Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >

Breaking down the Chiefs

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:41 PM

Breaking down the Chiefs 


They're 2-10, with an OT win over New Orleans way back in Week 3 and the 27-21 win over 3-9 Carolina last week. The Power Polls I've seen have them ranked last. 

Offensively, they're 31st in scoring at 15.7 ppg. They're average at moving the ball and converting first downs, so that's not the problem. They're even above average in time of possession with 32 minutes per game. What kills them is turnovers, where they're at -21, worst in the league. They've lost 16 fumbles this year. By comparison, the Browns have lost 4.

The Chiefs run the ball, period. They rank 4th in rushing attempts per game and 26th in passing attempts. And they run it very well, ranking 7th in yards per carry at 4.5. Opponents know it's coming but the Chiefs have still been successful. Jamaal Charles is a very good back.

But again, scoring is the problem. They're only 24th in rushing TD's and they're not real explosive with only 8 gains of over 20 yards in 392 carries. They move the ball pretty well but then cough it up.

The Chiefs are last in QB rating at 67.5. They've improved slightly since Quinn took over; his rating is 70.3. They're tied for last in interceptions and rank 30th in pass plays over 20 yards. They have to be the worst passing team in the NFL.

My guess is the Browns will put Joe Haden on Dwayne Bowe, who's their only real receiving threat, and let everybody else concentrate on stopping Charles. 

Quinn had a good game last week, however, going 19-for-23 for 201 yards and a QB rating of 132.1 against a statistically average pass defense. I expect mostly short passes to Charles, Bowe, and the TE's. 

I don't see the Chiefs getting 27 points against the Browns like they did last week. But if they could eliminate turnovers they wouldn't be all that bad. 

Defensively the Chiefs rank 27th in scoring, giving up 27 ppg. Their run defense is ranked 26th in yards per carry. They're last in allowing runs of over 20 yards. Richardson and Hardesty should be effective.

The pass defense is abysmal. They're tied for last in yards per pass attempt, last in TD passes allowed (25), and tied for 30th in interceptions with 7. They're also last in opponent's QB rating. What's to like? Nothing.

The amazing thing is that the Chiefs are also last in opponents' pass attempts. Surprisingly, opposing teams have thrown fewer passes against the Chiefs than any other team. Why, if their pass defense is so bad? My guess is that teams have been so far ahead that they've elected to run the ball to kill the clock. And since the Chiefs run defense is among the worst in football, maybe opponents haven't had to pass much.

I wonder if there's ever been a team that was last in TD passes allowed despite having to defend fewer passes than any other team. You'd expect that the team with the most TD's passes allowed would lead the league in passes thrown against them, but it's the opposite. 

If you go by the total numbers after 12 games, this looks like a win for the Browns. However, the Chiefs have shown the ability to play well when they're motivated. They lost to the Ravens, 9-6. They lost to the Steelers in OT 16-13 and knocked Ben and Leftwich out. They lost to 9-3 Denver by a score of 17-9. And they beat Carolina last week after the tragedy just a couple of days before the game. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see this one be another of those close, low scoring games decided late. They're not going to let Quinn air it out. Romeo is going to depend on Charles' running and short, high percentage passes to keep the chains moving. He'll take that 19-for-23 for 201 yards any day. 

With Gordon, Little, and even Massaquoi coming on strong lately, I think the Browns need to challenge what may be the worst pass defense in football and not try to play conservative, ball control offense. The Chiefs have only 21 sacks and 7 interceptions in 12 games, so it's not like throwing the ball against them is a big risk.

Last edited 12/5/2012 3:45 PM by PROSECUTOR

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:44 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


I was just laughing to myself thinking that this could be a "trap" game.

As if the Browns could have such a thing.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 4:18 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 



Gameface64 wrote: I was just laughing to myself thinking that this could be a "trap" game.

As if the Browns could have such a thing.

More like a classic letdown game.  Win streaks are hard and this is the easiest game on paper in the last month so it will be hard for them to be as interested in it as they would be if this was a playoff team or a division team.  Also with the nonsense surrounding Belcher it might draw their focus more than other off-field items would.

If the weather is bad and there's a turnover or two on the Browns side I'd be concerned but they should be able to limit passing options straight up and cheat on the run.  Even more than they were able to do last week.
Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12844 posts this site

Posted: 12/5/2012 5:47 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


When thinking about a Romeo Crennel offense, it is hard to get past his belief that Mo Carthon was the best guy for offensive coordinator.  After a dismal first year, he brought Mo back. At his core, Romeo believes in the Mo Carthon offense.

Expect Charles and Hillis to run, run, run and Brady Quinn thowing safe passes, short with an occassional deep throw away.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 8:30 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 



redright wrote: 

Expect Charles and Hillis to run, run, run and Brady Quinn thowing safe passes, short with an occassional deep throw away.
Hillis is averaging 6 carries per game for the worst team in football. And to think SoulDawg was pissed off that we didn't give him a big multi-year contract. 

By the way, of the 16 fumbles the Chiefs have lost this year, Hillis is only responsible for two of them.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 9:42 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 



PROSECUTOR wrote:
redright wrote: 

Expect Charles and Hillis to run, run, run and Brady Quinn thowing safe passes, short with an occassional deep throw away.
Hillis is averaging 6 carries per game for the worst team in football. And to think SoulDawg was pissed off that we didn't give him a big multi-year contract. 

By the way, of the 16 fumbles the Chiefs have lost this year, Hillis is only responsible for two of them.
SD:

To be clear was my point that Hillis should have been paid based on his production unlike Cogong who was paid large and hadn't done nothin  , and not treated like dirt especialy when we had loads and loads of cap room .

It set a bad precedent and turned an asset into a cancer and left an immense hole in the roster prior to the draft .

It would have freed up our draft , and we wouldn't have telegraphed our need for RB which Minnesotta exploted for 3 picks which should never have been been coughed up on such a weak bluff in the first place.

The browns were so so loaded they didn't need a 250 pound running back with tremendous hands catching out of the backfield to help their rooki QB ,,,,,, who knew.

An incentive based contract tied with a doctors tretment to address that bipolar Hillbilly would have worked wonders .

But instead we took a guy good enough to go on the  Madden Cover and kicked him out the door , because we had it like that.

Yeah right.

ON KC .

The HC the rb and the QB will be highly motivated to kick our azz , so put that it your stat pipe and smoke it.


SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/6/2012 9:24 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


The Kansas City Chiefs scored 188 points and have given up 322 points.
The Cleveland Bowns scored 229 points and have given up 265.

It appears the Cleveland Browns schedule is more difficult through the first 12 games.

When you look at Cleveland, and since we have watched the games and discussed them in some detail, the Browns have remained competitive in all their games.

Looking at the scores of the Kansas City games, the appear to have been blown out by a few teams, a few close games and a variety of other games where they could have received a late score to make the game look closer.

Their defense does not look like a defense they is built to prevent points scored.  When we discuss the Browns, we know they give up yardage at times, but, last year like this year, when the defensive players are healthy, the scoring is limited.

The Kansas City offense gains more yardage and their defense gives up less yardage than the Cleveland Browns.

The Kansas City offense can control the clock, they have a good margin of more first down than their opponents.  Now, the opposite is true regarding the Browns  The do not control the time of possession now are they very close in gaining more first downs than their opponents.

There are many chances that the statisitics averaged through 12 games can change for the Cleveland Browns over the next four games and that can be good for a different thread on a different forum.

Breaking down the Chiefs comes back to the same question the Cleveland Browns defense has faced for many years.  Can the Cleveland Browns defense provide a strong run defense.  The Browns need to get the Chiefs offense off the field and when they are on the field, they have to be inside their 20 or 30 yard line.  This team can not have a short field on offense.

The Browns have to score and score often early in the game.  If Kansas City has to pass the ball, the advantage goes to Cleveland.

The Kansas City team is 2-10. When the Carolina team discussed the Kansas City Chiefs last week at this time they was a team that was 1-10.  It is best not to underestimate any team in the NFL. 

The ball bounces some interesting ways in the NFL.  Lets just hope the Browns get the bounces in their favor the next four weeks.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/6/2012 10:04 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


SD, check out what Joe Thomas had to say about your bipolar hillbilly. Then tell me all that was management's fault.

http://news-herald.com/article...s/nh6301553.txt

Last edited 12/6/2012 10:18 AM by PROSECUTOR

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/6/2012 10:15 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


The Browns have to score and score often early in the game.

I wouldn't go that far. The Chiefs are averaging under 16 ppg. They move the ball, but they don't score. Too many turnovers. They also lack a big play capability, and it's tough to score from the red zone. 

And as you pointed out, the Browns defense has been solid when their key guys are healthy. Since Taylor and Haden and Rubin returned the defense has been very good. I'm not expecting the Chiefs to put 21 points on the board. I'm thinking more like 9 to 14. 

Their second leading WR only has 18 catches. Most of their passes go to their TE and the running backs. They nickel-and-dime the ball down the field, but they don't put a lot of points on the board. 

I think 17 points may be enough to win. The thing that concerns me is how tough they played the Ravens and Steelers. On any given Sunday even the worst team in the league can play pretty well.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/6/2012 10:45 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 



PROSECUTOR wrote: SD, check out what Joe Thomas had to say about your bipolar hillbilly. Then tell me all that was management's fault.

http://news-herald.com/article...s/nh6301553.txt
SD:

What part of the contract does not become a distraction if they pay the man and make it a none issue .

Gocong who did nothing but suck FO  Butt got paid , while Hillis who carried the team as the only weapon did not .

Where is the loyalty and consistency in that .

The after the fact spit in the eye comments by Thomas , are of reaction to events , which wouldn't have ever been news until the Team took their biggest offensive and only offensive asset at the time and turned him into a cancer , playing him on the cheap .

It was the lack of respect  X 2 which orchestrated the previous Cribbs renegotiation drama which was also unnecessary and uncalled for .

Thomas got his , Hillis didn't as they tried to rape him and pay him NFL peanuts at the same time rewarding humps like the Gong who hadn't done nothin.

Yeah it was a distraction , but whose fault was it really .

Harbors on Banners point about Heckert not understanding how you have to pull a team together , specifically rewarding his lockeroom snitch in Gocong , while allowing 40% of your offense to walk for nothing.


SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/6/2012 2:13 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


First of all, Gocong has nothing to do with it. Each player is dealt with independently. They're all independent contractors. 

Second, there are hundreds of players around the league every year who are on the final year of their contracts and don't become a cancer and alienate their teammates to the point where even teammates who thought they were close friends with the guy want him gone.  

Most players on the final year of their contract put their heads down, don't make waves, and try to play their best football rather than skipping games and becoming a huge distraction. But then most players aren't complete morons. Changing agents three times in less than a year was the first clue that Hillis wasn't hitting on all cylinders. 

Your point seems to be that the Browns should have given him what he wanted in terms of years and money as soon as the 2010 season ended, thus ensuring he would have a good attitude the following year. They didn't think he was worth what he was asking. 

Based on his performance in KC this year (3.3 ypc on an average of just under 5 carries per game), I think they were right. And based on what he ended up signing with the Chiefs for, all 32 teams agreed.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/6/2012 2:39 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


The Chiefs have played five solid games this year out of 12. The common denominator is they ran the ball very well in each game.

Saints (OT win): 45 carries, 273 yards
Ravens (9-6 loss): 51 carries, 214 yards
Steelers (OT loss): 35 carries, 142 yards
Carolina (27-21 win): 43 carries, 158 yards
Denver (17-9 loss): 31 carries, 148 yards

By the way, the Saints are giving up 5.1 ypc, worst in the NFL.

The main concern for the Browns defense is to stop them from getting 40 carries for 200 yards and force them to throw.

Also, the Chiefs are last in turnover plus/minus at -21, but they've improved lately. They only turned the ball over three times in the last four games. 

So if the Chiefs continue to take care of the ball and can also run effectively, this game could go either way. And if we lose to the Chiefs at home we can start the head coaching search now.

I still say the Browns need to come out throwing aggressively. The Chiefs' defense is last in average gain per pass play and touchdowns allowed. They have only 7 picks and are averaging less than two sacks per game. Gordon, Little, and Massa are getting in better sync with Weeden. 

If the game plan is to slug it out in the trenches it will play right into Romeo's hands.

Last edited 12/6/2012 2:41 PM by PROSECUTOR

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/6/2012 4:31 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


Jamaal Charles is a tough back to rate, I'm not suggesting he sucks mind you.  The guy has nice speed no doubt, but if you take away his two longest runs of the year totaling 137 yards (...and I know you can't), his YPC drops from 4.8 to 4.1.  That's a fairly decent drop.  To me he just seems to be too hit or miss, and gives you as many poop games as he gives you above average games.  He reminds a bit of Chris Johnson in terms of production.

2010 is his only really consistent season.

noidea
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/6/2012 9:12 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


Pros>

First of all, Gocong has nothing to do with it. Each player is dealt with independently. They're all independent contractors.

SD:

No sheet , whats next you gonna tell me Alice in wunderland is real .

Heckert made the point they were paying their core players , Thomas got paid Nyquil got paid the Gong of nothing got paid and sorry Charlie nothin left for you Mr. Hillis didn't get paid , their most productive player..

Next you'll be telling me girls don't talk .

Pros>

 


Second, there are hundreds of players around the league every year who are on the final year of their contracts and don't become a cancer and alienate their teammates to the point where even teammates who thought they were close friends with the guy want him gone.  

SD:

Prosecutor try and focus , your rambling like a naive child , barking up the wrong tree .

Guys who produce and have a short life span have to speak up , if they're getting the shaft or bend over and take it .

Hillis not handling the negotiation well  is separate from the team causing their own problems  by trying to dry phuck the guy.

Pros>


Your point seems to be that the Browns should have given him what he wanted in terms of years and money as soon as the 2010 season ended, thus ensuring he would have a good attitude the following year. They didn't think he was worth what he was asking. 

SD:

On a team full of drek Hillis had a Hollywood type year  and carried a sorry team , he had become a fan favorite , sheer ignorance hubris and arrogance failed to capitalize on that Cheddar and parlay it all into a positive .

Good teams reward their stars , the Browns dogged the only guy who was news worthy in years .


Pros>

Based on his performance in KC this year (3.3 ypc on an average of just under 5 carries per game), I think they were right. And based on what he ended up signing with the Chiefs for, all 32 teams agreed.

SD:

Different team different system with no QB .

Hillis had 50 catches for over 600 yards while en route to an additional 1200 yards of rushing .

Based on that vs what we had , his contract demands were a meager pittance vs our husbanded cap resources .

They tried to screw him into the ground  instead of putting their arm around his shoulder and embracing him because they didn't draft or acquire him , and neither party came out ahead .

The Browns lost a valuable asset after turning him into a cancer devaluing his worth, to the point he had no trade value or team value
over a pittance in relative terms .


It was a waste of resources , tantamount to flushing money down the toilet , while really hanging a neon sign out to the league on how they treated vets who just wanted to get paid  .

Hillis was smeared just like they attempted to smear Cribbs because they didn't want to pay him .

That's it that's all .

That's what your defending.

SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/6/2012 10:38 PM

RE: Breaking down the Chiefs 


Crennel is still a decent coordinator in this league. I thought after he was fired from Cleveland he'd be gone forever...but he pops up from time to time :)

When they beat the Packers last year, I figured it was all Crennel...BB has said he did not win in '03-04 without Crennel...
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/7/2012 8:05 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


I am in the same corner with Pros. Had the man/hilljack had any sense what so ever, he would have buckled down and done it twice in a row. He for sure would have gotten paid then, at least by somebody. Instead he became a cancer (and we really don't know when that started, could have been during his "wonder" year), and then nobody wanted to pay him.
SoulDawg74 wrote: Pros>

First of all, Gocong has nothing to do with it. Each player is dealt with independently. They're all independent contractors.

SD:

No sheet , whats next you gonna tell me Alice in wunderland is real .

Heckert made the point they were paying their core players , Thomas got paid Nyquil got paid the Gong of nothing got paid and sorry Charlie nothin left for you Mr. Hillis didn't get paid , their most productive player..

Next you'll be telling me girls don't talk .

Pros>

 


Second, there are hundreds of players around the league every year who are on the final year of their contracts and don't become a cancer and alienate their teammates to the point where even teammates who thought they were close friends with the guy want him gone.  

SD:

Prosecutor try and focus , your rambling like a naive child , barking up the wrong tree .

Guys who produce and have a short life span have to speak up , if they're getting the shaft or bend over and take it .

Hillis not handling the negotiation well  is separate from the team causing their own problems  by trying to dry phuck the guy.

Pros>


Your point seems to be that the Browns should have given him what he wanted in terms of years and money as soon as the 2010 season ended, thus ensuring he would have a good attitude the following year. They didn't think he was worth what he was asking. 

SD:

On a team full of drek Hillis had a Hollywood type year  and carried a sorry team , he had become a fan favorite , sheer ignorance hubris and arrogance failed to capitalize on that Cheddar and parlay it all into a positive .

Good teams reward their stars , the Browns dogged the only guy who was news worthy in years .


Pros>

Based on his performance in KC this year (3.3 ypc on an average of just under 5 carries per game), I think they were right. And based on what he ended up signing with the Chiefs for, all 32 teams agreed.

SD:

Different team different system with no QB .

Hillis had 50 catches for over 600 yards while en route to an additional 1200 yards of rushing .

Based on that vs what we had , his contract demands were a meager pittance vs our husbanded cap resources .

They tried to screw him into the ground  instead of putting their arm around his shoulder and embracing him because they didn't draft or acquire him , and neither party came out ahead .

The Browns lost a valuable asset after turning him into a cancer devaluing his worth, to the point he had no trade value or team value
over a pittance in relative terms .


It was a waste of resources , tantamount to flushing money down the toilet , while really hanging a neon sign out to the league on how they treated vets who just wanted to get paid  .

Hillis was smeared just like they attempted to smear Cribbs because they didn't want to pay him .

That's it that's all .

That's what your defending.

SoulDawg
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/7/2012 9:12 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


No question Hillis had a tremendous season in 2010. Despite his heroics, the Browns won five games. They didn't have much talent on that roster. 

You would think that on a team desperate for playmakers and needing to fill holes everywhere, they'd be ecstatic that a productive RB dropped into their hands. Especially one that was young and fit the mold of the traditional Cleveland Browns power backs - Motley, Brown, Pruitt, and Mack. A true bad weather, AFC North type back, perfect for this team.

So why didn't they lock him up for the long term? Why wasn't he considered a "core player" like Thomas, DQ, and Gocong?

My guess:

A) They knew he was a head case (and he quickly proved them right)
B) His high contact style of running inevitably leads to fumbles and injuries. (Which it did).

So they decided to hold off on a long term commitment. Maybe they saw him as a complementary back - like the Chiefs are using him now. Maybe they figured his style of running, where he takes multiple hits on each carry, wouldn't allow him to be an every down back, so they didn't want to pay him a Pro Bowl salary. 

Jerome Harrison rushed for 800 yards in four games the season before. The Browns knew he wasn't the next Jim Brown.  

You can blame the Browns for Hillis' behavior. I don't. Neither does Joe Thomas.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/7/2012 11:26 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 



glousterbrown wrote: I am in the same corner with Pros. Had the man/hilljack had any sense what so ever, he would have buckled down and done it twice in a row. He for sure would have gotten paid then, at least by somebody. Instead he became a cancer (and we really don't know when that started, could have been during his "wonder" year), and then nobody wanted to pay him.
SoulDawg74 wrote: Pros>

First of all, Gocong has nothing to do with it. Each player is dealt with independently. They're all independent contractors.

SD:

No sheet , whats next you gonna tell me Alice in wunderland is real .

Heckert made the point they were paying their core players , Thomas got paid Nyquil got paid the Gong of nothing got paid and sorry Charlie nothin left for you Mr. Hillis didn't get paid , their most productive player..

Next you'll be telling me girls don't talk .

Pros>

 


Second, there are hundreds of players around the league every year who are on the final year of their contracts and don't become a cancer and alienate their teammates to the point where even teammates who thought they were close friends with the guy want him gone.  

SD:

Prosecutor try and focus , your rambling like a naive child , barking up the wrong tree .

Guys who produce and have a short life span have to speak up , if they're getting the shaft or bend over and take it .

Hillis not handling the negotiation well  is separate from the team causing their own problems  by trying to dry phuck the guy.

Pros>


Your point seems to be that the Browns should have given him what he wanted in terms of years and money as soon as the 2010 season ended, thus ensuring he would have a good attitude the following year. They didn't think he was worth what he was asking. 

SD:

On a team full of drek Hillis had a Hollywood type year  and carried a sorry team , he had become a fan favorite , sheer ignorance hubris and arrogance failed to capitalize on that Cheddar and parlay it all into a positive .

Good teams reward their stars , the Browns dogged the only guy who was news worthy in years .


Pros>

Based on his performance in KC this year (3.3 ypc on an average of just under 5 carries per game), I think they were right. And based on what he ended up signing with the Chiefs for, all 32 teams agreed.

SD:

Different team different system with no QB .

Hillis had 50 catches for over 600 yards while en route to an additional 1200 yards of rushing .

Based on that vs what we had , his contract demands were a meager pittance vs our husbanded cap resources .

They tried to screw him into the ground  instead of putting their arm around his shoulder and embracing him because they didn't draft or acquire him , and neither party came out ahead .

The Browns lost a valuable asset after turning him into a cancer devaluing his worth, to the point he had no trade value or team value
over a pittance in relative terms .


It was a waste of resources , tantamount to flushing money down the toilet , while really hanging a neon sign out to the league on how they treated vets who just wanted to get paid  .

Hillis was smeared just like they attempted to smear Cribbs because they didn't want to pay him .

That's it that's all .

That's what your defending.

SoulDawg
SD:

That's Bullsheet , the shelf life on a RB is less than three years , as a third year vet , his time was then ,when his numbers were good , not after the team wrecked another year of havoc on his body where he risked injury being phased out of the offense so he couldn't meet incentives or any number of other trips and occurrences which happen when you put off a year what you should do today .

With no guaranteed money , players have to seek that signing bonus which is the next best thing A mere $10 million dollar signing bonus amororized on a five year deal would have left a mere 2.5 million cap hit when we had over 20 million in cap space at the time .

Top backs were drawing over 7 million per , they smeared the guy to suckas like you who make $8 bucks an hour that Hillis was trying to Rape the organization , and they were simply protecting the teams panties , by turning him away .

It was all a lie and a ruse , and unnecessary .

Just like dumping Vickers for what ........

SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/7/2012 11:55 AM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 


PROSECUTOR wrote: No question Hillis had a tremendous season in 2010. Despite his heroics, the Browns won five games. They didn't have much talent on that roster. 

You would think that on a team desperate for playmakers and needing to fill holes everywhere, they'd be ecstatic that a productive RB dropped into their hands. Especially one that was young and fit the mold of the traditional Cleveland Browns power backs - Motley, Brown, Pruitt, and Mack. A true bad weather, AFC North type back, perfect for this team.

So why didn't they lock him up for the long term? Why wasn't he considered a "core player" like Thomas, DQ, and Gocong?

My guess:

A) They knew he was a head case (and he quickly proved them right)
B) His high contact style of running inevitably leads to fumbles and injuries. (Which it did).

So they decided to hold off on a long term commitment. Maybe they saw him as a complementary back - like the Chiefs are using him now. Maybe they figured his style of running, where he takes multiple hits on each carry, wouldn't allow him to be an every down back, so they didn't want to pay him a Pro Bowl salary. 

Jerome Harrison rushed for 800 yards in four games the season before. The Browns knew he wasn't the next Jim Brown.  

You can blame the Browns for Hillis' behavior. I don't. Neither does Joe Thomas.
SD:

His behavior wasn't a problem until they attempted to Phuck him .

Btw what else is Thomas gonna say .....he got payed , so his perspective is gonna be quite contrary to the one who got screwed to make hay for his salary.

Hillis carried them bums , he naiavely thought it had earned him a place at the big boy table where they served up large portions to Thomas Nyquil and then Patterson and the Gong , so you can see why he would lose his damn mind when it come to him they started opening up a can of spam , when everybody else got steak lobster the Dom and the white table cloth treatment .

I'm not defending him going into the tank , I'm pointing out the Browns decision to screw this kid into the ground caused the problem .

It was as justified as dumping Vickers with no comparable replacement , insisting on paying and keeping a Pashos instead of legitimately addressing a problem with a real solution , Paying interception Jake mounds of cheddar , and bypassing 6 legitimate QB prospects in the 2011 draft for the hump which is Colt .

They tried to screw Hillis into the ground and it blew up in their face , it was a negotiation a fifth grader could have gotten done , but they turned it into War and Peace he said she said and totally ruined their own property .

Stoopid is what stoopid does .

The whole deal was ignorant and deliberate  and a mangled elaborate  screw job perpetrated on a less than willing rube , who was both out of his depth and out of his league.

You know it was a con , because Homie the clown , not Heckert took pains to explain it .

SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/7/2012 2:13 PM

Re: Breaking down the Chiefs 



PROSECUTOR wrote: No question Hillis had a tremendous season in 2010. Despite his heroics, the Browns won five games. They didn't have much talent on that roster. 

You would think that on a team desperate for playmakers and needing to fill holes everywhere, they'd be ecstatic that a productive RB dropped into their hands. Especially one that was young and fit the mold of the traditional Cleveland Browns power backs - Motley, Brown, Pruitt, and Mack. A true bad weather, AFC North type back, perfect for this team.

So why didn't they lock him up for the long term? Why wasn't he considered a "core player" like Thomas, DQ, and Gocong?

My guess:

A) They knew he was a head case (and he quickly proved them right)
B) His high contact style of running inevitably leads to fumbles and injuries. (Which it did).

So they decided to hold off on a long term commitment. Maybe they saw him as a complementary back - like the Chiefs are using him now. Maybe they figured his style of running, where he takes multiple hits on each carry, wouldn't allow him to be an every down back, so they didn't want to pay him a Pro Bowl salary. 

Jerome Harrison rushed for 800 yards in four games the season before. The Browns knew he wasn't the next Jim Brown.  

You can blame the Browns for Hillis' behavior. I don't. Neither does Joe Thomas.
His fumbling issue was huge, and potentially injury prone style of running.  I think his agent wanted way too much money!  However, his behavior was a JOKE!  First, him going home on gameday because he was sick that was BS!  Then I remembered reading prior to the niners game warmups, he was out there punting balls (bad hammy leg) and running around.  This while he had a "severe"  LOL! hamstring pull.  I remember reading many players were PISSED! when he did that. 
They questioned why he couldn't play, while he was running around having a good 'ole time!  I lost all respect for Hillis, He's F**KING C**KSUCKER!!!!  He became bitter when Browns wouldn't give him what he wanted.  So he quit on the team.  I hope someone really takes his as* out Sunday!
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >