Red Right 88

In Cleveland, hope dies last

Archive for the category “right vs. wrong”

Perception, reality and the Browns

“Everything you see or hear or experience in any way at all is specific to you. You create a universe by perceiving it, so everything in the universe you perceive is specific to you.” – Douglas Adams

With the St. Louis Rams coming to town on Sunday to take on the Browns, we got to thinking about how people perceive the current Browns season and head coach Pat Shurmur.

Shurmur spent the past two seasons as offensive coordinator of the Rams and, after just eight games in charge of the Browns, some are ready to run him out of town.

If Shurmur is so incompetent, you’d think that Rams fans would be glad that he no longer is in town. But that appears not to be the case, according to Jim Thomas, who covers the Rams for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

“I think if you would have taken a poll to see if Shurmur should be rehired, maybe the vast majority of the fans would have said the Rams probably should fire him,” Thomas told the Beacon Journal. “Then he ended up as head coach of the Browns. So that was the image and part of it was because of a lot of short passes and an offense that didn’t score a lot of points. But when you consider that he had a rookie quarterback (Sam Bradford), a rookie left tackle (Rodger Saffold), a right tackle in Jason Smith who’s basically a rookie and next to no wide receivers to work with, he did a pretty good job in St. Louis.

“They had averaged only 10.9 points a game (in 2009), and they scored a touchdown more a game (in Shurmur’s second season as offensive coordinator). … One of the biggest criticisms from not just fans but some media and columnists was that they needed to take more downfield shots. But the West Coast offense is more of a timing thing, the Rams really didn’t have deep threats at receiver and I think he did it partly to protect Bradford.

“He did a good job in developing Bradford, and I think he got a lot out of the offense.”

Hmm, a young quarterback still learning the league, inexperience offensive linemen, no wide receivers to work with … where have we seen that? (And don’t forget the fourth- and fifth-string running backs).

But that reality clashes with the perceptions among some fans. The way they see it, Shurmur should have been able to turn this team into the ’87 Browns while installing a completely new offensive system without the benefit of a full off-season. That hasn’t happened so they need to create an alternate reality filled with doom and gloom.

Perceptions can work both ways, of course. The Browns have the “No. 1 pass defense” in the NFL, if you go by yards allowed. But is that because they have a defense that terrorizes opposing quarterbacks? Or is it more likely that it is so easy to run on the Browns that opposing teams have no reason to pass the ball?

This isn’t unique to Cleveland; take the case of the Carolina Panthers, who are ranked No. 5 in the league in offense.

Because they have been able to move the ball on offense, the Panthers are treated as a “team to watch.” But that masks the reality that they are 2-6 and all those yards are not translating to wins.

If it turns out the Panthers are for real, however, maybe the Browns can hire a dynamic offensive coordinator like Carolina’s Rob Chudzinski. Oh wait, they did that and, in the great Phil Savage/Romeo Crennel purge of 2008, Chudzinski had to go so we could get offensive mastermind Brian Daboll here.

The Browns are clearly not showing the kind of offensive progress we had hoped to see eight games into the season, but we can still hold out hope that a better day is coming.

Now whether than hope is just us creating our own reality or not, only time will tell.

***

Things certainly aren’t getting any easier for the Browns, as strong safety T.J. Ward, running backs Peyton Hillis and Montario Hardesty), wide receiver Mohamed Massaquoi, free safety Usama Young, cornerback Dimitri Patterson and defensive end Auston English all missed practice on Wednesday.

Just lovely.

***

Finally, now that word has come out that Joe Paterno will “retire” at the end of the season* – much like how Jim Tressel “resigned” earlier this year – this gives everyone another good lesson in how to judge someone’s character.

People don’t have good character just because they wear a sweater vest or thick glasses, or because they talk a good game – a person’s character is revealed by the choices they make.

We recently had the opportunity to hear Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Daniel Christman, former superintendent at West Point, talk about the meaning of honor.

“‘Honor’ and ‘integrity’ are closely associated, but they are not synonyms,” Christman said. “Integrity means living a principled life, always free from hypocrisy, being true to your values. Honor defines what those values and principles are. Simply put, it means ‘doing the right thing.’”

Judging from the way Paterno and Tressel acted – looking out for No. 1 above all else – they would have learned a valuable lesson from Christman’s talk.

*Turns out Penn State’s Trustees did what Ohio State’s Trustees were unwilling to do – they fired Paterno Wednesday night.

(Photo by Cleveland Browns.com)

It’s right vs. wrong, not new vs. old

Dan Le Batard at The Miami Herald apparently doesn’t get it.

In his latest column, he cries that “new” journalism is ruining it for everyone else.

He takes Deadspin to task for its recent story on Mark Sanchez, but somehow lets The New York Post off the hook for doing something far worse (bolding is us):

“What Deadspin.com did this week was wrong by all the previous measurements, although those measurements mummify more every day. It wasn’t news to report that a 17-year-old girl had maybe slept with Sanchez. That age is legal in New York. It wasn’t news that she had photographed proof of Sanchez’s bedroom. (This is what The Kardashian Generation has wrought; the famous get screwed, and the screwed get famous.)

“The girl wanted it published, then didn’t, but Deadspin published it anyway — and traffic soared. And you know what happened next, right? The New York Post followed by publishing the girl’s name and picture for her high school classmates — something even Deadspin avoided. This is how it happened with Favre and Rex Ryan’s wife, too — old media deciding to follow what everyone was talking about because that’s where the money, eyes and marketplace were.”

You can argue how close Deadspin got to crossing the mythical ethical line that journalists and newspapers deal with on a daily basis, but how can you even try to defend what the Post did? You just don’t publish the name of a minor, especially one who didn’t do anything wrong. That’s sleazy, no matter where you fall on the journalism age line.

But apparently that’s OK because the Post is “old” journalism and they are just trying to keep up. So rather than take the high road and do the right thing, it’s OK for the Post to trash a high school girl because Deadspin opened the door, the Post had no choice in the matter, they just had to follow.

Le Batard also misses the point in regard to Tiger Woods:

“There appears to be a fascinating sexual tension growing between old journalism and new journalism. A startled and exposed Tiger Woods discovered this the hard way, when both journalisms barged into his bedroom together with a kind of zeal that had no precedent in American sports.

“There is the feeling that a divorced and broken Tiger Woods should have been more discrete, should have known better. But he couldn’t have. The rules changed on him, and for all sports figures, while he was getting undressed.”

The only thing that Tiger Woods discovered is that he can’t do anything he wants without repercussions.

If you’re married you don’t cheat on your spouse.

We’re pretty sure that rule predates the creation of both “new” and “old” journalism.

***

From UniWatch comes this link to Hoopism, a site with several sophisticated and interactive NBA-centric infographics.

The best one shows word clouds for every NBA team based on who played the most minutes for each team. The one for the Cavs is pretty sweet.

***

Sure, when the Indians lost Albert Belle and Manny Ramirez and Jim Thome and C.C. Sabathia and Cliff Lee and on and on that’s just the way it goes.

But now that Albert Pujols might leave St. Louis, suddenly it’s a problem?

Please.

***

Would the Browns consider bringing Braylon Edwards back in free agency?

Someone at Bleacher Report thinks it’s a good idea:

“Bringing Edwards back might allow him to mentor younger receivers such as Mohamed Massaquoi and Brian Robiskie, both of whom struggled in only their second seasons. It would also give Colt McCoy a legitimate No. 1 receiver.

“Fans need to forgive and forget when it comes to Braylon Edwards. Sure, he dropped passes, but there is not a receiver in the league worth his salt who hasn’t.

“The only thing Cleveland fans need to worry about is whether adding Braylon Edwards will make the team significantly better.

“And the obvious answer is yes, it will.”

We’re going to go out on a limb and say that’s never going to happen.

Post Navigation