Meyer's Managerial Mistakes

By Kris Mead

Ohio State University football, under Urban Meyer, has been able to recruit a top ten, and even sometimes a top five, recruiting class year in and year out. So, it can be confidently stated that Ohio State is more talented than all the teams on their schedule.  The question then becomes, “how does a team, with such talent and pedigree, manage to lose, and lose badly, to a Purdue team who started the year 0-3?” The answer should be squarely pointed at the people on the field receiving paychecks – the coaches.

Urban Meyer, a coach who has had and continues to have significant success at every university for which he’s coached, has recently settled for complacency in the form of cronyism. When Ohio State won the national championship in 2014, and Meyer’s years at Ohio State prior to the national championship, Meyer had a coaching staff of excellent assistants, who had no connections to Meyer. For instance, Ohio State was led by offensive coordinator, Tom Herman. Herman not only coached three excellent quarterbacks for Ohio State – Miller, Barrett, and Jones – but he had to coach two significantly different quarterbacks in the run to the national championship. Luke Fickell also had no personal connection with Urban Meyer prior to being named the defensive coordinator. He too created a defense that was able to be ferocious and was the backbone of the Ohio State team. Kerry Coombs, the father of “DBU” (Defensive Back University), developed the likes of Marshon Lattimore, Gareon Conley and countless others. Then there was Chris Ash, an intellectual who created dominant safeties such as Malik Hooker. Of course, because these assistant coaches were so good, they were poached by other teams to become collegiate head coaches or assistant coaches in the NFL.

After watching Ohio State last night (10/20/18) it was pretty easy to figure out where the team has its largest issues. Granted, there were issues at every position.  The first issue is the offensive line. It is well documented that Isaiah Prince has regressed back to his 2016 tendencies – off sides and holding penalties, due to his failure to sufficiently guard the edge rush. The other problem is the fact that Michael Jordan, who was moved from guard to center this year after All-American center, Billy Price, was drafted by the Bengals, has struggled mightily at not only snapping the ball with velocity, but was out maneuvered by Purdue’s interior defensive line, which has been terrible the whole season.

The offensive line coach for the Buckeyes is Greg Studrawa.  Meyer hired Studrawa to replace Ed Warriner.  Warriner was an excellent offensive line coach (2012-2016) for the Buckeyes and had no connections to Meyer prior to being hired. Warriner took an offensive line that allowed four sacks per game in 2011 and, by the end of 2013, cut that down to 1.5 sacks per game. He was promoted to offensive coordinator, a position that was not a good fit for him and which caused him to be pushed out. In turn, Michigan hired him as their offensive line coach this year. Now Michigan’s offensive line looks much better than Ohio State’s. Studrawa, on the other hand, coached under Meyer at Bowling Green. Studrawa then coached for LSU as the offensive line coach and was let go after seven years of mediocracy. After LSU, Studrawa became Maryland’s offensive line coach for two years. Mentioning Maryland and football should be enough for anyone to realize that he stunk there too. However, Meyer decided to hire his friend in 2016. The line has deteriorated ever since, but at least Meyer retains his friend – Greg Studarawa.

The linebackers for Ohio State, which are usually a staple component of not only the defense, but the entire team, have been, at the very least, dismal. The linebackers seemed lost on several plays, at times taking bad angles on tackles and at other times they don’t fill gaps. This may be due to the scheme that they are playing on defense. Lately, it appears that Greg Schiano has been moving his linebackers to the line of scrimmage which, although it provides a defensive rush, does not allow the linebackers to “see the play” and fill the holes. Being practically placed at the line of scrimmage from the onset, the linebackers are already engaged in their pursuit and therefore cannot see how the play develops. This essentially creates a two layer defense. The first layer is comprised of the defensive line and now because the linebackers are committed at the line of scrimmage, the linebackers too. The second layer of the defense are the defensive backs, predominantly the safeties. The safeties also do not fill gaps and, for some reason, make instinctual mistakes. The instinctual mistakes made by the safeties in the run game are incredibly bad. In some instances, a play may be going to the right and yet the safeties initially start running to the left. However, if the linebackers stayed back and did not automatically line up at the line, big runs could be mitigated.

The coach of the Ohio State linebackers is named Billy Davis. Davis has coached the majority of his career, other than a stint at Michigan State in 1991 as a graduate assistant, in the NFL. His NFL resume is long and it is unclear why he made a move to coach at the collegiate level, rather than trying to remain in the NFL. Nick Saban and Chip Kelley also moved from the NFL back to the college level, but that was only after they were either fired or “significantly persuaded” to leave their NFL positions. It seems obvious that Davis was hired less for his resume but more for the fact that he was a teammate of Meyer’s at the University of Cincinnati.  In addition, Davis was Meyer’s best man in Meyer’s wedding. Further Wikipedia (I know isn’t “credible”) has stated that, “[i]n 2018, Davis’s linebackers at Ohio State consistently guess what hole to attack before they even read the play, get blocked and are unable to shed the block resulting in huge plays.” That quote encapsulates all that is wrong with Bill Davis’s coaching. The man should be fired for his blatant inability to develop the linebackers, adjust to the opposing offense, and the numbskull formations he uses to position his linebackers.

The other friend Meyer hired is Greg Schiano. However, I hesitate to criticize this hiring too much because, for the most part, OSU’s defense has been Ohio State’s most consistent facet. However, lately I question the secondary and, as stated earlier, the failure to adjust properly to opposing team’s offensives. This happened routinely against Minnesota two weeks ago. Minnesota consistently ran “read-option inside slant routes.” The slot receiver would run out, run freely I might add, and then commit to an inside slant. The safety in charge of covering this slot receiver would be initially ten to twelve yards away from the receiver. By the time the safety commits to covering the slot receiver, he is caught flat footed and fails to cover the slot receiver as he makes his inside cut. In turn, there was no adjustment to this issue. No linebacker was moved over to cover up the slot receiver at the line of scrimmage, nor was a safety initially lined up five yards away. The failure to adjust was mind boggling. This same failure to adjust occurred in the Purdue debacle in which Purdue’s, not only best receiver, but best player in Rondale Moore, was given a ten yard cushion almost routinely.  It seemed as though Buckeyes had no answer to Moore’s crossing routes. The entire game it was obvious to everyone that Moore was Purdue’s quarterback’s first receiving option – everyone, except for Ohio State. In other words, I have never seen a more inferior and unintelligent Buckeye secondary than the one that played against Purdue. It was an utter embarrassment to even try to believe that these players were four or five star recruits out of high school.

The reason why this lack of secondary play may come for three reasons, two of the reasons are squarely due to failure to hire adequate coaches. The first reason is that there is a chance that Ohio State’s corners and safeties are not at the same level that Ohio State has previously been spoiled with in the likes of Marshon Lattimore and Denzel Ward. The other issue is that the dean of “Defensive Backs University” left for the Tennessee Titans just after last year, in Kerry Coombs. It should be noted that Coombs was hired by Meyer in 2012 and had no previous connections to Meyer. Coombs was simply the most skilled coach at his position. In turn, Meyer replaced Coombs with a Jim Tressel cornerbacks coach in Taver Johnson. Now Johnson was not a bad hire, but it becomes obvious that Meyer most likely did not do a thorough hiring search and hired Johnson out of convenience rather than based on skill. The second issue is the fact that Meyer previously hired Chris Ash to coach the safeties. Ash left to become the head coach of Rutgers (that’s going fabulously … not) and Schiano has taken over for coaching the safeties. This is concerning, especially this year, because the safeties are playing poorly for the reasons mentioned previously, and the defense, as a whole, is playing like a dumpster fire. Schiano needs to focus on the entire defense and Meyer should hire a specific position coach for the safeties.

There are five decent coaches. These coaches are Brian Hartline, Ryan Day, Alex Grinch, Kevin Wilson and Larry Johnson. Johnson is the best of these assistant coaches and only assistant coach from the 2014 National Championship staff. His defensive line may be the strongest unit on the defensive side of the ball, even without Nick Bosa. Ryan Day was excellent as an interim head coach, although TCU was the only competitive team for him to coach against in those three games. However, Day was a graduate assistant under Meyer at Florida. Brian Hartline, also a graduate assistant under Meyer this year, was recently promoted due to Meyer’s close friend, Zach Smith, having to be fired from Ohio State because he could not keep his hands off his wife.  Kevin Wilson and Alex Grinch were both best available hires and so Meyer should be given credit. The issue, though, for Wilson is the fact that his offense is always stalled because Studrawa’s line is so anemic and lacks any sort of motivation to be good. Grinch was a talented hire from Washington State, where he was the defensive coordinator, and this hire was smart because it was assumed that Schiano was going to be hired by the University of Tennessee, but that went awry. So Ohio State has settled with having co-coordinators at both the offense and defensive coordinator positions. I have to believe that Kevin Wilson has authority over Ryan Day at offensive play calling, and Schiano has authority over Grinch at defensive play calling. But frankly, with Meyer’s managerial skills, he probably chooses not to instruct who the “lead co-coordinator” is. It should be noted that in the past Meyer has routinely had co-coordinators at Ohio State. However, Chris Ash was hired to coach safeties and Wilson was hired after Warriner was quickly sent packing.

In a nutshell, the issue with Ohio State, and this goes for the entire university, is this constant climate of complacency. It starts with Meyer who has become complacent in choosing to hire folks he knows, rather than the best suited coaches available for the job. In the least case scenario, this complacency has caused Ohio State to be embarrassed on national television against a Purdue team that lacks any NFL talent. In the worst-case scenario, Meyer’s hiring complacency has caused him to nearly lose his job – failing to report his friend Zach Smith for beating his wife.  The other complacency that follows is the fact that Meyer is complacent in not holding his coaches accountable. If Meyer couldn’t fire Zach Smith until his domestic violence was aired to the world, why would any OSU fan assume he would even consider scolding his assistant coaches, who are also his friends, for coaching so poorly? The answer is, he won’t.

Meyer is losing control of this talented team. He has done this under his own making in a failure to hire responsibly. Meyer has chosen convenience over vetted candidates and has chosen friends over qualified candidates. These friends coach under no fear of losing their jobs because Meyer, most likely, is too scared to reprimand their inability to coach. Players have chosen complacency for the simple fact that their coaches have committed to complacency – complacency in strategy, matchups, and play calling. Ohio State lost the Purdue  game the moment their most talented player, quarterback Dwayne Haskins, gave Meyer “bunny ears” during Meyer’s national pregame sideline interview. That indicated that the coaches did not emphasize improvement to the players and continued to preach the mantra that, “we keep winning, therefore everything is fine. If everything is fine, we don’t need to change a thing.”

The Zach Smith episode was thought to be a benign cancer in Ohio State’s locker room. However, after last night’s embarrassment, coupled with Ohio State’s troubled victories against inferior opponents, has revealed that the cancer may be much worse. Meyer has evaded the sickness once, but he should remove the tumors now before the disease becomes malignant and the entire team infected.

2018 Browns' Chronicles: Week 6

By Kris Mead

 

In the film, Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope there is a scene in which Han Solo and Luke Skywalker must venture into the Empire’s Death Star, posed as enemy storm troopers, in order to rescue Princess Leia. At the same time the Jedi, Obi-wan Kenobi, attempts to switch off the Death Star’s tractor beam. The mission is a success. Solo and Skywalker are able to secure possession of Leia, and Kenobi is able to switch off the tractor beam. Although Kenobi sacrifices himself for the group to escape, and the fact that Solo, Leia and Skywalker must fight their way out of the Death Star, the group is still able to successfully complete their mission with limited casualties.

The Browns, last week in their loss to the San Die ... ooops…Los Angeles’ Chargers, were “attempting” to do what Skywalker, Solo, and Kenobi were successful in doing – escaping, successfully, undetected in enemy territory. I put attempting in quotations, because the Browns’ attempt was about as effective as the Battle of Mogadishu was in preventing Somali from tumbling into civil war.

For the Browns, it has felt as though they have been able to disguise themselves as storm trooper (i.e. a legit professional football team against whom other teams actually have to practice) all within the confines of the Empire’s (i.e. the NFL) Death Star. For the most part, the Browns have been able to evade complete discovery. In a way, the Browns were similar to any of the Assassin Creed video games. In those games the player is, well, an assassin who sneaks around so as not to get detected. The player has this little arrow that will enlarge and change color to alert her that she either has been or, if she does not hide, will be detected. In times, when the assassin is not noticed, the arrow will stay “white” and small. The Browns for the first five games have mostly stayed in either the non-detected or “slightly detected” stage (loss to the Raiders).

However, the massacre that happened this past Sunday was essentially the equivalent of Solo and Skywalker stepping off the Millennium Falcon, in the Death Star, and being decapitated immediately by Darth Vader. The Browns did not fool anyone. They reverted to their old ways, and I’m talking “old ways,” like the butt whooping the Browns received by the Cowboys in the 2016 regular season twenty-five-point loss. The Browns weren’t just an assassin detected, but it was like being detected in the Palace of Versailles, in Assassin’s Creed Unity, and all of King Louis’ Palace Guards were slashing their cutlasses into the Browns’ gullet simultaneously. Watching the Browns’ on Sunday was like watching Alabama beat The Citadel in football, and, unfortunately, The Browns were The Citadel!

So enough with the sci-fi analogies. It is the only way that I can cope with the loss without resorting to a strong drink, which, if the people at my bar are a sample size of the greater Cleveland Browns’ fan base, most people have chosen a stiff drink as their coping mechanism (I salute you!). How was this a massacre? The score alone, 38-14, is enough to suggest that this was a massacre, but that’s not a reliable measure to simply write off a game as a “massacre.” If questioning this theory, just look at the Ohio State victory against Minnesota last Saturday. Although Ohio State won by sixteen points, anyone who watched that game would never consider it a blowout.

So then why was this such a blowout for the Browns? First, the Browns could not stop the run … at all! The Chargers could run it up the middle, around or side to side.  It didn’t seem to matter where they ran it because they just could. Melvin Gordon was the Chargers’ leading rusher with 132 yards on just 18 carries.  He also recorded three touchdowns. All the Browns rushes combined do not even come within ten yards of surpassing Gordon’s rushing yards. The Browns’ leading rusher, Duke Johnson, had thirty-six yards on two carries; whereas Carlos Hyde had the most touches (14), but only ran for a total of thirty-four yards. The second issue isn’t so much the Browns’ rushing attack, but more so the Browns’ offensive line - or lack of one. Combine the lackluster rushing with Baker Mayfield’s five sacks, for a combined loss of twenty-four yards, and it is a recipe for an offensive disaster. The third issue was Baker Mayfield himself. He resembled, dare I say, Tyrod Taylor instincts. In other words, Baker held the ball far too long when he should have either dumped it off or thrown it away. However, this coincides with the fourth issue – lack of wide receivers. With Rashard Higgins injured, the Chargers doubled team Jarvis Landry and took their chances playing one on one with the Browns anemic receiving corp of Njoku, Calloway, and the rookie – Damion Ratley (who ironically would be the leading receiver for the Browns).  So pretty much the offense as a unit was completely dismal, i.e. they played like the traditional Browns. So the Chargers thought, and to quote the ex-Arizona Cardinals head coach, Dennis Green, “they [Browns] are who we thought they were” and they suck!

On a bright note, the Cleveland kicking game, which has been the Browns’ Achilles heel (pun is absolutely intended) was the best part of the team! Greg Joseph went two for two. Encouraging as that may be, the Browns have to restart, and they have to realize that this game exposed them. The Browns can’t stealthily sneak up on opponents and take them out, like in Assassin’s Creed. Sometimes they are going to have to take their opponents head, a full-frontal attack, with “guns a blazing.”

Onto Tampa Bay!

 

P.S.

If you still don’t think this was “that bad of a loss”, just realize that Geno Smith played better than Baker Mayfield (in terms of QBR). The very fact that the Los Angeles’ Chargers allowed Geno Smith to not only touch an actual football field, but allowed him to touch an actual football, should cause any reasonable person to instantly nauseate.  That’s how bad the Browns played.

The Booger Beat: MNF Redskins v. Saints

By Kris Mead

 

With John Gruden’s departure from Monday Night Football on ESPN, most viewers who enjoy not having their ears bleed while watching football, were hopeful that they could once again unmute their televisions and watch the game with the sound on. However, that wish was short lived as ESPN replaced one washed up NFL coach, who could only muster speaking words with, at most, three syllables, with an equally, if not more unintelligent, brute in Booger McFarland.

Since ESPN has beat reporters to cover each NFL team, I have taken it upon myself to be the beat reporter for our lovable nimrod – Booger McFarland. Welcome to the inaugural installment of The Booger Beat!

Booger is unique not only in his ability to state the obvious, but in how he goes about stating the obvious. For instance, in last Monday’s game, Booger made this analysis, when the Redskins were in the red zone but down 26-6 against the Saints, “Redskins need a touchdown, cannot settle for a field goal in the red zone.” Disregard the fact that Booger could have used his experience playing football to better analyze how the Redskins should attack the New Orleans defense, or what play call the Redskins tend to make in this part of the field.  Instead, Booger used all his NFL insight to state that a team down by twenty points would be better off scoring six points rather than three points.

There was another point in the game in which the Redskins were called for a horse collar tackle penalty. While the penalty was being sorted out, Booger was given the honors of letting the viewers know what was happening. So, Booger stated, “think you may have a horse collar on the tackle.” Booger essentially defined a word by using the word in the definition. By saying that it was a “horse collar,” there was no need for Booger to add that extra insight that the horse collar “is on the tackle.” That’s because the penalty is literally called a “horse collar tackle.”

At other times Booger chose to use the Socratic method on the viewers. At one point the Saints were pushed back on third down due to a penalty. Booger took it upon himself to make his “deep” analysis. First Booger told the audience that, “They [Redskins] got to make a play here.” What Booger did in this case was similar to when a fifth-grade teacher tells her students that they should refrain from using adjectives with three letters and try to use “bigger” words in their writing. Booger basically did the same thing, but in sportscaster talk. Whereas a teacher might encourage her pupils to use the word “enormous” in place of the simplistic word “big” to describe something large, a sportscaster is encouraged to say something like, ”the middle linebacker should blitz up the A gap because you know the offense likes to throw in third and long” rather than, “they need to make a play” when describing a third and long situation for the defense. However, Booger decided to go the more simplistic route. The second item that Booger did was what I’ll call “flip the script.” After Booger said that the Redskins needed to “make a play on defense,” he then asked the audience, “Do they come after him [New Orleans quarterback, Drew Brees] or stay back?” Booger went Socratic method on us football viewers! Booger probably got too tired of giving us idiots all the answers, deciding it was time the viewer worked for his expertise!

Some other “notable quotables” that Booger decided to use:

1. Just a dancing bear, not just a blind dog in a bee house (Booger was describing a Washington defensive lineman causing a fumble on a New Orleans screen play. Still not sure what to make of that analogy).
2. That’s not a good formula to play D against that guy (That “guy” would be New Orleans quarterback Drew Brees. The Redskins committed pass interference which gave New Orleans a fresh set of downs.)
3. Them ‘Bama Boys make a difference (the name Booger gave to the Redskins defensive line because two out of their three linemen came from the University of Alabama…)
4. Redskins need to settle down, lot of football left to play in the second half (another extremely generic football quote. There is exactly 30 minutes of football left to play at the beginning of the second half)

At one point it appeared Booger was being outright contradicted by his own commentator, Joe Tessitore. In the second quarter, the Redskins were down but had the ball. Booger stated, “Redskins can still run the football. They have to be patient.” However, then Tessitore immediately said, “You must press the pedal against the Saints.” Joe, who had zero experience playing football at any high level, outright contradicted the most insightful analysis that Booger gave the entire night!

Joe’s annoyance with Booger would only continue. In the third quarter the Saints caused a sack fumble and recovered the ball. Booger’s analysis was, “I think they [referees] are going to call that a sack fumble, Joe.” Joe immediately stated, without any hesitation to Booger, “No doubt about it.”

A few “Booger Stats”:

1. Total comments in first quarter: 13
2. Total comments in second quarter: 30
3. Total comments in third quarter: 21
4. Total comments in fourth quarter: 10

So, if you do tune into Monday Night Football I still recommend keeping your T.V. on mute.  But if you must have the sound, I recommend only turning it up during the first and fourth quarters. Booger gets all riled up in the second and third quarters and I have yet to find out why this is (possibly they feed him during these quarters), but my investigative reporting (from my couch) has yet to determine the cause. Sorry.

2018 Browns' Chronicles: Week 5

By Kris Mead

 

The Browns not only won a game on a Sunday, the first in over 1,000 days, but, more importantly, they beat a division rival for the first time in three years! Although the Browns won in dramatic fashion, they earned the win against an extremely talented Baltimore team, primarily against its second ranked defense. However, not everyone could be happy and in this week’s issue of the “Browns’ Chronicles” I will examine the human rain cloud, better known as ESPN’s Cleveland Browns’ beat reporter – Pat McManamon.

Who is Pat? Pat is a native Clevelander, so I can’t dog him for being an outsider who only took the Cleveland beat writer job out of desperation, rather than actual interest into Cleveland sports. However, there is some level of argument that ESPN would like to layoff Pat, as they have been gutting their personnel for some time. If you need to see who ESPN let go, just tune into its up and coming rival FS1 and you’ll rediscover the same talking heads who once yammered their mouths on behalf of the almighty ESPN. It could also be there is just a lack of supply for beat writers licking their chops to cover the Browns. In turn, ESPN faces the economic challenge of a lack of labor which drives McManomon’s perceived worth “up” and gives him the “oompas” to keep writing garbage columns.

The article I will be critiquing is Pat’s analysis of the Browns’ week 5 win against the Baltimore Ravens entitled, Baker Mayfield, Browns look for hope from an ugly win. So right off the bat, Pat portrays himself as the guy in school who is friends with the losers, but wants to fit in so desperately with the winners that he’ll throw his own nerdy friends under the bus in order to achieve that gratification.  Just look at the passive aggressive title, “Browns look for hope from an ugly win.” Now, it is quite common for the words, “Browns,” “ugly,” and “hope” to be in the same sentence, but “Browns” and “Win” in the same sentence is about as common as President Trump not making an utterly dumb remark within a 24-hour news cycle. So then why must Pat combine the negative words with the positive words? Sure, Pat wants to come across as an unbiased journalist, but it seems more evident that Pat wants to subliminally distance himself from the “loser franchise” he covers, for fear his readers might view him a loser by association.  With that, let’s continue examining this shallow, uncharacteristically negative, ESPN Cleveland beat writer, shall we?

Pat then begins his article by recalling how the Browns, just last week, lost a game after scoring 42 points, but then, this week, only scored 12 points and yet won. This passive aggressive jab at the Browns inadvertently reveals Pat’s lack of understanding for the unexpectedness that is the NFL.  For instance, the Buffalo Bills lost to the Ravens by 44 points but then went on to beat the Minnesota Viking by 24 -  in Minnesota. Both opening sentences first state something negative about Cleveland and then are quickly twisted around to make it “sort of” positive. It’s as though Pat can’t believe the Browns could win, because the week prior they lost even after playing well.  The same can be said for the Bills and their Viking win, since the Bills lost so badly prior to the Ravens. However, and what Pat fails to understand, is that more often than not the NFL is unpredictable.  Previous week games are inconsequential to the week coming up. If this wasn’t the case the NFL would become an extremely monotonous, predictable form of entertainment. Actually, if the NFL increased in predictability, its entertainment value would, hopefully, decrease (what fan would want to wasting four hours of their Sunday watching something where the outcome is fairly certain?). Now, to be clear, there is some level of statistics which allow coaches to either change their upcoming week strategy or exploit their opponents’ weaknesses. In that way outcomes become a little more predictable.  Nonetheless, due to high levels of competition between each NFL team and the fact that even the smallest variable could cause a team to lose, the NFL is a highly unpredictable week to week.   

The next statement Pat makes, which is uninspiring, comes in the end of his third paragraph in which he says, “[a] team trying to change its culture . . . maybe can use a 12-9 overtime victory to propel it forward.” First, the very fact that Pat is certain a victory will assist a team trying to change its culture is utterly absurd. Pat, how would you suggest a team, that in the past two years has gone 1-31, best go about trying to change its culture? It wouldn’t require a half-baked and whitewashed FBI investigation to figure this one out, as the answer is simple: winning football games is how a historically bad team starts to change its culture. So, it isn’t that the Browns “maybe” could use a victory, but rather that need to have a victory, in any form, drives culture change. Secondly, the win in itself has propelled the Browns forward automatically for the simple fact that under Hue Jackson they have never won more than one game in a season - now they have doubled that. Another way to look at it is if the Browns would have lost, they would not have moved forward at all. So in turn, because they won, they automatically have propelled forward and now need to continue propelling forward by winning games. However, to suggest that if the Browns weren’t to win any more games this year then they would not have propelled forward from this win would be false.  Sunday’s win in itself is evidence of the team moving forward.

Next Pat does something that all non-Browns fans do – they reminisce on how bad the Browns have been. Pat goes on to provide anyone who has been living under a rock various examples of how bad the Browns have been. Thanks, Pat. I am quite confident that anyone choosing to read about the Browns is either a Browns fan or is having suicidal thoughts, and if it’s the latter, don’t waste your time giving them a history lesson.

Pat moves on to describe that “…when they [Browns] somehow pulled out the win, the outlook changed. For this team 2-2-1 is a quantum leap from 1-3-1.”  This phrase makes it seem that the Browns had some sort of 300 moments similar to when the 300 Spartan warriors “somehow” held back the thousand or so Persians from advancing on them. Now, I will give Pat some leeway here as he does go on to discuss how Baker, Denzel Ward, and Myles Garret’s play helped the Browns win.  But to say that this was a “quantum leap” is startling, to say the least. The reason for this is that the Browns are a team that is capable of winning 6 games, if not more. They became markedly better between this year and last year. For instance with the signing of Randall, Terrence Mitchell (although now hurt), and Jarvis Landry, the Browns sured up their pass defense and helped out their depleted receiving corp. Further with the Browns picking Mayfield, Ward, and Calloway in the draft they, again, became more talented than the year prior. It wasn’t a quantum leap that the Browns won.  It is more like a quantum leap that the Browns did not have some sort of unpredictable mishap cost them the game – multiple missed kicks (New Orleans loss) and inexplicable official miscues (Oakland).

So I congratulate the Cleveland Browns and especially to the rookies – Mayfield and Ward. The former for keeping an offense going even when it seemed over, and the latter for making game saving plays in crucial moments. That is what propelled the Browns to the win and what will continue to propel the Browns forward (although the Browns do need to cut the penalties).

Finally, I apologize for Pat McManomon’s constant pandering to the rest of the NFL fandom. Yes, in his article he does mention, briefly, about Cleveland’s growth, but he did so under a cloud of judgment in which he, involuntarily or otherwise, secretly wishes that the Browns would come back down to earth. It may be that Pat has become so accustomed to writing about losers that he isn’t quite sure how to write about winners. If this is the truth, then not only do the Browns need to use this win to “propel” forward and change the culture, but so does Pat.

2018 Browns' Chronicles: Week 4

By Kris Mead

This week’s loss could be summed up with a very simple take that my friend told me, “The refs screwed us, and it didn’t help that we shot ourselves in the foot.” So that’s essentially what this week’s chronicle will analyze: (1) how the refs robbed the Browns of a victory with two very bogus calls, one of which had no reasoning behind it and another that had very bogus reasoning behind it and (2) the Browns’ missed opportunities that would have allowed them to win the game. So, without further ado, let’s dig into the epic collapse, that is better known as the Browns!

1.       The Zebras. Let me first preface this point by advertising another blog I wrote that, ironically, is specifically about football refs called, Although Refs May Dress Like Zebras, They are Still Dumber. Okay now that I have that “self-marketing” segment out of the way I will proceed with violating one of the wholly sacraments of all of sport: "thou shall not blame thy refs when thou loses." That sacrament is for the very fact that if players refuse to respect the refs, then the game fails to be played in its proper nature. It is essentially like if the U.S. population chose not to follow a judge’s ruling, simply because it felt the judge was wrong. However, I think that the refs can be blamed for a loss the same way Seahawks fans blame Pete Carrol for choosing to throw the ball, rather than handing the ball off to Marshawn Lynch on fourth down at the Patriots’ 1-yard line, in the closing moments of Super Bowl XLIX (as many of you know the pass was picked off and the Patriots then won the Super Bowl).

So, the first blunder by the refs in the Browns v. Raiders game was the strip sack, which was blown dead. There is no consensus as to why this play was blown dead. It can only reasonably be determined to have been an inadvertent whistle (which is the ultimate cardinal sin a ref can commit). The refs could not suggest that Oakland quarterback Derek Carr’s arm was moving forward in a throwing motion, as he clearly had the ball held at his chest when it was stripped. Further, it can’t be said that he was down prior to the ball popping out, as the ball was clearly on the ground before Carr was toppled over. The issue that stings the worst in this referee blunder was the very fact that the ball was scooped up by a Browns’ defender, who would have waltzed into the end zone for a Browns’ touchdown. That would have not only put the Browns up even further, but any morale Oakland may have had, would have been severely depleted. In the ref’s defense, we all make mistakes, but some mistakes are worse than others. For instance, forgetting to copy someone on an email is usually a relatively inconsequential mistake, but that wasn’t what the ref did. Here the ref basically did the equivalent of a soldier opening fire on fellow comrades and only realizing he made a mistake after they are all either were killed or critically injured. In this case, the ref who blew the whistle most likely wished that he was dead right then and there. The reason for this is because good old Hue Jackson, who just last week got his second win in his over two-year stint with his Cleveland Browns, had a little pep in his step, a little swagger with his walk, if you will. So, Hue gave that ref an earful of most likely inaudible sounds.  That ref took it. One last note, before I move onto to the next ref blunder, the ref could breathe a sigh of relief that the inadvertent whistle went in the home team’s favor, because if the same whistle was blown in Cleveland, well, I would have provided a link to his obituary.

The next blunder occurred in the fourth quarter. Essentially the Browns just needed to pick up a first down, and, if they did so, they could just run out the clock on the Raiders. However, in Browns fashion, Carlos Hyde took the hand off and was awarded the first down. However, the NFL decided to do an official review. After, the analyst claimed the call probably would stand because there was not enough evidence to overturn the call on the field, the NFL does what it always does to Cleveland – screws us. The refs stated that Hyde was just short of the line to gain a first down and therefore it would be fourth down. So, Hue punted and the Raiders, with just over a minute left to play, were able to score a touchdown AND convert a two-point conversion, sending the game to overtime. What was interesting was the fact that after the game was over, and due to such uproar (justified uproar I might add) the NFL decided to come out with a statement that defended its refs. The NFL defending its refs is sometimes like a teacher’s union defending that teacher who everyone knows was a pedophile. So, the NFL came up with some outlandish quote about how they stitched together two angles in the NFL’s New York review headquarters, to determine the call, after stitching together these two views they then could overturn the call on the field. So basically, the NFL is saying, “please don’t question us because we have information that you don’t have (i.e. the stitched together sequence), but we aren’t going to provide you with that information, but still please take our word for it. Thanks.”

In a league which tries to provide the fans with every little field of view imaginable, it’s hard to imagine why they would not provide the fans with the same viewpoints the NFL officials apparently had. It baffles me. The NFL should, instead of treating these “secret” angels as some sort of top secret national security information, market it by partnering with Direct-TV. Together they could rip off their loyal Cheeto eating, Bud heavy drinking, slightly obese, half shaven, red neck American viewer by getting him to purchase the “Angle Package.” Yes, the Angles Package, which sounds like some sort of adult entertainment site, but will give that middle age man the same views the refs use in NFL headquarters to determine challenges. So not only did the privacy that these “secret views” carry cause me to once again see how outlandish and utterly dumb the NFL treats its viewers, but I also started to question which angles they were stitching, as the ref in the commentator booth said it was extremely unlikely that the call on the field would be overturned. So the NFL’s ambiguity caused me to think the NFL may have cameras that us viewers aren’t even privy to. My guess would be there must be some sort of micro cameras at every hash mark or, better yet, the Goodyear blimp is some sort of military style drone that can see every angle of the field.

However, as much as I kid, the NFL rather I come up with these dumb ideas, than question their truthfulness. For why would a business that dedicates a month to Breast Cancer, and every day to Veterans, convolute a game with hypocrisy? It’s because it is a business.  A sport can only be followed if people believe there is an equal chance that each team could win. For if that aura of fairness is sucked out of the sport, then it is no longer a sport, but it becomes what so many other enterprises are these days – gimmicks. It becomes nothing more than a magic trick in which the viewer is lured to view something happening in one place, so that he won’t notice something happening in the other. Now, I am not suggesting that the NFL is rigged, but I am suggesting that they will do everything possible to make sure that there can never be any doubt of fairness, even if that requires lying to keep their refs safe.

With all this turmoil in Washington this week regarding Brett M. “Keganaugh” claiming that he is being persecuted under some Democrat conspiracy, but at the same time claims he is a nonpartisan justice, it was a welcome respite to just tune into football. However, after seeing the lousy officiating in the NFL, followed by the NFL’s even lousier excuse for the bad calls, begs the question – are Americans really this easy to deceive? To put it more bluntly, are Americans really so dumb to drink whatever Kool-Aid is handed to them, not only from Washington, but the NFL too?

2.       Mistakes. This one is simple – catch the ball when it is thrown to you and play better defense.

America's Morals are Restored and Kavanaugh Collapses (Hopefully)

By Kris Mead

The level of straight face lying has reached an exorbitant level in the last two years. Just this past week America had a potential Supreme Court Judge, Brett Kavanaugh, refute his alleged claims of sexual assault against him by sharing with the Senate Judiciary Committee his high school calendars, which ironically, marked the days in which he planned to drink … underage. However, he was quick to note that he never drank “too much” and never had a lapse in memory from drinking (right …). What was even more amazing was the very fact that Americans, “hardworking Americans,” believed Brett over the alleged victim – Dr. Ford.

Ford has nothing to gain from making this accusation and providing her testimony to the Committee, other than providing the American people a fair assessment of Judge Kavanaugh’s character. Kavanaugh will not have any criminal charges pressed against him from Ford’s testimony and Ford will not receive any sort of civil award for damages.

One set of Americans who side with Brett Kavanaugh but must desperately fight their moral conscience to do so are women. These types of Americans seem to suggest defenses such as, “everyone does stupid things in high school” or “I wouldn’t want someone looking back 35 years into my past” are legitimate.   Their defenses don’t refute that Judge Kavanaugh committed sexual assault, but rather they try to rationalize committing sexual assault with say, “teepeeing Johnny’s house.” The latter is something that immature youths commit, while the former is an egregious act that is not only immoral and outright disgusting, but is a felony.

The other kind of defense that many Americans have used is to first rationalize Kavanaugh’s actions, and then, second, go after Dr. Ford’s credibility.  The first attack that Kavanaugh supporters use against Ford is the fact that, “why did something that happened 35 years ago, and was alleged to be so terrible, just now become public knowledge?” This attack demonstrates that the attacker lacks information about women who have been sexually assaulted and, more importantly, women who have been sexually assaulted by men who had resources (i.e. rich, white men). These victims tend not to report. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2016 only 23 percent of victims of sexual assault or rape reported these incidents to authorities. The reasoning for not reporting is usually due to fear that the victim will experience retaliation, especially if the alleged perpetrator is well known or comes from a wealthy family. It was also found in a report by the Rape, Abuse, & Incest, National, Network (“RAINN”) that, between 2010-2014, out of every 1,000-sexual assault perpetrators, 994 walked free.

The other attack that they use against Ford is “she was probably drinking at the party and so was no angel either.” Yet this is again trying to rationalize attempted rape with underage drinking. If these linear thinking apologists were to actually listen to Dr. Ford’s extremely detailed testimony, they would  realize  she was not asking to have sex. Consensual sex does not typically require the man to place his hand over the woman’s mouth to stop her from screaming. Furthermore, consensual sex usually does not require the man to have to try and rip off the girl’s clothes.

So, there is ample reason why Ford did not come forward earlier.  Also, it wasn’t that Ford had never discussed this assault with anyone previously.  It was stated that in 2012 her counselor, whom she was seeing because of sexual assault experience, noted that Ford told her she was sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh in high school. Also, Ford told her husband in the same time. Ford repeated her claims in 2013 during a counseling session.

Finally, what these hearings have established are not only the partisanship and level of indecency that has engulfed the Republican Party (remember this was the party that was supporting a child molester for the open Senate seat in Alabama … luckily he lost … barely), but the white male privilege which has been in American politics since its onset.  Although it would appear that women have made strides in government, it still seems that with a flip of a switch white men can still force their will and do so unapologetically. Also, what is sickening, is the fact that the Republicans just need a simple majority to get their “guy” on the bench. The fact that they will refuse to withdraw Kavanaugh’s nomination and select another far-right judge is due to two fears. The first fear being that the Republicans would be politically embarrassed. In other words, by taking away Kavanaugh’s nomination, they would essentially be saying that, “yes, this guy is too far gone and we were wrong to select him.” The other issue is the Republicans are afraid that they may very well lose Congress in the midterms. So, by having to go through a whole new nomination process, they may not get Republican dominant hearing before the elections.

Both of those points only matter if the Republicans set aside their morals, which they haven’t done on numerous occasions. For if the Republicans listened to their morals, they would realize that Kavanaugh is a lying scum bag of a man. In his “firing” rebuke on Thursday Kavanaugh sounded like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Rush Limbaugh as he decided to claim that all these allegations were some sort of left wing conspiracy and a “Clinton revenge.” In Brett’s opening lines he displayed that he is not a neutral jurist, but rather a deeply slanted, right wing ideolog who most likely will decide law, not based on the facts, but based on his conservative and nonexistent morals. Kavanaugh is a man who is adamantly opposed to an FBI investigation, into the alleged claims of sexual assault, but at the same time professes he is completely innocent. In turn, because the hearing is not a criminal trial, the “burden of proof” is not that of “beyond a reasonable doubt” but just a mere “preponderance of the evidence.” With that burden of proof measure, there seems to be enough character doubt against Kavanaugh that he should not be deciding cases and enforcing law against the American public, and especially not deciding law against American woman. For if Kavanaugh had no problem trying to rip a woman’s pants off, he surely would have no problem deciding women’s rights, as it appears he doesn’t believe they have any. So yes, people do “dumb things in high school”, but as the old saying goes, “some people don’t change from high school.” Kavanaugh may have grown up, but he is still that rich, entitled, kid from suburban D.C., who is unaccustomed to not getting his way. It’s a shame Republicans, even with all their Bible belt rallies, can’t find any morals to stand on. What they have found is under the culture of Trump, when the moral high ground is an impediment to maintaining power, bypass the high ground, feign righteous indignation, but by all means, keep the power!    

2018 Browns' Chronicles: Week 3

 

By Kris Mead

1. We Won! The best part about this win was that it was a decisive win in all three phases of football. The offense, once Tyrod was no longer able to play and Baker inserted in, looked fantastic and the defense, as it has been doing in the last two games, was dominant. So, in saying that it was “decisive” I am referring to the fact that it felt like the Browns were a legit NFL team … for once. For instance, in 2016, in the one game that the Browns won that year, it was great that the Browns won, but it wasn’t decisive.  It was more or less extremely lucky – Josh Lambo shanked the Charger’s game tying field goal. Further it was late in the year,  so the fans just wanted “a” win to avoid the dreaded 0-16 record, which, little did we know, would be awarded to us the following year.  


However, this win, which happened on September 20, 2018, was like what the Battle of Gettysburg was to the Union Army. Before the North’s victory at Gettysburg they were getting beaten profusely.  The North’s only “meaningful” win was at the Battle of Antietam, but this battle was essentially won after both armies annihilated each other.  It just so happened at the battle’s conclusion that there were more Union troops standing in the ocean of blood than Confederate troops. So, for purposes of football, consider the Browns’ win on December 24, 2016 against the San Diego Chargers as their Antietam.  


2.A Tale of Two Quarterbacks. The First Half. Tyrod Taylor played the role of General Burnside or General Hooker. It doesn’t matter which of the two Union generals are picked because they both sucked, like Tyrod did. Tyrod was brought in, not because he won games, but because he didn’t lose games. So, the Browns knew their defense was good and figured that if their defense could hold up, then Tyrod could make at least one or two drives to get the Browns some points. But that was not the case. The defense held up their end of the bargain, but Tyrod, like Generals Hooker and Burnside, couldn’t clinch a decisive victory. In the first half, the half that Tyrod played almost the entirety, Tyrod went 3 for 22 passing for 19 yards.

Tyrod resembled 1^st Lieutenant Norman Dike, from the World War II miniseries, Band of Brothers. Dike assumed the role of company commander of Easy Company. At one point he attempted to attack a village but was pinned down and ordered his men to take cover behind a wagon, as a machine gun barreled down on them. Dike’s sergeants informed him that he must decide where his soldiers should move, because if he didn’t, they would all be annihilated. Tyrod was hiding behind the wagon, as the machine gun, in this case the Jets defense, kept pinning him down. Tyrod was so afraid to make a mistake that his decision making froze, causing him to throw bad passes and miss obviously open receivers. While Tyrod did risk a deep pass (twice), it just seemed that his arm strength wasn’t there, as the Browns wide receiver was too fast for his limp throws. Despite the wide receiver beating his defender, both underthrown deep passes were nearly intercepted, forcing the wide receiver to come back to the ball. Tyrod suffered the same fate as Lieutenant Dike, in that Tyrod was relieved from his battlefield duties and sent back to HQ or in football terms, the bench.

3. A Tale of Two Quarterbacks. The Second Half. I’ll admit Baker Mayfield was not my favorite quarterback in the draft.  I thought he was immature and lacked athletic ability. However, winning is the best kind of deodorant and no matter how bad you “smell” (I’m looking at you Rapistberger, Michael Vick, and Ray Lewis) it always covers the nastiest of stenches. In Baker’s defense there wasn’t any egregious behavior before the NFL, and, so far, there hasn’t been any sort of immature or egregious behavior that has occurred while he has been in the NFL. With that said, Baker Mayfield was the Browns’ Gustav Adolphus (the leader of the Swedes who single handedly turned the tide in the Protestant’s favor during the Thirty Years War). The stats speak for themselves: 17 of 23 for 201 yards passing and a QBR of 94.9. Remember, these stats are over just one half of football! However, the stat line doesn’t justify what Baker did for, not only the Browns, but for all Cleveland Browns fans. Baker Mayfield looked like a pro quarterback. He electrified a dispirited team, he had both accuracy and zip on the ball, and he was decisive with his throws. Baker looked like Brett Favre. Actually, let me rephrase - Baker looked like Brett Favre on the field, not the Brett Favre who sent pictures of his “you know what” to a female reporter (I’m sure Brett’s wife loved that kind gesture of his!), and now, ironically, does Wrangler Jean commercials sponsoring their “V” shape crotch jeans meant for “extra comfort.”


4.We Looked Like a Real Team. I know I alluded to this in the first section, but the Browns finally looked like a TRUE NFL team. Typically, the Browns play similar to an unbalanced table. For instance, let’s say you have a table in which three of the four legs reach the floor, while the other leg does not. So, what do you do? You grab a couple sugar packets and place them under the adjacent leg to balance the table. However, imagine placing sugar packets under every foot and still the table fails to balance. That’s the Browns of yesteryears. At one moment the offense could be playing great, but the defense doesn’t know where they are, or, and more typical, the offense plays like a Pee Wee football team and the defense eventually gets worn down. Then there are the times in which none of the table’s legs reach the floor, like when our only consistent play is a punt and our pass defense, plays like butter being sliced by a warm knife!


On September 20, 2018 the legs of the table all reached the floor and the sugar packet, it appeared, that worked, was Baker Mayfield! He brought the best out of the offense – receivers catching passes, balls being thrown with crisp power and accuracy, the running game was moving, and the defense held strong. Further, this team’s draft picks are proving to be effective. With a team that has made a namesake for missing picks and drafting busts, this was a relief. Denzel Ward played like a corner that we have needed for years, Myles Garrett looks like a number one overall draft pick with getting two sacks, Ogunjobi is playing like a defensive tackle that we haven’t seen since Sean Rogers (and hopefully Ogunjobi doesn’t “accidently” bring guns in a suitcase while going to an airport), and even Jabrill Peppers is playing surprisingly well.  


Although General Meade won Gettysburg, it would be dreadful if Baker becomes a “General Meade.” Yes, Gettysburg was important to the Union, but it was the high-water mark of Meade’s notoriety and battlefield prowess. What Cleveland needs Baker to become, and hopefully has found, is a General Grant or General Sherman - someone who can take command, be a force that its opponents fear, and provide consistent victory. So yes, it’s nice the Browns finally won a game, but that was just a battle, the war is far from being won.


On to Oakland!