Just when you thought your Browns previews couldn't get any weeklier, it's time for preview number eight. As always, the stats in this post are borrowed from Football Outsiders. To read a detailed explanation of how DVOA works, click here.

Browns offense vs. Ravens defense:

           CLE offense  BAL defense
total DVOA    -8.9%       -24.0%
passing      -16.5%       -14.9%
rushing       -0.9%       -35.7%

Following an underwhelming—if seemingly successful—performance in Jacksonville, the Browns offense now ranks 26th in total DVOA, with a 26th-ranked passing attack and an 18th-ranked running game. Part of the problem is that the Browns have been extremely boom-or-bust, as we've seen not only from play to play, drive to drive, but from game to game (the Browns have the league's highest offensive DVOA variance, 16.5%). This type of inconsistency, usually a negative in the long term, actually teases us in the short term with knowledge of the possibility that the Browns might put on a real show. It's not much to hang our hats on, but it's more than we had in 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003...

Meanwhile, the Ravens have the league's second-best defense, 7th against the pass but 1st against the run. They are a unit without many weaknesses. For what it's worth, they have struggled to defend passes to "other" receivers (meaning, WRs who are #3 or lower on the depth chart), ranking just 29th in that area with a DVOA of 29.0%. That could be evidence of a lack of DB depth, or it could be a weird fluke. Either way, the Browns' own lack of WR depth doesn't inspire much confidence. Syndric Steptoe's one great play last week was basically the first great play of his career. Let's hope it was the start of a coming-out party, I guess. Huge advantage: Ravens

Ravens offense vs. Browns defense:

           BAL offense  CLE defense
total DVOA    -0.8%         9.9%
passing      -17.0%        10.5%
rushing       10.0%         9.3%

The Browns rank 18th in total defensive DVOA, 18th against the pass, and 24th against the run. It's worth noting, however, that the Browns rank last in the NFL in defensive Adjusted Line Yards (4.95), which suggests that their problems in stopping the run occur more at the line of scrimmage than a "normal" run defense could expect. In other words, the Browns' front line is not stuffing its fair share of runs, whereas the "second level" defenders are, at least, doing an okay job of preventing those runs from going too much further.

The Ravens will salivate to hear this, because their ground game is the only part of their offense that's had much success. If ever we needed more evidence that passing is more closely tied to overall success than rushing, we could look to [all the data ever to come out of the NFL since the invention of the forward pass. But I guess we could also just look to] the 2008 Baltimore Ravens, whose 5th-ranked running game has done little to improve their overall DVOA ranking (19th). The Browns are a team that just might allow Baltimore to subsist for a period on its rushing success, but ultimately, the Ravens will have to take to the air to score points, and the Browns should be (at least) reasonably equipped to match up with them in that arena. Slight advantage: Ravens

Special teams matchups:

                        Browns    Ravens
total DVOA                4.1%      0.2%
FG kicking                0.2      -3.7
CLE kickoff vs. BAL KR    3.7      -2.8
CLE KR vs. BAL kickoff    0.8       0.0
CLE punt vs. BAL PR       4.9       0.5
CLE PR vs. BAL punt       1.1       6.5

The Browns continue to excel at special teams in the quietest way possible. They now rank 3rd in DVOA despite receiving almost no contribution from last year's record-setting kickoff return team. Instead, the key to their success seems to be their lack of any glaring weakness. It's not much to get excited about, but it does mean the Browns offense and defense reap lots of "hidden" rewards in the form of better field position, etc. The Ravens rank 20th in special teams DVOA, with an excellent punting unit, but not much else. In particular, the Browns should be able to exploit Baltimore's weak kick return team, especially if the weather is Dawson-friendly (or Robot Phil-friendly, I should say). Sticking Joe Flacco and company with terrible field position would be an excellent way to force the Ravens to pass the ball (since, the longer the drive, the harder it is to get by with rushing alone), which, as we've discussed, could play into the Browns' hand. Advantage: Browns

Once again, the Browns are the weaker team heading into this week's matchup. But unlike last week, when I thought the Browns happened to match up favorably with the Jaguars in many key areas, I don't think the Ravens' strengths and weaknesses dovetail as nicely with the Browns'. That said, the Browns will have the home field, plus a gargantuan edge in Moral DVOA. It should be a good one!

For once, the Browns were on the other end of a crazy finish, that being the winning end. But for one fortuitous bounce off Matt Jones's hands, we'd be cursing fate and adding this week's game to the list of gut-wrenching Browns finishes.

All wins seem wonderful and even a little preordained in retrospect, but I think it's important not to forget how close the Browns were to losing to the Jaguars. If they were to lose, the mistakes we'd harp on would be how the Browns closed out the game. Let's not forget the absolutely, disgustingly terrible endgame executed by the Browns.

Tied at 17, the Browns had a 1st-and-goal at the one yard line, thanks to a fantastic bit of catching and tackle-breaking by Syndric Steptoe. Following a defensive penalty, Jamal Lewis gets stuffed and Derek Anderson overthrows his receiver twice. The Browns kick the field goal. On the ensuing kickoff, the Browns are gifted with a turnover as Brian Witherspoon decides he'd rather not hold the football any longer.

So now the Browns have the ball deep in the Jaguars' territory with four and a half minutes left and a three-point lead. Following another Lewis failure and two more Anderson incompletions, the Browns kick another field goal. The lead remains within one score and the Browns have taken sixteen seconds off the clock. Amazingly, on the next drive, the defense forces a three-and-out; the Jaguars punt. There are now three minutes left and the Browns have decent field position. Three more unsuccessful rushes by Jamal Lewis later, the Browns punt—having spent another fifty seven seconds.

The Jaguars at this point must drive the entire field in under two minutes, without timeouts, and score a touchdown to win. Even a replacement-level defense ought to be able to stop the Jaguars offense from this task. The Browns succeed in doing so only by the slimmest of margins—thank the heavens Matt Jones couldn't tip the ball to himself. Otherwise, I may have torn my hair out.

Starting with the Browns' final, feeble goal line stand, the offense played execrably. Needing to run the clock or run up the score, and given favorable field position, they do neither. That the team went on to win suggests a couple things: the defense held up its end of the bargain and the Jaguars are more than a little responsible for this victory, too. Despite the win, this game didn't make Crennel look good.

Play of the Week

Alex says: My favorite play of the game is definitely Derek Anderson's sweet teardrop pass to Braylon Edwards deep on the left sideline. It took perfect coordination between the two to work so well. Edwards had a step on the defensive back and Anderson made a flawless deep throw. Not to get too poetic, football is known for it's violence and aggression, but plays like that—with supreme finesse and timing—make the sport so much better.

Corey says: Steptoe Bismol! The Browns played a boom-or-bust game, in which the offense (in particular) was generally unexciting but occasionally brilliant. One of the more brilliant plays was Syndric Steptoe's 53-yard reception setting up the decisive score. Anderson made one of his characteristic risky throws, finding Steptoe in tight triple coverage, but somehow Syndric found the open field, and one Braylon Edwards block later, the Browns had 1st-and-goal at the 1 (a certain touchdown, right? Grumble grumble).

Player of the Week

Alex says: It violates the spirit of Player of the Week, but I have to recognize Nick Sorensen for disrupting Matt Jones in the endzone on the game's second to last play. Jones tipped the ball up in the air, but Sorensen was able to get over from another receiver in time and keep Jones from completing the catch. It'd be hard to fault cornerback Brandon McDonald on the play; he was right there with Jones all the way to the pylon. It's just that David Garrard made a fantastic pass, high enough so that only the tall Jones could get to it. Without Sorensen's heroic save—and I can't repeat this enough—this game would be on the level of the 2001 Bears Hail Mary game, the Dwayne Rudd game, and last year's Arizona game in terms of painful finishes.

Corey says: Though the Browns didn't exactly take full advantage (with sacks), the one thing that was pretty solid for most of the game was the QB pressure. So, much as I hate to go along with the popular pick, my Player of the Week is Shaun Rogers, who (along with Alex Hall) seemed to be in Garrard's face the most. Rogers had 8 tackles on running plays—a lot for a nose tackle—in addition to his one official sack. Oh yeah, he also blocked a field goal and recovered the ball himself.

Quote of the Week

Alex says:

"Like I told him before, I had to go through eight tackles to get in that position." —Syndric Steptoe

First, a little context: this quote came in response to a reporter's non-question, "Darnell Dinkins says you're not tall enough." I don't have much to add to this besides that Mayor Dinkins is awesome. Steptoe Bismol ain't bad, either.

Ryan Pontbriand Honorary Special Teams Moment of the Week

Alex says: I must give credit where credit is due: Phil Dawson has played very well this year. He's been accurate on field goals and gotten good distance on most of his kickoffs. At the very least, he hasn't become the sub-replacement level kicker I feared. Though, sad as it is, I think the Browns should keep Le Fils d'Awesome on a short leash. He has a nasty habit of sucking once the weather turns (as it is right this moment). For a marginal team like the Browns, any improvement should be exploited, loyalty be damned—for now.

Corey says: The aforementioned blocked field goal is going to be hard to top in just about any game. I don't have any hard data here, but I have to believe that that one play added the most "win expectancy" for the Browns, so to speak. For one thing, if Jacksonville makes the field goal, then at the very least, their final drive ends with them forcing overtime. But since the Browns managed three easy points themselves right after Rogers' block, it might not even have gotten to the point of overtime: Jacksonville probably would have won, had Rogers not blocked that kick.

Will Hill Memorial Obscure Brown of the Week

Alex says: Always a sucker for religious diversity, I'd like to recognize offensive lineman and Obscure Brown Scott Young. Born and raised (eh?) in Salt Lake City and an alumnus of B.Y.U., I can only assume that Scott is a Mormon. Also, the always respectable Mormon Times count Scott as one of "27 Latter-day Saints on NFL team rosters." [Ed: Haloti Ngata, too? What the...] Befitting his white Utah upbringing, Scott has a pretty boring middle name: Lewis. I won't begrudge him for it.

Corey says: After two months of slumming it with a bunch of minimally recognizable Obscure Browns, it's time for one of my favorite Obscure Brown of the Week traditions: dipping into the practice squad. These are the guys without even a soupçon of familiarity. Even the front office personnel have no idea who these dudes are (apart from Steve "Chin Man" Sanders, the Josh's Cribbs mainstay). Of course, that makes it a pretty tough choice for me—I'm like a kid in a candy store. This week, I guess I'll go with LB Titus Brown, an undrafted rookie out of Mississippi State, on the basis of his mellifluous middle name: Markeith. Congrats, Titus!

Fashion Item of the Week

Corey says: The loyal readers among you know that I am firmly against uniform patches of any kind, in any situation. That said, I recognize that the death of Gene Hickerson is a mournful passing for the Browns organization. I still don't think that should automatically mean the players have to wear new "GH" decals on their helmets, but I'm hardly surprised. I mean, as long as the league is forcing them to wear "GU" decals in memory of Gene Upshaw, whose place in the franchise's proverbial heart is probably subordinate to Hickerson's, then how could they not also honor Hickerson with a decal? Frankly, rather than two decals, I might have preferred to see Hickerson's decal bump Upshaw's. They could even have saved a little on the decal budget—something like this:



Of course, if they're truly insistent upon memorializing both men via decal, I propose the following space-saver, which pretty much says it all:

Idiot of the Week

Alex says: As much as it pains me to do this, which coincidentally is less painful each week, I have to point out Willie McGinest's hilariously-bad tackle attempt on a David Garrard scramble. Just go to this video, fast forward to 0:40, and enjoy. Obviously, D'Qwell Jackson should've brought down Garrard first, but let's look past that. See that white blur that seems to purposely get out of Garrard's way? That would be McGinest. What was he thinking?

Number of the Week

Corey says: 49.5%—that's Derek Anderson's completion percentage for the season. And even though he actually improved that number with his 14-for-27 performance in Jacksonville, it was another low-efficiency game. Here are the updated standings for the worst completion percentage among qualified QBs:

                   passes   pct.
M. Hasselbeck, SEA   128   49.2%
D. Anderson, CLE     225   49.5%
J. Russell, OAK      216   50.3%
B. Johnson, DAL       75   50.7%
T. Thigpen, KC       135   51.2%

With one exception, the other guys on the list have thrown about half as many passes. Now, as we've discussed over the last few weeks, some of this is certainly the fault of the receivers, who lead the NFL in drops. But even if we add 5 or 10 more completions to Anderson's total, he comes out near the bottom. The point is, the Browns offense has been quite variable, but even in a "successful" game such as this most recent one, they're inconsistent. The Browns offense almost seems designed for booms and busts, which can be exciting, but in the long run, is a bad thing.

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: As Josh is an NFL player, he has an obligatory non-football business venture. In this case, Josh and teammate Darnell Dinkins (now possibly my favorite Brown, all thanks to Josh's Cribbs) are co-owners of Bounce City, a wonderland of inflatable Moonwalk-type entertainments (e.g. obstacle courses), soon to have its Grand Opening (we're told). It's clear that Dinkins is the brains of the partnership. Josh spends his "day at the office" hauling bags of sand and goofing around on the equipment. For some reason, Mike Adams is there—he and Josh race each other a few times through some of the obstacle courses. In the background, Dinkins worries about permits, staffing, and the last-minute construction of their storefront. Frankly, if I had kids, I'd totally take them to Bounce City for the day—it looks awesome. Meanwhile, Josh's Cribbs is on a roll lately with the quality episodes.

Next week:

Yay Browns! Boo Ravens! (And don't forget to submit your guess now on who our Idiot of the Week will be, on the next face-slappingly-good edition of Born and Raised on the Cleveland Browns!)

Here we go; Browns preview number seven. No time for delay!

Most stats are borrowed from Football Outsiders; click here for an explanation of how DVOA works.

Browns offense vs. Jaguars defense:

           CLE offense  JAC defense
total DVOA    -9.7%        14.8%
passing      -18.0%        28.3%
rushing       -0.8%        -1.8%

The Browns have the NFL's 25th-ranked offense (24th passing, 19th rushing), however they rank dead last in variance (18.2%), which in their case is probably a good thing (it means they have been the least consistent offense from week to week). As I guessed in last week's preview, the Browns do indeed lead the NFL in DVOA when passing to one of their running backs (narrowly edging the Jaguars themselves). This is worth knowing because Jacksonville ranks 30th in defending passes to running backs (43.4%). The Browns should try to exploit this extremely imbalanced mis-matchup as much as possible.

But the Jaguars defense is about more than struggling against running backs-turned-receivers. It's about struggling against other things, too. They rank 25th in overall DVOA (27th against the pass, 15th against the run). They have varying degrees of difficulty containing all types of receivers, with the exception of "#1 receivers" (-8.4% DVOA, to rank 6th). They also apply poor QB pressure, ranking 30th in Sack Rate (4.5%). Slight advantage: Browns

Jaguars offense vs. Browns defense:

           JAC offense  CLE defense
total DVOA     8.1%         8.7%
passing       13.7%         4.0%
rushing        2.0%        12.5%

The Browns defense has been slightly below average, though the pass defense is slowly emerging as a team strength. They rank 18th overall, 17th against the pass, and 26th against the run. As I said last week, the Redskins were probably one of the few teams who could truly make the Browns pay for their deficiency in run defense. The Jaguars' rushing game has been about league average (15th), so even if they can gain some yardage against the Browns, they'll probably still have to live and die by their passing attack, like most teams.

In that regard, the Jaguars do have an adequate-to-solid passing attack (also ranked 15th, but with a much higher DVOA). David Garrard is a high-percentage passer (completing 66.7% of passes, to rank 8th among qualified QBs). He's also racked up the 5th-most rushing DYAR among QBs (20, with a rushing DVOA of 5.2%), for what that's worth. As noted above, the Jaguars do rank #2 in the NFL when passing to their running backs; however, the Browns defense ranks #1 in the NFL in defending those passes, so Garrard may have to depend more on his WRs Matt Jones (99 DYAR, 15.8% DVOA; ie. solid) and Reggie Williams (1 DYAR, -11.5% DVOA; ie. pitiful). Advantage: Jaguars

Special teams matchups:

                        Browns    Jaguars
total DVOA                3.9%      2.6%
FG kicking               -0.4       1.4
CLE kickoff vs. JAC KR    2.5       1.1
CLE KR vs. JAC kickoff    0.3       6.2
CLE punt vs. JAC PR       5.0       1.2
CLE PR vs. JAC punt       1.3      -4.2

Both these teams are solid in the arena of special teams (Browns 6th, Jaguars 10th). For the Browns, it's all about the punt team (both the D-Zaster's punts themselves, and the team's ability to contain opposing return men) and Robot Phil's kickoff team. For the Jaguars, it's about the NFL-leading kickoff team. Jacksonville's one big weakness is their punt team, so maybe the Browns can finally get Cribbs going that way. Slight advantage: Browns

Though I'm giving the Browns slight advantages on offense and special teams, the Jaguars are still the more efficient team overall (-4.1% to -14.4%), so I wouldn't exactly predict a Browns win. I do think, however, that the Jaguars happen to match up favorably for the Browns, so I probably expect this game to be closer than the betting public does. The wild card in all this is that, where Jacksonville ranks #1 in overall variance (1.7%, meaning they have been the most consistent team in the entire NFL), the Browns rank 27th (28.5%), which opens the door for all kinds of zany things to occur. Vote "Zany" in '08!

Kevin Pelton of Basketball Prospectus, the fledging sister site of (who else?) Baseball Prospectus, unveiled his new N.B.A. prediction engine this week. In the vein of PECOTA, he even copped the name, sort of. His is called SCHOENE after Russ Schoene, apparently the Bill Pecota of basketball. The first set of predictions released is conveniently for the Central Division. I have my reservations about SCHOENE's reliability, but it's worth a read.

Corey noticed something interesting in that first set of numbers. The two players most likely to improve this season over their established career norms are both Cavaliers: Daniel Gibson and LeBron James. For both of them, it's obviously a good thing. But I'm especially glad with Gibson since, as Pelton says, he's something of a one-dimensional player now. But I think he's actually better than that.

I've gone on record in the past to say that LeBron will improve until he become a being of pure energy, so SCHOENE's 74% improvement rate for Him is no surprise. I wonder, if LeBron indeed improved, and let's say it's by some ridiculous amount—80 points and 20 rebounds per game—would he end up winning the Most Improved Player award (in addition to the Most Valuable Player award)? To go from a superhuman level to the utterly inhuman—who could be more deserving?

I remember John Hollinger quipping in the past that the Most Improved Player award is really the Most Improved Playing Time award. Instead of going to the guy who established a new level of play for himself, it goes to someone who goes from last man off the bench to in the rotation. They were playing at the same level all along, but never got the chance to show it off.

Now that's what I call a Browns game. Seriously, this game would have been right at home in, say, 2004. The Browns followed the Butch Davis formula to a tee: (a) get noticeably outplayed, (b) lose lots of ground in the third quarter or so, (c) somehow, in the waning moments of the game, have some kind of wacky, longshot chance at pulling it out, but (d) fail to do so. Check, check, double check.

It's good to be on familiar ground again. That in mind, let's get right to the nutmeat, shall we?

Play of the Week

Alex says: The best play of the game—or at least the play that was best at the end—was Eric Wright's strip of Clinton Portis in the fourth quarter. To force the fumble was a beautiful move, although I'm not sure the defense needed to allow Portis twenty four yards first. The defense was only in that position because the offense had failed to score after getting a first-and-goal from the 1, which is a little ridiculous. Though they shouldn't even have had that first-and-goal. If you recall, Jamal Lewis caught a screen and had nearly scored a touchdown. The replay showed that he was never down by contact. He was tripped up by Rex Hadnot, I believe. Lewis hit the ground and then rolled into the end zone. That's a touchdown, right? Unfortunately, I couldn't hear the commentators, so I don't know if they brought up the issue. The only reasons I can think of for Romeo Crennel not to challenge the play is that (1) he thought it wasn't worth the risk of losing a timeout since the chances of scoring a touchdown from the 1 are very good, or (2) the play was unchallengeable—maybe the whistle was blown, or some such. (1) is a pretty weak argument. I don't feel like expounding why, you should know. If (2) is the case, then there was nothing to be done. But if it's not, then I seriously question Crennel's strategical expertise.

Corey says: I think Jamal was down by contact since his knee touched the ground. Alex and I discussed this in one of our patented non-blog conversations; Alex concedes that the knee may have hit the ground, but says it doesn't matter because the play should only end if a defender touched him. As is our wont, neither one of us wants to actually look it up. Readers?

(Oh yeah, my Play of the Week is also Clinton Portis' fumble. I gotta give credit to the writers there: I did not see that plot twist coming.)

Player of the Week

Alex says: In his first action since Week 1, Sean Jones led the team with ten solo tackles. However, only three of them came at the end of plays that could be considered positives for the Browns. Obviously, you can't lay the blame for this poor performance at Jones's feet. He was usually the last line of resort. I haven't seen enough to say confidently how big of a drop-off there was from Jones to Mike Adams in the past few games. I'd bet that it's mostly in the passing game, since the Browns don't seem to utilize the strong safety in run defense much. And the pass defense was halfway decent against the Redskins.

Corey says: Look, it's already Thursday night; I barely even remember this game, outside of the last couple minutes of the fourth quarter. Don't blame me, though—blame our genius editor who thought it would be a good idea to "wait a few days" before writing Born and Raised. "Let your impressions caramelize for a little," he said. Well, I hope you're happy now, Ray Ninman.

(My Player of the Week is, uh... Brandon McDonald? I don't really remember hearing his name much—which usually means he's doing something right. According to the official play-by-play, the Redskins only tested McDonald twice—can that really be?—once on an incomplete pass to Santana Moss, and once on an 8-yard pass to Portis on 3rd-and-12, resulting in a forced punt. McDonald is slowly but surely filling up the giant hole in my heart left by the departure of Leigh Bodden.)

Ryan Pontbriand Honorary Special Teams Moment of the Week

Alex says: Josh Cribbs has yet to make a really Josh Cribbsular play this season. What's going on? His hamstring and shoulder injuries from the preseason are the likely culprit. And though he hasn't been spectacular, the Browns' return teams have been solid this season. It looks like Cribbs, instead of ripping off huge returns, is consistently gaining a few yards on a return. And most importantly, he's held on to the ball. Turnovers on special teams are killers and the Browns especially can't afford them.

Corey says: Have the Browns' return teams been solid? The punt return team is now tied for 11th, according to Football Outsiders, while the kickoff return team is ranked 15th. If that's solid, then my name isn't Carlo Gesualdo. Okay, so I guess it's kind of solid.

(Right, so here's a parenthetical afterthought where I tell you I'm not really picking a Special Teams Moment of the Week this week.)

Gern Nagler Memorial Obscure Brown of the Week

Alex says: Too many times this season, I've seen a Browns defensive back with dreadlocks and thought, "Who is that guy?" I then learn that it's either Terry Cousin or Gerard Lawson, then I promptly forget again. Earlier in the season, Corey highlighted Lawson, so today I want to take time out to applaud the many accomplishments of Cousin. He has great dreadlocks. He had two tackles and three assists against the Redskins, though most were cleaning up after his own or other Browns' mistakes. He has two daughters. He's a replacement-level cornerback. Way to go, Terry!

Corey says: Once again, brother, I have to call into question the obscurity of your choice. Terry Cousin has been a starter in the NFL for like a decade now. He's not obscure, just washed up. Anyhoosier, my O.B. of the Week is second-year DL Santonio Thomas, formerly of the Patriots. I wonder: when selecting obscure players off the free agent scrap heap, is it better to take a former Patriot (who probably was made to succeed in whatever playing time he did get, but whose potential would probably have been recognized, lest he get away) or a former... I don't know, Chief (who could well be the next Jim Brown, for all the Chiefs know)? The answer, of course, is neither: it depends what's in your heart.

Rubin of the Week

Alex says: For the seventh consecutive week, Ahtyba Rubin easily wins my Rubin of the Week accolades. You may remember his impassioned sideline-cheering last week against the Giants, inspiring the team to victory. What sealed it this time around was his assist on an Alex Hall tackle of Clinton Portis late in the second quarter. Without that essential Rubin element to the tackle, Portis surely would have gone on to scored a touchdown, if not detonated a dirty bomb in a major American city. For shame, Clinton.

Corey says: It was a tough choice, but after much deliberation, I too am going with Ahtyba. We're rootin' for ya, cuz'!

Idiot of the Week

Alex says: Like I said before, if it weren't for the heroic patriotism and selflessness of the under-appreciated A. Rubin, Clinton Portis very likely—nay, definitely—would've set off a thermonuclear device in an American metropolis. This, in turn, would have started a global nuclear holocaust and caused the end of human life on Earth. Why Portis would so recklessly attempt something so outright dangerous can only be known to him. For this reason, and despite Fred Smoot's egregious penalty for illegal use of his hands, I have to name Portis this week's Idiot.

Corey says: I'd like to take this opportunity to talk about the current situation with Kellen Winslow's suspension. Kellen should not have said what he did, but then, the Browns should not have tried to keep secret the nature of Winslow's ailment. So while it seems the organization hardly treated him like a "piece of meat," they've now overreacted to the comment and presumably hurt the Browns' chances of winning on Sunday, and for what? To keep the other players from catching the negativity bug? The best way to keep the team positive would be to win the next game. More importantly, who's ever heard of a 24-hour staph infection? Shouldn't Winslow be in the hospital for, like, a long time? But most importantly, what the hell is with the Browns and staph infections? Are they running a secret underground infirmary over there?

Number of the Week

Alex says: 57%, or the Browns' highest odds of winning at any point during this week's game. I'm using the numbers from GridIronMine.com, which I just discovered. It's similar to FanGraphs in many ways, but about football. When did the Browns reach this magical plateau of win probability? According to the GridIronMine.com model, it came with 3:23 left in the first quarter, right after the defense had forced the Redskins to punt. The Browns were starting their drive at their own forty-six yard line. Things were looking pretty good. And of course, they went three-and-out.

Corey says: 41%, which is Braylon Edwards' catch rate for the season so far. And that's even higher than I expected to find. But it's still pretty miserable; only 4 of the 78 qualifying wide receivers in the NFL have caught a lower percentage of the passes thrown their way. Some of that has been Derek Anderson's fault, sure, but most of it has been Braylon's fault. I'm not sure if Edwards leads the league in drops, because I don't have access to that data, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say yes, he definitely does lead the NFL in drops. there's no question.

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: Monday's Josh's Cribbs saw Josh and four Browns teammates (Darnell Dinkins, Andra Davis, Kris Griffin, and Steve "Chin Man" Sanders) taking their kids to the Cleveland Metroparks Zoo. It was designed to be dads only, which apparently didn't sit well with a certain Mrs. Dinkins. At any rate, the kids all have a great time petting snakes and feeding polar bears. Andra Davis is expressly unimpressed with all the animals except for one: the tiger. He goes on about the tiger for way too long. And Darnell Dinkins might be my favorite Josh's Cribbs character ever—his antics are always amusing (and from the looks of next week's previews, there's more Mayor Dinkins in store). All in all, this was the second really great episode in a row.

Moral DVOA Rankings

It's been two weeks since we updated you on the ol' Moral DVOA. The Browns' Monday Night win over the Giants catapulted them into a new stratosphere of moral uprightness, while a more familiar moral victory over Washington kept them in the same ballpark (but not literally). As for the rest of the AFC North... yadda yadda yadda, you don't actually read this part, do you?

            Moral VOA  NFL rank
Cleveland     137.8%       1
Pittsburgh     15.1%      11
Cincinnati     -0.3%      17
Baltimore   -4202.0%      32

Next week:

The Browns set sail for what I imagine is easily one of the top 25 major cities on the east coast of Florida: scenic Jacksonville. There, they'll stomp all over their turquoise nemeses, or possibly just throw a bunch of beer bottles at them (woo! topical). We'll be right here with all the recap you could ever tolerate—plus: resolution of all this week's cliffhangers! You won't want to miss that.

After a game like Monday's 35-14 extravaganza, there is a strong temptation to "decide" that the Browns are "back on track" and that therefore, the numbers from the first four games no longer "represent" them. However, history suggests that a sudden turnaround like this is more likely to be an outlier than a Change We Can Believe In. It's possible that the Browns will continue to show 2007 form, but if we want to make the best possible prediction at this moment in time, we have to treat last week's game as one data point in five, nothing more. It would take at least a few weeks of domination for us to start thinking about discounting the early season results.

The stats in this preview come from Football Outsiders, yadda yadda yadda, click here to read about the methodology behind DVOA.

Browns offense vs. Redskins defense:

           CLE offense  WAS defense
total DVOA    -7.4%        -3.6%
passing      -14.7%        -2.5%
rushing        0.2%        -5.3%

Not surprisingly, the Browns offense has taken a small jump up the rankings this week; they now rank 23rd by DVOA (24th passing, 14th rushing). One interesting thing I've noticed is that the Browns may in fact lead the league in DVOA when passing to their running backs:

             passes   rec. DVOA
J. Lewis       11       69.4%
J. Harrison     7       86.3%
J. G. Wright    6        5.9%
L. Vickers      5       44.8%

Those are some gaudy numbers, especially when you consider that the Browns are among the worst in the league when throwing to other types of receiving targets. So what's going on here? It may be a Chudzinski thing (the Chargers, where Chud had his previous job, are the other team that stands out for excellent RB receiving DVOA, with the notable exception of LaDainian Tomlinson). Or it may be that opposing defenses are blitzing more (a luxury made possible by the Browns' pathetic WR/TE depth). Either way, the running backs have found themselves wide open. And since Anderson isn't really being sacked that much (5.2% of passing plays, to rank 11th in the NFL), we can also assume that if opposing defenses are blitzing more, the running backs and offensive linemen are doing a decent job of picking up those blitzes. In short, when there have been passing woes, they've pretty unmistakably been the fault of Anderson, Edwards, and the rest of the receiving corps.

The Redskins have a better-than-average defense, which ranks 8th in DVOA (11th against the pass, 11th against the run). They've been excellent at defending passes to #1 receivers (-10.9% DVOA, to rank 5th) and tight ends (-49.1%, 3rd), which doesn't look good for the Browns on paper (this would be a great week for Donte Stallworth to show what he's made of). The 'Skins have been about average at defending passes to other categories of receiver, including running backs (-3.3%, 16th). Up front, Washington does not sack very often (4.9% of the time, to rank 27th), so their strength would seem to be in the secondary. Advantage: Redskins

Redskins offense vs. Browns defense:

           WAS offense  CLE defense
total DVOA    23.4%         8.8%
passing       26.8%         2.4%
rushing       20.3%        14.5%

As we pointed out in "Born and Raised" a few days ago, the Giants' final point total (14) belies the fact that the Browns defense surrendered a lot of yards (they bailed themselves out with a couple of interceptions near their own goal line). In terms of the big picture, holding New York to 14 points is not necessarily as impressive a feat as it sounds. The Browns have actually fallen down the defensive DVOA rankings (to 22nd); however, their pass defense has improved its DVOA (to rank 14th, whereas the run defense now ranks 28th).

Indeed, the pass defense has looked really good for a few weeks now, and I don't think that has much to do with the QB pressure (5.5% Sack Rate, to rank 24th). The name of the game, rather, has been interceptions. The Browns have nabbed .191 interceptions per drive, which is the best such mark in the NFL. As a result, they also lead the NFL in total turnovers per drive (.234), despite the fact that they're unlucky (if anything) in recovering fumbles (.043 per drive, to rank 22nd). Here's how the pass defense's DVOA rating breaks down in defending each receiver type:

                  DVOA   rank
vs. #1 WRs        -3.7%   12
vs. #2 WRs        -9.2%   12
vs. "other" WRs  -30.2%    6
vs. TEs           20.6%   24
vs. RBs          -34.9%    2

Really, the only pass catchers who've had much success against the Browns are the tight ends (which could explain the success against the Giants, who don't throw to their tight end very often). The tight end struggles are likely the result of Sean Jones' injury; the rest of the DB starters have looked generally solid (if inconsistent) to me.

Unfortunately, the Browns will have to contend with a very efficient tight end in Chris Cooley, who ranks 4th in receiving DYAR among NFL tight ends (76) and who leads all of his WR teammates in receiving DVOA (22.5%). Overall, the Redskins have an excellent offense, ranked 4th in DVOA (10th with the pass, and 3rd with the run). You won't hear me say this often, but Washington seems to be one of the few teams whose success on offense relies heavily on rushing the ball. Clinton Portis leads all NFLers in rushing DYAR (201) and DVOA (30.1%), and the 'Skins rank 4th in Adjusted Line Yards (4.78). Normally, I wouldn't be too concerned about a team whose M.O. was to run more than usual, but run defense has been one of the Browns' biggest weaknesses. Expect to see the Redskins earn plenty of first downs, but hope that their drives stall out before they reach the end zone, whether by punt, interception, or being held to field goals instead of touchdowns. Advantage: Redskins

Special teams matchups:

                        Browns   Redskins
total DVOA                4.7%     -4.8%
FG kicking                0.4      -0.3
CLE kickoff vs. WAS KR    3.0       1.4
CLE KR vs. WAS kickoff   -0.1       4.3
CLE punt vs. WAS PR       4.6      -2.4
CLE PR vs. WAS punt       0.7     -13.7

The Browns still rank 4th in special teams DVOA, and they're still doing it the quiet way. The strongest units are the punt team (ranked 5th) and the kickoff team (11th), while the weakest unit is the field goal kicking "team" (ranked 21st). The Redskins, on the other hand, rank 29th in special teams DVOA. Their strengths are kicking off (7th) and returning kicks (11th), while their weaknesses are punting (31st) and returning punts (25th). The Browns match up favorably in almost every category here. They hold significant advantages on both sides of the punting battle, which should give them excellent field position both offensively and defensively (assuming Dave Zastudil still remembers how to punt!). And who knows, maybe Josh Cribbs will finally make the highlight reel for the first time in 2008. The game's in his home town, after all. Advantage: Browns

Once again, the Browns would appear to be outmatched on both offense and defense (but able to cling to a special teams edge—woo!). On paper, the Redskins look like a team that presents matchup problems for the Browns. But we've already seen that the Browns can overcome odds like these. I, for one, will be watching this game with much keener interest than I would if the previous game had been a failure. Enjoy it!

This game showed that I know nothing about football. Or I certainly can't judge football talent. I have been calling for Derek Anderson to be benched since the beginning of the season, mostly because I thought he had a low-ceiling and was bound to make stupid mistakes. And against the Giants, he was, if not spectacular, very good. He threw accurately and efficiently. He even failed to make any Anderson-esque mistakes (though maybe we should call them Frye-esque).

I don't want to read too much out of one game—there are other, important reasons Anderson succeeded that weren't necessarily under his control—but this week's made me want to toss all my previous analysis of Anderson out the window. Me, the king of screaming "small sample". It's safe to say that how the game unfolded was shocking.

So, where to go from here, if I know nothing about football? I'm tempted to stop giving my advice on who deserves playing time and who doesn't, which strategies work, etc. since Romeo Crennel and Phil Savage have it all figured out. But it's pretty naïve to say, as the Titanic is sinking, "Don't worry about it. I'm sure the captain knows what he's doing." Not to suggest that the Browns are like the Titanic. And it's just lazy. The only choice, I suppose, is to be as educated as possible when it comes to watching the games. And that means more film study. And hanging out with Ron Jaworksi.

Then again, it was only one week. All of this will look mighty stupid come November, I bet.

Player of the Week

Alex says: I'll give this one to Braylon Edwards, though as much for his interviews as for his play. You may remember, during the broadcast, they showed a prerecorded interview where he said that a victory would result in it being a whole new season for the Browns. What a perfect bunch of media-baiting. He gift wrapped a perfectly good, bite-sized story to the press and let them run wild with it. And to top it off, it came at no possible detriment to Edwards. It's not like he was going on a limb. If the Browns won, then hey, it really is a whole new season. And if they lost, and continued losing, oh well, it would've been a new season, if only they'd won. Also, he played very well during the game. The old ball-off-the-helmet play was, well, terrible, but the rest was good. New season!

Corey says: With apologies to Dave Zastudil—who was truly flawless—this one goes to Derek Anderson, who wins by default because the bylaws of "Born and Raised" are very specific in that you can't award Player of the Week honors to "whole offense" (or to Rob Chudzinski). Nevertheless, consider this: coming into the game, the Giants defense led the NFL in Sack Rate (10.5%), yet they didn't get to Anderson once. Not once! The sackiest defense in the land! Similarly, the Giants defense led the entire NFL in forcing punts (.634 per drive), yet they failed to force a single one out of Anderson and company. So congratulations to Anderson—but more importantly, congratulations to the entire offense for a truly amazing and entirely unprecedented accomplishment.

Offensive Play of the Week

Alex says: Braylon Edwards's first long catch of the day was a great reminder of something that's plagued the Browns this year: luck. Well, not necessarily luck, since the Browns had to do a lot right to make the play work, and to call the right play at the right time. But the forty nine-yard catch could have easily been only six or seven had the cornerback stuck the tackle. Don't get me wrong, all good offenses rely on luck now and again, just don't bet on those kind of breakaways any time soon.

Corey says: There are way too many candidates to choose from in this category. Braylon Edwards' two long catches were probably the two most "value-adding" offensive plays of the game, so I'll go with one of those (just take your pick). I would like to give an honorable mention, however, to Jerome Harrison's 33-yard gain on a reverse handoff from Josh Cribbs at the outset of the third quarter. It was the Browns' longest rushing gain of day, bettering the next-longest rush by 20 yards. Chudzinski got very, very creative on a number of offensive plays—that one being a prime example—and it paid off in a big way.

Defensive Play of the Week

Corey says: Trailing by 13 in the fourth quarter, the Giants drove 77 yards down to the Browns' 9-yard line, poised to make it interesting. The Browns defense appeared to have gone soft, having just surrendered first downs on four straight plays. But wait! Eric Wright introduced his own special bail-out plan, which involved a 94-yard interception return for a touchdown. Such a schwindler! It was a beautiful pick, too, as Eric read the route and the throw perfectly. In hindsight, the Browns defense did an excellent job overall (in light of the fact that the Giants ranked #1 in offense), but it's worth noting that they gave up much more yardage than they did pointage, so to speak. Several times did the Browns "bail themselves out" of tight spots by picking off Eli Manning after a lengthy Giants drive. That's probably evidence of a few things: that the Browns do a great job sniffing out interceptions, but that they still have trouble stopping drives the old-fashioned way.

Alex says: I too must choose Eazy-E's interception. What else could it be? It sealed the win for the Browns. But before then, my Browns Are Going To Blow This sense was acting up. They'd had a fumble stolen away by the referees in the first half and turned into a touchdown by the Giants and looked poise to embarrass themselves on national TV. I was even contemplating how I would express how so many of these types of games feels to a Browns fan. I eventually settled on this:



You know, everything's going great. You're coming out of the S-turn (figuratively speaking, of course) and then— WHAM! But that didn't happen. Still pretty funny, though. Where was I? Oh yeah, stay out of my booze.

Ryan Pontbriand Honorary Special Teams Moment of the Week

Corey says: It was a quiet day for the special teams—some more than others. We did get to see one major return, however: the return of Robot Phil Dawson. Though he did miss a field goal (classic Robot Phil), he booted 4 of his 7 kickoffs into the endzone (3 of which resulted in touchbacks), while another one landed at the 2, resulting in a tackle at the 14. Human Phil Dawson (whom you might remember from such games as "most of them") has great accuracy but terrible distance (no matter what the MNF announcers say; I'm guessing those guys haven't watched too many Browns games). I'm pretty sure it was Human Phil who booted the first Browns kickoff of the game (a 44-yarder), but after that, it was all Robot Phil, all the time. The subsequent 6 kickoffs had an average distance of 67.5 yards.

Robert Lyons Memorial Obscure Brown of the Week

Alex says Time and again, I've pointed out that if it weren't for that pesky Josh Cribbs, we'd all be hailing Darnell Dinkins as our kick-returning lord and savior. Guess what. He did it again this week. Taking a John Carney kickoff back twelve yards right before half-time. But that's not all. He also caught an awesome touchdown this week—the third of his career—on what became the longest reception of his career. It was a fine week for Mayor Dinkins.

Fashion Item of the Week

Corey says: I am all for any uniform gimmick that allows us to bask in the glory of striped socks. If one things was proven on Monday night, it's that the striped socks cause the Browns to play near perfectly on offense. That said, the obsession with throwback uniforms in NFL games did not start in Cleveland, and for good reason; it started in places like San Diego and Buffalo—places where it actually made sense—and quickly became "expected" of all the other teams. I like when the Browns make historically-informed choices about their current uniforms (which they have done, mostly, except for the freaking socks). What I don't like is the throwback "solution" they've shown us the last two years. It's not only trite; the helmets are aesthetically displeasing, and the whole thing feels forced; that is, geared towards jumping on the NFL's throwback bandwagon.

Alex says: Maybe this would be more appropriate for Number of the Week, but I'd just like to point out that the Browns are 1-0 when wearing striped socks this season and 1-3 when not.

Number of the Week

Alex says: The whole Monday Night Football crew, Mike Tirico especially, continually harped on the Browns' glut of "procedural" penalties, mostly their six false starts. They questioned how a team could win with so many mistakes, which were extra befuddling, since the Browns were at home. But any reader of the Football Outsiders should know better. I'm thinking specifically of Bill Barnwell and Aaron Schatz's essay "False Starts: Separating Fact from Fiction" from Pro Football Prospectus 2007. In it, we learn that home teams commit 45% of false starts—which isn't far from exactly half you can see. Though, false starts and delay of game are the penalties that correlate most with losses. My natural skeptic told me that the announcers were overreacting to some frustrating mistakes, but they had a point. Winning teams don't jump early much.

Corey says: .191 and .234—that's the number of interceptions per drive and turnovers per drive, respectively, that the Browns defense has gotten this season. I mention this because, after Monday's beatdown, the Browns now lead the NFL in both categories. This comes in spite of the fact that they rank only 22nd in fumbles recovered per drive (.043), meaning it's all happening with interceptions (that's a good thing—fumble recoveries are mostly determined by luck). If you're curious, the Browns do now rank 14th in defensive DVOA against the pass (2.4%), which is up from their previous ranking of 16th (4.8%). Sufficed to say, we'll keep our eye on these numbers.

Misunderstanding of the Week

Corey says: Okay, so I might as well address this. Before the game, I wrote a post which was itself a critique of an article called "10 Reasons the Browns Will Beat the Giants in MNF Game." Sufficed to say, I did not see much validity in any of the 10 reasons. After the game, the author of the article found my post and posted a few gloating comments about how he was right and I was wrong. The misunderstanding, though, is this: one positive result (even a small number of positive results) does not—cannot—validate a methodology. To cite a clichéd example, even a broken clock is right twice a day. If I awoke from a coma, and my only clock, now obviously quite broken, led me to proclaim nonetheless, "I believe it is 6:26!" and, by the purest of luck, it happened to be exactly that time of day, then I ask you: was my proclamation a good one? For the record, I'm not suggesting that the Browns owe their victory to the purest of luck. I am, however, suggesting that prior to the game, there did not exist anything like the sufficient evidence needed to make a reasonable prediction of a Browns win. Eugene, the author of the article, made his methods—10 of them—explicit, and the fact remains that they are not methods that are likely to prove helpful over a large enough sample of games.

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: This week on Josh's Cribbs, Josh and Maria visit their alma mater, Kent State University, showing us scenes from their courtship and Josh's college football career. This was probably the strongest episode of the season so far, as it consists primarily of Maria telling embarrassing stories about Josh: how he stalked her, how he couldn't hack it at her spin class, how he messed up the words at karaoke ("I'll do any girl" instead of "I'll do anything"). Josh basically denies it all. The funniest story involves shooting Maria's Top Model audition tape, in three feet of snow, in a swimsuit, in the middle of the Golden Flashes' football field. Maria claims it was Josh's idea. Whatever the case, Josh's banter with his wife (or teammates, depending on the episode) makes for much more interesting television than his usual "talking head" conversations with the camera. I'm hoping for more episodes like this one.

Next week

A breash of freath air is coming to our nation's capital! That's right, the Browns—the original reformers themselves (Ever heard of the forward pass? You can thank Paul Brown.)—storm into Washington to sweep out the old-boy network and cronyism that defines the Redskins organization. Catch all of the late-breaking news on the next edition of Born and Raised on the Cleveland Browns. Politics!

This isn't usually my thing, and it feels a little too easy... but apparently, Google News thought I would really enjoy reading this article, entitled "10 Reasons the Browns Will Beat the Giants in MNF Game" from something called The Cleveland Leader. So, as punishment for wasting 45 seconds of my day, I'm going all FJM on The Cleveland Leader's ass. Take that, Google!

10 Reasons the Browns Will Beat the Giants in MNF Game

1. "The New York Giants are bound to 'bounce' after last weeks [sic] 44-6 whipping of the Seattle Seahawks." Ah, the bounce theory. Can The Cleveland Leader have stumbled upon some version of the Plexiglas Principle? Perhaps, but even if the Giants are "due" to return to Earth, their return will only nudge them towards their 2008 "baseline"—a baseline that still rates them light years ahead of the Browns—not towards league average. Besides, "league average" would still have no trouble beating the Browns.
2. "The Cleveland Browns are coming off a bye week and have had an extra week to prepare against the the Super Bowl champions." This has been researched. I don't remember the exact findings, but I seem to recall that teams coming off a bye do not increase their winning percentage by very much, if at all. But whatever; you can have this one, The Cleveland Leader. You're going to need it.
3. "The NFC East may be a paper tiger. After many thought the division was the toughest in the National Football League, the league [sic] hasn't lived up to expectations. The Philadelphia Eagles were the only team in the division to win yesterday [sic] the Dallas Cowboys nearly lost [sic] the Cincinnati Bengals last week at home and then fell [sic] the historically awful Arizona Cardinals. The Washington Redskins fell on their face at home against the St Louis Cardinals [sic!] yesterday at home [sic]. Are the Giants the next to fall to [sic] lowly Browns?" Well, the Ravens and Bengals both lost yesterday. And the Steelers didn't even play a game! Apparently, this means the Browns are in big trouble. By the way, the NFC East is still the best division by far, according to DVOA (probably—the Week 6 ratings have yet to be posted, but it's almost inconceivable that they would change that much). The Giants rate #1 in the league, the Eagles #3, the Redskins #5, and the Cowboys #7. Paper tigers they are not.
4. "The Browns are in the top 10 in the NFL in defense. Defense wins games." The Browns are in the top 10 in total yards surrendered. I hate when people confuse this meaningless stat for "defense"—of course they're in the top 10, they (and the Giants) have played fewer games than every other team in the NFL, and in many cases, the Browns have played 2 fewer games. For what it's worth, the Browns rank 14th in yards allowed per game. But even then: the Giants rank 3rd in that category. Defense wins games, indeed. But even then: who cares about YPG? The Browns rank 18th in defensive DVOA (the Giants rank 7th). But even then: defense does not win games. Defense contributes about three sevenths of the combo of things that wins games. Either way, we should be able to agree: if any team is winning this game by virtue of being in the top 10 of anything, it's the Giants.
5. "The Browns put together their best quarter and [sic?] half on offense against the Bengals in their win before the bye week. The bye week probably helped the timing that was lost after quarterback Derek Anderson's injury in the pre-season." Nice try, The Cleveland Leader, but that's two reasons. The Browns might have put together their best "quarter and half" (did you mean "quarter and a half"?) against Cincinnati, but I doubt it (the Bengals defense is terrible). Meanwhile, the bye week probably helped a lot of things, but we've already covered that.
6. "All of the Plain Dealer sports writers believe the Browns are going to lose. Bet the house on Cleveland!" Fill in this blank: "All of the ___ believe the Browns are going to lose." It could literally be anything—Plain Dealer reporters, San Diego Padres players, SHI EMEA Account Executives—anything. Bet the house on Cleveland!!!
7. "Toledo beat Michigan, didn't they?" Paul Krugman won a Nobel Prize. Ergo, the Phillies will win the World Series.
8. "Monday Night home underdogs are historically dangerous." I am not looking this up for you, The Cleveland Leader. But this kind of thing is not unknowable—it's perfectly 100% quantifiable and look-up-able—and the onus is supposed to be on you when you make a claim like that. For the record, I'm entering the hypothesis that you are wrong: Monday Night home underdogs have a historical winning percentage equivalent to that of Sunday afternoon home underdogs.
9. "Ferocious Cleveland fans will have all day to drink. That even scares me and I am from Cleveland!" Ferocious Cleveland fans will also have all afternoon to read this post, whose sobering (depressing?) effect will more than cancel out the ferocity associated with being slightly drunker than usual.
10. "God owes Cleveland a break after Red Right 88, The Drive, The Fumble, The Move, Bottlegate, and a 10-6 season that didn't get us into the playoffs when we deserved to be." Oh The Cleveland Leader, you [probably] always save the best for last. Reason #10 requires us to grant that (a) a god exists, (b) he interferes in people's daily lives, (c) he cares about the outcomes of sporting events, (d) he specifically wants the Cleveland Browns to lose, and (e) he "owes us"—that is, he intends to "make it up to us" at some point. Of course, even if we accept all five of these propositions—all five of which are false—we are still left with the problem of answering why, exactly, god would choose this game to make it up to us. Would a win against the Giants (that would extend the Browns' record to 2-3, in a season in which they'll probably end up 5-11 or 6-10) make even a sliver of a dent in god's bar tab of Browns misery? By this logic, couldn't the previous game, which the Browns won, have been the sum total of god's big plan to pay off his debts?

Okay, Google News. We're even.

Warning: the following Browns preview is rated GU—for Given Up on the Browns—because if you still harbor any delusions about the Browns being good this year, you're not going to like what DVOA and I have to say about this misguidedly be-Mondayed game.

The stats that follow are actual DVOA totals (no more DAVE, no more raw VOA), and as you'll see, the Giants are currently rated the #1 overall team in the NFL. The Browns, not so much. For a detailed explanation of how DVOA works, click here. Let's prev'!

Browns offense vs. Giants defense:

           CLE offense  NYG defense
total DVOA   -24.7%       -12.4%
passing      -36.7%       -14.1%
rushing      -12.2%       -10.2%

Even though there are now opponent adjustments factored into our DVOA (meaning the numbers now reflect, to some degree, the fact that the Browns have faced a couple elite defenses), the Browns' offensive DVOA ranking has dropped precipitously (they're now 31st, by DVOA). They rank 31st with the pass, and 29th with the run. And with Kellen Winslow out for this game, things aren't looking up. One big problem has been Derek Anderson's penchant for interceptions. The Browns, as a team, have thrown .146 INTs per drive—the most in the NFL. The overall turnover situation doesn't look as bad on paper, because the Browns have not yet lost a single fumble to the defense (something we can partially attribute to good luck, ironically), but Anderson has done very, very little to inspire confidence of any kind.

(Edit 10/13: Maybe we're being harder on Anderson than we should be. Check out this fascinating article from Football Outsiders' Bill Barnwell. Apparently the game charting data suggests less blame for Anderson; more blame for Braylon Edwards—and the injuries to Donte Stallworth and Joe Jurevicius, which have severely reduced Kellen Winslow's effectiveness, by altering his role. An interesting read.)

However, (whether Anderson deserves to replaced or not,) Brady Quinn might want to hope for another's week's stay of execution. The Giants have the league's 7th-ranked defense, and they're 6th against the pass. The key to their success has been quarterback pressure; the Giants lead the NFL in Sack Rate, having recorded a sack on 10.5% of pass plays. This has led to their forcing punts more often (63.4% of drives) than any other defense. On the plus side, it has not necessarily led to more Giants interceptions (.049 per drive, 24th in the NFL). Let's just hope Dave Zastudil brings his A-game. Huge advantage: Giants

Giants offense vs. Browns defense:

           NYG offense  CLE defense
total DVOA    41.1%         6.3%
passing       43.6%         4.8%
rushing       38.6%         7.6%

Such as it is, the Browns defense have been the "overachievers" of 2008, so far. They rank 18th in total defensive DVOA, 16th against the pass, and 23rd against the run. The front seven has provided more pressure than in past years, but they still rank only 20th in Sack Rate (6.1%). The secondary has looked (mostly) good to my eyes; in fact the Browns have been the 4th-most likely to grab an interception (.154 per drive).

They'll have their hands full this week, though. The Giants lead the league in offensive DVOA (2nd with the pass and 1st with the run). Eli Manning has reinvented himself (seemingly), having racked up the 7th-most passing DYAR (404) and 3rd-best passing DVOA (33.4%). And it's hard to say which receiving targets to watch out for. WR Amani Toomer has been thrown the most passes (31), but his receiving DVOA is a (comparably) miserable -18.4%. Plaxico Burress has been targeted 26 times, but even his receiving DVOA (21.7%) is below the team average. The Giants throw to their running backs and tight ends very seldom, and with mild success. The best receivers, on a per-play basis, have actually been WRs Domenik Hixon (92.0%) and Sinorice Moss (72.9%), but they've only been targeted 11 and 7 times, respectively. In short, the Giants have a balanced, unpredictable, and very effective passing attack. Huge advantage: Giants

Special teams matchups:

                        Browns    Giants
total DVOA                6.2%      3.2%
FG kicking                1.7       3.9
CLE kickoff vs. NYG KR    1.7      -0.5
CLE KR vs. NYG kickoff    0.0       0.2
CLE punt vs. NYG PR       4.6       1.4
CLE PR vs. NYG punt       1.0      -0.4

The Browns should hope for a chance to maximize their special teams advantage, slim though it may be. They rank 4th in special teams DVOA, while the Giants rank 10th. Ironically, the Browns' kick return team (a record setter in 2007) has been the weakest unit so far, while the punt team has led the way (ranking 3rd in the NFL). New York's special teams have been mostly about average, except for John Carney's solid field goal kicking. Advantage: Browns

So there you have it: this is not a game the Browns are likely to win, at least not without a huge amount of luck. Weirder things have happened, though... so, uh, bring on the weirdness!

Loyal readers, by now you're used to the routine around here: we receive millions of reader inquiries per day, and in a given year, we only have three real opportunities to reply to any of them. As you know, the Browns' bye week just happens to be one of those opportunities. So here you have it: your annual unholy combination of gritty, mailbag-style journalism and zany, "Born and Raised"-style phoning-it-in. We would have posted this sooner, but Alex was feeling under-the-weather (on a scale of 2000 Kane Davis to 2007 Betancourt, he reported that he was about a 2004 Rick White). Anyway, let's get right to the questions...

Dear Mistake Sports Brothers,

You guys crack me up. When the Browns are leading the league in offense, you're Derek Anderson's biggest fans, but as soon as he starts to struggle even a little, you're calling for his head. Your agenda here is rather pathetic.

Herschel
Rocky River, OH

Alex says: First of all, Herschel, I'm not so sure that we were ever "Derek Anderson's biggest fans," as you say. In fact, I'm pretty sure we were sounding the alarm about Anderson long before hardly anyone else.

In Week 2 of last season, I wrote, "underneath Anderson's sparkly statistics... it wasn't clear that Anderson had solved his former problems." In Week 5, Corey said, "If things continue such that Derek Anderson looks like he's the only glaring problem, I say great—we've got the solution to that particular problem all lined up." In Week 9, this time from me: "We're starting to sound like a broken record. Derek Anderson is good, but let's not forget the offensive line." Week 13, Corey: "Derek Anderson's two interceptions, for example, did have me a little worried, because, while he has done a great job cutting down on those mistakes in recent weeks, he had a previous habit of forcing the ball into bad spots."

Of course, I'm cherry-picking quotes, but I didn't really skip over much enthusiastic praise of Anderson. Once in a while, we let it slip that we thought he was starting to play like a top quarterback. But then the next week, he'd go out and do something stupid and it'd be right back to lauding the offensive line and lamenting forcing the ball into coverage. As for our agenda, that remains to be seen.

Hi guys,

What does history say about a team that starts 0-3? Do the Browns have any shot left at making the pancakes? Or should we be asking ourselves what kind of shot they have at drafting Michael Oher?

Jim Stansel
Dallas, TX

Corey says: It might interest you to know, Mr. Stansel, that Football Outsiders keeps track of Playoff Odds similar to those at Baseball Prospectus. Using weighted DVOA as a best guess for how teams might perform from here on out, they simulate the rest of the season 10,000 times, keeping track of the percentage of simulations in which each team makes the postseason. Right now, the Browns, at 1-3 and with a rather bleak forecast for the coming months, make the playoffs in only about 100 simulations, giving them about a 1.0% chance of pancake glory.

Should the season go completely Oher-board (see what I did there?), the Browns could set their sights on a high draft pick—not that that would be a good thing (loser's curse and all that). Football Outsiders also tracks the number of simulations in which each team ends up with the worst overall record in the NFL. So if you were laying bets today, you'd probably want to give the Browns about a 4.2% chance of landing the #1 pick (which may end up being Michael Oher, subject of the excellent book The Blind Side).

Dear Mistake by a Lake,

Do you still think the Shaun Rogers trade was a mistake?

Julie Davner
Little Compton, RI

Alex says: Shaun Rogers, after a disappointing first game as a Brown, has come along very well. I don't really know what Leigh Bodden has done on the Lions, but the Lions suck, so let's just assume that he's been bad. So, Browns win! Hooray! I was wrong!

Well, not really... yet. My objection to the trade wasn't that Rogers is an inferior player compared to Bodden (which is still possible, check back at the end of the season, I guess). It was that the Browns were giving up too much to acquire Rogers. Bodden is very valuable, and worth much more than what the Lions gave up for him.

This last point will hardly ever be noticeable, since you can't really measure the lack of a draft pick without a sophisticated model. Regardless of how all the other pieces of the trade turn out, the Browns lost out by giving up a draft pick. It's possible that Rogers' performance will overwhelm that loss, thus making the trade a win for the Browns, but we can't know that after four games. I'm not even sure we can know that after one season.

To be more subjective, I still don't think the Browns should have made the trade. They are fundamentally weak at cornerback. I like both Eric Wright and Brandon McDonald, but were one to get injured, the Browns season may go up in smoke.

Corey and Alex,

I love it when you point out the interesting middle names of obscure Browns players, but surely there are also well-known Browns with interesting middle names. Can you enlighten us?

T. Nintendo Thompson
Dexter City, OH

Corey says: That's a great question. It's well-documented that a player's middle name quality correlates negatively to the likelihood that his NFL career will take off (it's genetic); however, there are a notable few who have managed to fight their way into the limelight despite their excellent, excellent middle names.

For starters, you've got your borderline cases like Andra Raynard David and Phil Drury Dawson. You've got your mild curiosities like Jamal Lafitte Lewis. And of course, you've got Mistake by the Lake legend Jason Gomillion Wright, though I'm not sure he qualifies as "well-known"—frankly, with a middle name like Gomillion, he's pretty much guaranteed to remain perched on the cusp of obscurity for the rest of his career (unless someone gets injured, of course—running backs are 95% interchangeable, after all).

But one Browns starter rises above the trend, with a middle name truly fit for a practice squad nobody: Corey Dornail Williams. Yes, the Browns' token Corey is not only a starter, and an allegedly decent one at that, but his middle name is Dornail. Now I ask you: where are these genius parents coming up with such inspired middle names like Gomillion and Dornail? Truly, the Wrights and the Williamses are the Mozarts of middle naming.

Rubin Bros.,

I know how much you guys love Browns players with cool middle names, so I just wanted to let you know about an especially cool one: Corey Williams's middle name is Dornail. I thought you might like to know. Anyway, my only question is, can you offer us any other interesting trivia about Corey Williams? Thanks!

Peggy
Guelph, ON

Corey says: Peggy, were you not paying attention like thirty seconds ago when I pointed this out? Anyway, as far as other interesting trivia, I mean, I guess I could give it a shot. Let's see...

It seems Williams is a true Renaissance Man (of sports). In high school, he lined up at defensive end, linebacker, fullback, punter and kicker. He was also the star of his high school's baseball, basketball, and track teams. He's also a skilled hunter and fisherman. And he enjoys four-wheeling (I'm not certain what that is, but it sounds like a sport, and it probably involves vehicles—likely with four wheels). Oh, and he's an avid horseback rider. In 2006, he bought his first horse, Roger (could that be short for Roger Dorn... ail?). But that's about all I could uncover. Tune in next mailbag when we'll explore D'Qwell Jackson's taste in ice cream flavors.

Moral DVOA Rankings

It's been two weeks since we updated these rankings. The Browns coupled a moral victory over the Bengals with a morally strong bye week, to retain their firm grip on the top ranking. The Steelers followed a moral thrashing of the Ravens with a moral disappointment against Jacksonville. The Bengals stumbled against the Browns, but eked out a moral victory against Dallas. The Ravens, of course, are plumbing new depths of moral turpitude. Meanwhile, we have now factored opponent adjustments into our Moral DVOA computations, so while the Browns (for example) still rank #1, their Moral DVOA has come down a bit, due to the fact that they've faced such morally reprehensible competition so far.

            Moral VOA  NFL rank
Cleveland      94.1%       1
Pittsburgh     23.3%       9
Cincinnati     21.8%      10
Baltimore   -4019.5%      32

Next week:

Monday Night Football returns to Cleveland—great job TV networks!—for a colossal, behemoth, gargantuan, immense, jumbo, elephantine, mastrodonic, Brobdingnagian, and many other synonyms for "giant" showdown against the... uh, I forgot their name. Who cares? The Browns will grind them into dust. Join us, if you dare, for another exciting edition of "Born and Raised"!

Slider was inducted into the Mascot Hall of Fame! We'll be sure to have tons of coverage about this historic moment throughout the week. Thanks to loyal reader Brad for sending this in.

First off, we at the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times would like to say "Get well soon!" to loyal reader Linda Visser. Hang in there, Linda!

This is a follow-up to my most recent post, "What's the Best Place to Be a Browns Fan (Without DirecTV)?". You may recall that I tallied NFL broadcast data (from the superb website NFL Distribution Maps) in an attempt to figure out which regions of the country get to see the most Browns games.

But my curiosity was not sated. I decided to tally some more data, this time to learn which NFL teams appear on TV the most often right here in Cleveland. Call it "What type of despicable carpetbagger (without DirecTV) would feel the most at home in Cleveland?" Or, if you prefer: "What type of gullible outsider should we be trying to woo to Cleveland?" Either way, my findings were mildly surprising.

Number of games on Cleveland TV between 2005 Week 1 and 2008 Week 5:

Browns      52
Cowboys     42
Ravens      30
Bengals     29
Giants      29
Steelers    29
Eagles      27
Bears       25
Redskins    24
Broncos     23
Patriots    23
Colts       22
Packers     22
Seahawks    19
49ers       18
Chargers    18
Saints      16
Vikings     15
Raiders     14
Buccaneers  13
Chiefs      13
Falcons     12
Jets        11
Lions       11
Panthers    11
Cardinals   10
Bills        9
Jaguars      9
Texans       9
Dolphins     8
Titans       7
Rams         6

Once again, Alex was nice enough to put the totals in graphical format (click to enlarge):



There are some interesting patterns here. Obviously, there is a heavy bias toward winning teams, which appear on more national broadcasts, etc. There is also a slight bias toward NFC teams, whose games are less likely to conflict with the Browns' own contests. And as expected, there is a bias toward AFC North rivals, though not nearly to the extent I thought there would be. Surprisingly, there does not seem to be much of a bias toward teams that are geographically close (Lions, Bills, Bears, Colts), despite the fact that Browns games, as we saw, tend to appear (relatively) frequently in Metro Detroit and Chicagoland.

Since 2005, there are only 2 NFL cities that have received more Browns broadcasts than Cleveland has received of their home teams: Detroit and Nashville are friendlier to Browns fans than Cleveland is to Lions and Titans fans, respectively. But the other 29 NFL cities are all imbalanced the other way; i.e., their fans would be better served by coming here than we would by going there.

You might also notice (or previously have been aware) that the major TV networks have a very unhealthy NFC East fetish, especially when it comes to... well, when it comes to all 4 of those teams. But especially when it comes to the Cowboys. In 2007, for example, a Cowboys fan living in Cleveland could have watched 15 of his team's 16 games from the comfort of his living room. And if we count the upcoming weekend (the Browns' bye), there will actually have been more Cowboys games on Cleveland TV in 2008 than Browns games! It's no wonder there are no "Cowboys Backers" clubs; what would be the point? So I say, call up your backward cousins in Texas. Tell them, "Cleveland is a land of milk and honey, where we won't judge you by your ridiculous accents and garish outfits, and where the TVs spew Cowboys football like the condiment dispensers spew delicious Stadium Mustard!" This is how we're going to save the local economy. You got a better idea?

At the other end of the spectrum, we have the Rams, who have appeared on Cleveland TV only 6 times since 2005. Of course, the Rams have been pretty bad over that stretch. The one that perplexes me is the Titans (7 broadcasts), who have at least been decent, and (I seem to remember) were locked in a wild card race with the Browns just last year.

Well, that's about all I can think to say about this admittedly mundane topic. The lesson here is: if you must leave Cleveland, go to Detroit. But be sure to send us back a Dallas resident or two to take your place.

The best place to be a Browns fan is, of course, The Cleve. However, it has come to my attention that sometimes our Cleveland brothers and sisters have to leave the homeland for other, darker regions. When this happens, they often find themselves in places where the rightness of rooting for the Browns has not yet taken hold. In short, it can be difficult to follow the Browns when you're not in Cleveland.

The best solution to this problem (really, the only solution) is to join your local chapter of Browns Backers. Unless you live in the middle of nowhere—and even then it's 50-50—I can almost guarantee there's a chapter of Browns Backers nearby, where you will be able to watch every game, no questions asked.

But if football is something you simply must enjoy from the comfort of your favorite barcalounger, the next-best solution is to subscribe to DirecTV, which lets you watch every NFL game. Problem is, DirecTV is not cheap, and if you live in an apartment building, you probably won't be able to install a satellite dish.

That puts you at the mercy of CBS and FOX, which got me to wondering: what are the best areas to live in, if you're an anti-social Browns fan without DirecTV? The excellent website NFL Distribution Maps has broadcast data going back to the beginning of the 2005 season, so I did a little tallying. For this survey, I only counted major cities, plus Alaska and Hawaii (for curiosity's sake). This will account for the vast majority of the Cleveland diaspora.

Browns games on local TV between 2005 Week 1 and 2008 Week 4:

Cincinnati      25
Pittsburgh      21
Baltimore       18
Detroit         15
Washington D.C. 12
Chicago         11
Indianapolis    10
Milwaukee       10
Minneapolis     10
Portland        10
Charlotte        9
New York City    9
Philadelphia     9
Nashville        9
Houston          8
Los Angeles      8
New Orleans      8
San Diego        8
Alaska           7
Atlanta          7
Buffalo          7
Jacksonville     7
Miami            7
Seattle          7
Tampa            7
Boston           6
Denver           6
Kansas City      6
Dallas           5
San Francisco    5
St. Louis        5
Las Vegas        5
Hawaii           4
Phoenix          4

Alex was nice enough to put the data in graphical form, so that you could see the breakdown by season (click to enlarge):



Not surprisingly, the hot spots are the other AFC North cities. However, to be a Browns fan in one of those 3 cesspools is an indignity I would not wish upon anyone. So the true best place to be a Browns-fan-away-from-home is Detroit, MI. I hope you enjoy car jacking and/or fur trapping!

If Motown isn't your thing, I highly recommend Washington D.C. (probably the Ravens effect), Chicago (not sure about this one... probably just geographic proximity), or Minneapolis (no idea). A place like Portland (Oregon) rates highly thanks to the Derek Anderson effect, so move there at your own risk. Other towns that rate surprisingly high given their geography are Charlotte, Nashville, and (my favorite) Alaska. The surprisingly Browns-less zones include Boston, St. Louis, and Buffalo. (Seriously, Buffalo: what is your problem? You're like 15 miles away.)

One pattern I have noticed is that it's better to live in an NFC city than an AFC city (excluding the AFC North cities, of course), since the local team's games (usually on FOX) will be less likely to conflict with the Browns games (usually on CBS). That said, the worst place to be a Browns fan is probably Arizona (though if you really are a Browns fan, you're not capable of surviving in 100 degree temperatures, anyway). The sample of games I surveyed includes 3 nationally televised games (ie: Sunday or Monday night games), meaning those lonely Arizonans got only one Browns game above the minimum (that being the 2007 game in which the Browns played the Cardinals). Hawaii, too, got only one more than the minimum (that being Browns-Cowboys from a few weeks ago), but I'm not about to begrudge anyone the opportunity to live in Hawaii. You have my blessing.

I will grant that these data probably don't have the best predictive powers. For one thing, the sample size is small and can therefore be skewed by quirks of the NFL schedule. For all I know, the best place to be a Browns fan in 2009 could be Denver (though I wouldn't count on it). Personally, I'm sticking to The Cleve.