A note of appreciation

Plus a quick clarification on Jerome Ford vs. Kendre Miller

First of all, I have to start with some comments about the Browns, because to be honest with you guys I didn’t see the Nick Chubb news until after Part 2 released. I got asked about it, actually, and about Jerome Ford vs. Kendre Miller, and they are similar situations where the quarterbacks might ground the whole offense, but I would lean Ford there, both for the certainty that Chubb will be out not just this week but also next, and also because his situation does seem a little better.

Miller’s been running well, but he’s been contacted at or behind the line of scrimmage so often that even with some positive advanced metrics the stats have been underwhelming. Ford is also the clearer play in the passing game, with Miller having a bad drop last week, although I do think the Saints have so much with Alvin Kamara on designed throws in their playbook, and Taysom Hill might be a guy who would take some of that but is obviously out, that I guess I do still think Miller would likely catch a couple passes, and perhaps three or more. I do also think the possibility exists where he catches zero, because they don’t go to those playcalls, or they use Jamaal Williams or someone else, but I guess those alternatives are bad enough that going in that direction instead of using Miller similar to Kamara would surprise me a little.

That said, Ford should take over the lead duties, spelled by Pierre Strong. Strong has played some, but not a ton, and at this point doesn’t appear to be a real threat to the bulk of the work. He does a lot on special teams, and a lot of the work he does on offense is split out wide, or as a jet motion man, in some select packages. The Browns have used Ford as their traditional running back both before Chubb’s return and then interchangeably with Chubb, and while we’ll probably also get some D’Onta Foreman now mixing into the early-down carries and possibly short-yardage work, you’d have to think Ford will get quite a bit of work.

I guess I’d argue Miller does have a little more skill-based upside, but Ford’s also done enough — including a long TD run on a draw last week — that we certainly can’t write off an efficient stretch from him. So anyway, Ford would have probably been near the top of Biggest Signals this week, even with Dorian Thompson-Robinson taking over at QB, and I do think DTR is a downgrade even to the rushing efficiency, despite being mobile, because he’ll be so much less threatening as a downfield passer that the running lanes that have been open for Browns backs may not necessarily be as wide. That’s one of the things about Jameis, is he was so willing to push downfield, and even throw into coverage, that the obvious way to play him was dropping as many guys as reasonably possible on every play, so you have dudes around to potentially intercept passes when he gets frisky, and because you know the extra defenders won’t deter him from trying to make those passes. Also, just to guard those areas he is targeting, obviously.

All of that of course opens up the underneath rushing lanes as we see in so many offenses where defenses play that way, i.e. Kansas City, and I think probably some of those McShanny offenses like the Texans, Rams, and Vikings. So not having that element with DTR taking over, and his mobility being something that benefits RBs but also is going to force defenses to want to bring an extra guy (or two) down so he doesn’t run all over them, is going to potentially clog up some of the rushing lanes and offset the advantage that the defensive attention on the QB’s rushing might provide, since there will just be that many more bodies in those tight spaces.

Anyway, there’s a whole bunch of thoughts that I probably would have gotten into in Input Volatility, but wanted to get out this morning, because I always wanted to just say thanks to all of you. After writing the final Part 2 of Stealing Signals this week, several of you reached out with positive notes, and I’ve written this before but I do really thrive on the positive feedback, and so I just want to say the appreciation is mutual, and even if I don’t reply to each individual note, I really enjoy the stories and comments about your teams and your successes and any joy or knowledge you took from anything I wrote this year. I write a ton, and I’m obviously pretty self-defeatist about the value of any of it, so it’s always nice to get those messages, above and beyond just the fact that obviously it makes you feel good when someone says, “Hey, good job.”

And that doesn’t mean you all have to send those notes, either. I do get them enough, and your clicks still show up in the numbers I can see, and I can pretty easily extrapolate and recognize there are more people who feel those ways than find the time to write those notes. Appreciate you guys. You’re the best audience anyone could ask for, and it’s so cool I’ve found this space and have the opportunity to write for you guys.

And while there’s always some pressure you feel as a creator to grow, and find more audience, and get bigger — and that’s something I’ve maybe make too big of a focus at times — I’ve taken some specific feedback from a longtime Signals Gold subscriber to heart and really want to refocus this offseason on this space, and on you guys, the people who are self-selecting fans of my writing and my analysis. Going forward, I’ll be making a conscious effort to focus as much of my energy here as I can.

Thanks again for a great season of Stealing Signals, though as I’ve written, I don’t necessarily intend for that to be an end to posts in the near future. Will be back soon.