• I'd like to make a monthly donation to the Humate Society in Fred's name. To do this we'll need a few more dollars. If you can, please donate to help us reach our goal.

2019 Cleveland Browns Training Camp

The Human Q-Tip

Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up!
Moderator
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
24,249
Reaction score
33,405
Points
148

I love it. There was a scene on building the browns with 2 players on the sideline of the pre season game talking about how this doesn’t seem like their first game because of how often they’ve practiced in pads and they had practice again the next day.
"Kitchens called it a “no-brainer” to practice in pads as much as possible because “the game is played in pads.”

As for complaints from the team’s leadership council, Kitchens said he doesn’t have one.


“I have me, and that’s it,” Kitchens said. “I don’t get into that stuff either. That’s all a façade for excuses to blame other people. I will take the blame.
 

Marcus

No cLue
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
12,458
Reaction score
10,860
Points
123
Do you know what struck me the most about the status quo while re-watching Hard Knocks recently?

How comfortable Hue Jackson was with medicority and having won only one game in the past two season.

No one was moving with a purpose. Except Baker, and Greggg in some manic way.

Hue Jackson was supremely confident in sucking. Utterly amazing how he perceived the world.
Helps that he somehow still had Jimmy’s undying support and that he was on even footing with Dorsey in the rank structure. Dorsey was essentially handcuffed until things got so toxic that they were glowing.

It’s probably been posted elsewhere, but they did away with the coach and GM directly reporting to Jimmy, right? Or am I mistaken?
 

The Human Q-Tip

Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up!
Moderator
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
24,249
Reaction score
33,405
Points
148
Do you know what struck me the most about the status quo while re-watching Hard Knocks recently?

How comfortable Hue Jackson was with medicority and having won only one game in the past two season.

No one was moving with a purpose. Except Baker, and Greggg in some manic way.

Hue Jackson was supremely confident in sucking. Utterly amazing how he perceived the world.
The contrast really is striking. When Freddie got promoted, there was a lot of (understandable) concern that he was too close to the players, and too much of a "good old boy" to be a strong leader. Turns out that Freddie has little problem being a hard ass, as shown by him not wanting a formal veterans committee or anything. Dude is definitely in charge of the team, and that's a good thing.

I completely get the idea of not having a formal veterans committee. You don't have to have one to get feedback from more experienced players -- not if you truly have an open door policy and good lines of communication with your players. And there isn't any questioning of exactly where the buck stops, or why. If something does or doesn't happen, it's because the head coach decided things that way. Not because the veterans committee leaned on him to do something different.
 
Last edited:

jking948

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
9,129
Reaction score
14,636
Points
123
He seems to be doing really well as a coverage linebacker. Not sure what that means for him in terms of number of snaps in a base 4-2-5 defense, unless he basically plays the role of a glorified SS, and is counted as more of a db than an lb.

Still, even as a backup that's a really nice thing to have given how we got crushed by underneath routes when Schobert was out.
So Wilks likes what is known as a "big 4-2-5" or "big nickel" defensive scheme. It means you take one of the linebackers out, and rather than replacing him with a cornerback, you replace him with a safety. It lets defenses easily disguise coverage.

But, because that safety also plays a key role in run support, it means you'd like your two linebackers to be coverage linebackers who can be decent against the run. I actually think Schobert is a perfect example of a "big 4-2-5" linebacker.

Mack Wilson seems to have the coverage bit down, but a big reason he fell to the fifth round is that he is not a great tackler, and this hurts him in the run game and short passing game. I would be pretty surprised if he is not a frequently used rotation linebacker this year, but I do not think he is a starter yet, at least in Willks' defense.

Still, if our two fifth round pick linebackers turn into a reliable pass rush specialist and pass coverage specialist, it would be very difficult to complain.
 

The Human Q-Tip

Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up!
Moderator
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
24,249
Reaction score
33,405
Points
148
So Wilks likes what is known as a "big 4-2-5" or "big nickel" defensive scheme. It means you take one of the linebackers out, and rather than replacing him with a cornerback, you replace him with a safety. It lets defenses easily disguise coverage.

But, because that safety also plays a key role in run support, it means you'd like your two linebackers to be coverage linebackers who can be decent against the run. I actually think Schobert is a perfect example of a "big 4-2-5" linebacker.

Mack Wilson seems to have the coverage bit down, but a big reason he fell to the fifth round is that he is not a great tackler, and this hurts him in the run game and short passing game. I would be pretty surprised if he is not a frequently used rotation linebacker this year, but I do not think he is a starter yet, at least in Willks' defense.

Still, if our two fifth round pick linebackers turn into a reliable pass rush specialist and pass coverage specialist, it would be very difficult to complain.
What do you think the chances are of Wilks sometimes running that base 4-2-5, but instead of pulling the corner for a safety, you pull him for a great coverage linebacker like Mack? In other words, Mack would be counted in the "5", not the "2"?

Mack doesn't have the speed of a safety, but it seems his skillset may be an interest fit in the base defense as opposed to true nickel, where you'd definitely want a third corner, or at least a safety. It might at least be a way to add even more versatility.
 

jking948

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
9,129
Reaction score
14,636
Points
123
What do you think the chances are of Wilks sometimes running that base 4-2-5, but instead of pulling the corner for a safety, you pull him for a great coverage linebacker like Mack? In other words, Mack would be counted in the "5", not the "2"?

Mack doesn't have the speed of a safety, but it seems his skillset may be an interest fit in the base defense as opposed to true nickel, where you'd definitely want a third corner, or at least a safety. It might at least be a way to add even more versatility.
I think on obvious passing downs the defense will look like this:

Greedy/Mitchell-Randall-Carrie-Mack-Ward
Kirksey-Shobert
Avery-Miles-Ogunjobi-Vernon

So basically exactly what you are saying... though I think Mack plays the roll of the on-ball safety. That is just a scary lineup to pass against.

Willks has also historically incorporated some traditional 3-4 looks into his base big 4-2-5 and regular 4-3. So I could see Mack getting a lot of time when Willks trots out a 4-2-5 and then the defense quickly audibles into a 3-4 look.
 

The Oi

Ahhhh chachachacha
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
44,085
Reaction score
59,198
Points
148
The theory that you can’t be “friendly” with the people you lead is bullshit propaganda written by people who don’t know how to lead using a full range of emotion, skill and experience.

If you demonstrate that you respect and genuinely care for me while at the same time doing your job, you’re going to get a lot more guys that are going to run through a wall for you and stick you out when the going gets tough. You’re especially going to do well with guys who are good leaders themselves and you need them on your side.

You may not be able to be “friends” with your employees in the sense that you can’t party with them and let them make your decisions for you. There still needs to be a level of separation. But you can certainly have a beer with them and show them you care about them.

When people say anything other than this, it proves to me they have very limited views of leadership.
 
Last edited:

Lee

Gold Star Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
24,438
Reaction score
29,099
Points
135
What do you think the chances are of Wilks sometimes running that base 4-2-5, but instead of pulling the corner for a safety, you pull him for a great coverage linebacker like Mack? In other words, Mack would be counted in the "5", not the "2"?

Mack doesn't have the speed of a safety, but it seems his skillset may be an interest fit in the base defense as opposed to true nickel, where you'd definitely want a third corner, or at least a safety. It might at least be a way to add even more versatility.
I think Mack is more likely to get in as a 4-3 situation. On non obvious passing downs but not running downs.

The reason for the 4-2-5 defense is to combat 3 and 4 receiver sets. You really cant have Mack out there covering receivers but he can cover TE's and RB's. So it really depends on the team we are facing and the personnel they come out with.
 

jking948

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
9,129
Reaction score
14,636
Points
123
I think Mack is more likely to get in as a 4-3 situation. On non obvious passing downs but not running downs.

The reason for the 4-2-5 defense is to combat 3 and 4 receiver sets. You really cant have Mack out there covering receivers but he can cover TE's and RB's. So it really depends on the team we are facing and the personnel they come out with.
The big 4-2-5 that Willks runs is, statistically, the best defense against 12 personnel, per Warren Sharp.

I also would argue that you’d rather have Mack guard a receiver or tight end than a runningback. You don’t want Mack to stop a play by tackling. You want him to stop it by preventing the completion. Guarding RBs, in my mind, goes against Mack’s skills.
 

Humane Society of Summit County

Total amount
$135.00
Goal
$350.00

Radio

Top