerve late, we are probably screwed.

Sadly, I am resigned to the likelihood he will be here for year 4 and making excuses for why he isn't winning. Even the Glazers figured out Schiano had to go after the second year.

Exactly. What is the matter with people? The Process takes time, and we are barely into year three of a seven. And seven years is just phase 1. Patience, people. Patience.

The problem is situational. In this game we have a rookie LT, who may turn out to be great, but he's playing his first game opposite perhaps the best pass rushing DE in the game. Our QB is playing his first game with us, against his former team, and the smart play is to take the onus off him initially. That same QB is pretty good at play action, which gets set up by running the ball some. The rest of our OL is mostly playing their first games together, so how they function as a unit is a question mark. All that points to at least showing the run early to give the OL a chance to establish itself, the LT a chance to attack (and run blocking is his strength right now), the QB a chance to settle, and to set up the play action later, which may just give that stud DE a pause on his rush to the QB. Might the game plan next week be different? Sure, it depends on the opponent and what our various offensive units look like after game 1. And it might be different yet again the week after that based on those same questions. Maybe McCaffrey gets 22 carries in game 1 and 12 in game 2. This team is not good enough to "inflict its will" on most opponents. Maybe not any, who knows? Truth is, in the NFL being able to do that is rare these days. So you have to game plan to put the players in a position to succeed. We did not do that Sunday. We game planned seemingly without any regard to the situation or the opponent. Kinda like we have done for the last 12 years, at least.

Jones is a yoyo on coaching hires. He hires a strong, successful coach and then drives him off. He then follows that up with a yes-man, and then when that fails and he takes flack for hiring yes-men to stroke his ego rather than win, he looks for another big name. Had McCarthy been successful, his pattern would be back to a yes-man. But McCarthy was always over-rated, things haven't improved, and in fact are looking worse. What will Jerry do next? Tune in tomorrow for more on "As the Stomach Turns."

That is very correct. Which is one reason why he will not be on our sidelines.

Payton wins at a .631 clip. That does not require a lot of fluffing up. People may not like him as a person or may not want him as a coach because of the hatred of the Saints, but none of that has to do with his ability as an NFL HC.

I'd have settled for somebody running the ball, other than Mayfield out of a scramble. It's like our strategy was since they have a good pass rush and arguably the best pass rushing DE in the league, we were going to run pass plays until they wore themselves out rushing the QB. No doubt they would walk right into our trap and then be all ours.

Looking at the picture, we were frighteningly close to seeing PJ Walker under center until Darnold returns. Think about that sobering thought, on two levels, for a bit. Essentially, we did the same with Garrett that we did with Von Miller in the Super Bowl, although we did eventually provide some help on Garrett. How do we go into these games, look at the individual matchups, not recognize where some help will probably be needed, and develop a plan for it? Never mind, silly question.

I listened to him and not once did I think I was listening to a BS artist. The man knows how to be a HC in the NFL and he relates what that entails (in his view) quite comfortably. There was no "the Process" or "the analytics say." By the end, I was wanting to hear more. He also clearly understands how what his offense does (or doesn't do) impacts his defense. Any organization thinking about hiring a coach should listen to this clip. They don't need to agree with his particulars, but just asking whether the guy they are interviewing can approach his level of understanding would save them a lot of grief. Now we return to listening to Rhule, who would probably try to convince us he and Payton see things the same way.

Yep, like I said, I am not looking for a huge move toward the middle in that rating, unfortunately. We entered this game with it as a concern, the results confirmed that concern (or made it a fear), and the results Sunday would have been worse had the Browns committed to the run for the stretch where they seemed to confuse Brissett with Rodgers. Our opponent Sunday could abuse us again in that area. If we are walking away with any conclusions from week 1, it is that this specific area of concern in genuine. Nor do I think Snow has any answers, and there may not be any good ones on the roster.

The passing defense is heavily skewed because the Browns were not exactly starting Mahomes. Our rushing offense was 31st because of our (curious) choice to not run the football, especially early. Both of those numbers will probably bounce more toward the middle. Unfortunately, the rushing defense may not move much. It's one game, so I am not going to draw many conclusions and certainly not many beyond decisions and performances in one game. The one to watch, IMO, is turnover differential. Being 27th right now means next to nothing, other than the fact we didn't force any. Had the one we did get stood, the entire outcome and how the game unfolded from there may have changed.

I must admit, my favorite NFL team after the Panthers is whoever is playing Dallas. If the Cowboys were playing Al Qaeda, I would have a tough decision to make. That said, I have no issues with the players and actually like Dak, so his injury gives me no pleasure at all. But, Jerrah's continued floundering around and the many Cowboy fans in this area being quiet does give me some good cheer.

To add to that, had that come out of the chute running the ball and been able to do it even somewhat successfully, they open up the play-action pass Mayfield is good at. Let's put it this way: Probably one of the Brown's "musts" coming into this week was to not let CMC go crazy on them. They probably weren't thinking in terms of stopping him as much as containing the damage. We did that for them.

Exactly. Maybe you can make the case that if the game is tied as we face 1st and 10 at the Cleveland 14, playing to get the FG and cause them to burn their time outs is okay. Honestly, I still don't like it, but barring a huge breakdown, the worst that happens is you wind up in OT. But, starting this mess down by a point, you leave yourself open to losing on a late FG, which is exactly what happened. If all they need is a FG, it shortens the field for them by 30-40 yards (40 yesterday). Assuming they take possession at the 25 after the kickoff, that is only 35 yards in about 70 seconds to leave time for the kick. Even with no timeouts, that is not an overwhelming task. It isn't even an unlikely task. I everybody is sitting down, but our defense is not exactly the Steel Curtain or the Legion of Boom. Leaving over a minute on the clock with a slim lead is going to result in losses more times than not. Even the TD does not seal the deal, but it sure makes the mountain they have to climb higher. Ideally, as you said, if you can manage to get the FD, you still take their timeouts off the board and can actually milk the clock. Even if they opt to play for the FG at that point, Big Ben will have at least 40 fewer seconds (if you pick up the FD on the 1st and 10 play), which means the Browns get the ball back with 30-ish seconds left.....if they get the ball back at all. That is a lot taller order than what we left them. I think even our defense could hold a 2-point lead with :00 on the clock and people running off the field.

Mayfield bucked our trend of starting out well and then declining to zero the rest of the game. They might have helped his bad start had they actually run the effing football some. The guy does well with play action, so we decide to not do what the play action forces the defense to respect that you might do.

Sadly, that would not surprise me one bit. The only reason that may not be the case is it appears the criticisms of Rhule are coming from so many sources in so many places, Tepper can't avoid seeing them. But even that does not ensure a change will happen any sooner.

So let me understand this. We are preparing (or not) for a game against the Cleveland Browns. We have a brand new rookie LT and a QB who is starting his first game for us. Our rookie LT is more proficient at run blocking than pass blocking right now, which makes sense because it allows him to attack. He is playing opposite a DE who is perhaps the best pass rushing DE in the game, and if not the best, on the short list. Yet we decide to minimize the run because, over the course of the season, teams that win throw the football. Uh, Matt. Newsflash. Teams that win in the NFL generally do so by creating game plans to play to their own strengths, protect their weaknesses, and attack opponents weaknesses. Creating a game plan against a specific opponent based on an observation of all teams over the course of a season is, well, curious.

Officially, I classified Rhule as a snake oil salesman about the second or third time I heard "the Process" in response to some question. When it was clear that "the Process" was going to become a thing onto itself, my BS meter went from dancing around to being pegged in the red and it has not come down since. My first indication was the way he handled the Bridgewater meltdown. Teddy deserved some of the blame for the offense, but it was also clear the criticisms he leveled on the coaching staff were valid. There are a lot of good ways for a HC to respond, from not responding publicly to the obvious "given the results, we all need to do better and we are going to work on that." Instead, he and Tepper circled the wagons. As a result, the plan of using Teddy as a transition QB to the eventual starter, or to another transition QB while the search continued went right out the door. Which led us to Darnold. Part of being a leader is owning up to mistakes and shortcomings (and improving). Hell, part of being a leader is sometimes owning up to mistakes and shortcomings of others, at least publicly. WE succeed and I fail is the general idea. But in Rhule's world, HE succeeds (if he ever does) and others fail. I remember Darrell Bevell doing the same after the Seahawks gave away Super Bowl 49. It was everybody's fault but his, despite the fact that it remains probably the worst play call in Super Bowl history. He went from being a contender for head coaching vacancies to pretty much being persona non grata for such positions. Hell, the way we work, he will probably be our next HC.

I saw that quote when I was writing my response. More of the same from Rhule. He ought to be in politics. Essentially, this and other questions boil down to why was the team so unprepared for the game. His answer is that the fact that they spent a significant part of the prep time for the season not preparing for the season had nothing to do with it.

Where are all his defenders that openly wondered what the tone of this place would be when they came out and looked good on opening day, despite the reps being split up in the name of "competition?" How many of us were saying that training camp and preseason serves one over-arching purpose: to prepare your team for the regular season? That means getting your projected starting OL time together to start the gelling process they need to anticipate what each other are going to do. It means getting your starting QB time with his receivers and center. That doesn't mean somebody can't take a starting job if they look good enough or the projected starter looks bad enough, but this is not tryouts for the high school team......or is it? Even teams that do spend the preseason trying to prepare for the regular season usually come out rusty in the opening couple of weeks. Now imagine what a team that spends their time high school tryouts looks like. The good news is that you don't need to imagine. It was on display in the first half yesterday.