Since the Edwards trade early yesterday, there’s been no shortage of analysis. I feel like I’ve seen an article on every imaginable angle…Braylon’s attitude, his likelihood of success in New York, how he’ll take to the notorious NYC media, whether or not the Browns got shorted on what they received in return, how this trade is another reflection of Mangini’s coaching philosophy, and on and on.
However, one aspect that seems to be missing so far is a serious analysis of what this means for the Browns in the shortest possible term, i.e. this Sunday’s game against the Bills. (One possible exception is this article by Tony Grossi, which I used for some of my research.)
I expect that part of this void owes to the fact that the identity of the Browns (aside from an 0-4 team) is still very much an unknown - especially when you consider that with DA under center last week, they looked like a completely different team than in the previous 3 weeks.
Nevertheless, I’m going to try to fill this gap a little by asking the 5 questions that spring to my mind about game 5 - all of which are affected by Braylon’s departure:
1) With Braylon gone, who becomes the #1 receiver?
Based on his break-out performance last game, I think most fans expect Mohammed “The Prophet” Massaquoi to step into this role. 8 catches for 148 yards - especially when you’re not even the first option - is pretty special. This becomes even more true when you consider that a significant portion of those catches were in traffic.
However, to hear Alpha tell it (in the Grossi article linked above), the whole idea of a #1 receiver doesn’t play in his system. This should surprise absolutely no one. After all, when has Alpha ever been enthused by the idea of laying his cards on the table in any way? Having a clear first option flies in the face of everything he believes in.
Granted, part of this is just for show. When you don’t have an assassin* to line up wide, it’s easy to say that you favor a corps of receivers who are all…let’s be judicious and call them ”mild threats.”
[*Note: let’s assume for the sake of this argument that Edwards always played like he did in 2007. The point here isn’t to assess his actual performance - just to examine what it means to have an established #1 guy.]
You could argue that there’s merit to this approach. It’s no secret that every Browns’ opponent to date had just been double-covering Braylon and forcing someone else on the team to hurt them. Theoretically, the Bills’ defense will now have to vary their gameplan almost on a play-by-play basis depending on who’s lining up and where. But this leads us into the next question…
2) If the Bills’ defense is no longer distracted by doubling Braylon, can Massaquoi perform to a comparable level as last week?
Admittedly, I don’t have a good answer for this. It’s safe to assume that Mohammed will definitely be doubled at times this week - but I also don’t know that the Bengals didn’t switch up their coverage midway through the last game to pay him more attention. I’d have to watch game-tape to make that determination, and until someone starts paying us to write this stuff, there are limits to the lengths I’m willing to go to for this column.
One thing I feel confident about, though, is that Sunday’s game will give us all a much better indication of whether Massaquoi is the real deal.
3) What does Braylon’s departure mean for Brian Robiskie?
Presumably, it means we’ll finally get to see Robo (DA’s nickname for him in yesterday’s press conference - not to be confused with Robocop, the nickname Kenny Lofton gave Grady Sizemore in the 2007 postseason) run a route this Sunday.
Without Robiskie, the wide-outs are Massaquoi, new addition Chansi Stuckey, Josh Cribbs, and Mike Furrey.
Cribbs hasn’t exactly made a strong case for a legitimate receiver role this season: 9 catches for 39 yards, a 4.3 yards per catch average, a long catch of 9 yards, and 1 fumble. That said, it’s unfair to judge his potential based on three games with Inadequinn and one with DA. But it’s undeniable that Cribbs’s main strength is special teams, with the occasional “Flash package” (arguably the most inappropriate-sounding set ever devised) or reverse thrown in for good measure. Alpha is smart enough to recognize this, and my guess is that Cribbs will start to see his role on offense scaled back further as of this week so that he can focus on these other areas.
Stuckey should be an “every down” receiver. His career numbers are solid if unspectacular. I’ll point out that 29 of his 43 career catches have been for first downs, which seems like a very positive and at least marginally useful stat.
Based on last week, Furrey seems to be looking at a future of “poor man’s Deion Sanders” double duty as slot receiver and occasional safety. My guess here is that Alpha would prefer to see more Robo on offense to keep Furrey fresh for defense - but again, this is just conjecture.
The end result here is that Alpha drafted Robo to be a consistent offensive threat at receiver, and this Sunday should be our first glimpse into whether or not that will actually be the case.
4) With our premier receiver gone, will we see more focus on the run game?
I doubt it. With James Davis on IR and Jamal Lewis still limited in practice the past two days, Jerome Harrison remains our only legitimate back - and that designation is probably a stretch on its own.
The Browns called 33 run plays against the ‘Nati last week. Harrison took the ball on 29 of those, which is a heavy load for one guy to carry on a weekly basis. If Lewis can’t go, I expect that we’ll see a little more Chris Jennings to try to relieve some of the pressure from Harrison.
But the vast majority of last week’s offensive production (48 of of 81 plays, 249 of 395 total yards), came from Derek Anderson’s arm, and I don’t expect that to change - especially when you consider that the Bills are ranked 21st in pass defense and Mangini will want to get a good look at his young receivers.
5) Will DA’s performance be affected?
Conventional wisdom would suggest ‘yes.’ Anderson referred to Edwards in yesterday’s press conference as “a guy [he] trusted,” and I think a lot of people believe that the trust factor is huge in a quarterback’s ability to connect with receivers.
But to me, the overriding factor has to do with how well Robo, Massaquoi, and Stuckey understand the offense and run their routes. My understanding is that precise route-running is pivotal because so much of an effective passing game is timing and anticipation. Your QB isn’t often throwing the ball to where the receiver actually is - he’s throwing it to where they’re going to be. Theoretically, a receiver on a choreographed route should end up in the same spot at roughly the same time regardless of whether that receiver is Braylon or someone else. So DA should really be throwing the ball to this roster in the same place he’d throw it to Braylon.
No one was talking about the chemistry between Anderson and Massaquoi prior to last week. But because Massaquoi made catches against the Bengals, I’m sure that DA would now say that he trusts Massaquoi more than he did. But that trust didn’t have to be there in advance for him to throw those passes in the first place.
My take? Catches are required for trust to develop. Trust is not necessarily required to produce catches.
In other words, whether or not DA plays as well as he did last week has less to do with Braylon’s disappearance than with how our new guys play. And this early in the season with two rookie receivers, that’s an unknown quantity.
Looking back on this column, I think I’ve provided even fewer answers than I thought I was going to be able to. But the reality is that at this stage, it’s impossible to know how Edwards’s exit will actually affect the Browns. As with all trades, though, the true value will be based on what happens next. And if the Browns manage to get a win on Sunday, that’s going to now go even further with the fans than it would have before. Not that Alpha cares.
-T
(view comments)
