John Taylor's Pre-Game Twelve-Pack

Once again, John Taylor presents an always-refreshing and never-bitter way to continue your game-day preparation. Unless you're easily offended, in which case you'll feel neither refreshed nor not bitter. But that's just how he rolls.

Thoughts, notes and questions as the Cleveland Browns head into today's tough road matchup against the San Diego Chargers.

  • Whatever baby-steps Jeff Davidson allowed his team to take in a crisp debut as offensive coordinator last week, he needs to build on this week. Keep them in the walker if he must, but also put them on the floor and let them crawl around and pull themselves up on the furniture every once in a while.

  • Kellen, you talk the talk as well as anybody who has ever played your position. If your performance ever actually catches up with your mouth, you'll go down in the history books as one of the greatest of all-time. Oh yeah, and playing a full season would be a good step in that process as well. But, you laid it out there. Now is the time to back it up. And for some reason I suspect that you will.

  • My Cavs and my Buckeyes both played like Breeder's Cup contrail against inferior competition yesterday. In my convoluted way of Cleveland Sports thinking, that means that the Browns will play well against superior competition today. Whether that playing wellness translates into a Cavs or a Buckeye ending is still to be determined. But I will say this: Philip Rivers is not God. Hell, he's not even Bernie for that matter. Contain LdT, you could possibly steal one.

    (That's so easy to type, that last sentence. Reality does indeed bite, though.)

  • Speaking of reality, Charlie Frye needs to start showing something, anything, to keep the team from taking a serious look at upgrading his position this off-season. A BK poster on a childhood wall can only carry you so far. It's time to start producing. Or, at least, show some progression instead of the current arc of regression.

  • And, please, could people stop calling him a "rookie" or saying he's "basically a rookie"? No, he's not; he's a second-year player who has regressed in the seven starts of his second season from his five starts his rookie year.

  • I don't normally "do" predictions--although I have drunkenly called both "W" shots this season so I'll be looking for my cookie and pat-on-the-back in the mail--but I will make a prediction for a couple of things I "Joe Namath" will transpire in the Taylor household between the hours of four and seven p.m.:

    Me turning to my better half at some point today while watching LdT: "(Very bad word), we coulda had him."

    Me turning to my better half at some point today while watching a Deuce highlight: "(Very bad word), we coulda had him."

    Me turning to my open beer-filled fridge at some point today while watching the above two scenarios playing out: "(Very bad word), I'm gonna have you."

  • I do not wish ill on anybody but, if one member of the Browns secondary had to come down with a case of (fill in the blank), why could it have not been someone whose name rhymes with "Ralph Brown"? Seriously. Daven Holly is coming into his own and, all of the sudden, he comes down with Tuckeritis. All of these medical problems the Browns have endured in 2006 defy any logic, which leads me too...

  • Would this season not make for a killer two-part episode of "House"? Blown patella tendons, mystery illness times two and one offensive lineman's very nasty case of "nosackitosis" early on in training camp. Come on, tell me that Dr. House and crew would not be licking their stethoscopes over the preposterous maladies that have afflicted this team this year. At worst it's a two-parter; at best it's a spin-off.

  • Hey Joshua, Ty Webb called me the other day and told me to tell you need to "be the ball, Danny". He said you'd know what he meant.

  • Shawne Merriman was suspended for four games because of a violation of his league's substance abuse policy. Specifically, he tested positive for a banned performance-enhancing substance.

    He has yet to be vilified in any type of media that I have read.

    Barry Bonds has not been suspended because of a violation of his league's substance abuse policy. Specifically, he has not testified positive for a banned performance-enhancing substance.

    He's has been vilified by every type of media known to man, up to and including England's own "Horse & Hound" magazine.

    The question is, why? Nary a negative word about an athlete who has tested positive, yet the very same media has nothing but negative to say about an athlete who has never tested positive.

    Again I ask, why?

    (Writer's note: I am no Barry Bonds fan or apologist. In fact, if I were to actually hate an athlete, it would be Bonds. Or John Elway. Nonetheless, the hypocrisy in this instance just boggles my simple mind.)

  • In closing, I'll simply leave you with the words of the great Ron Burgundy:

    "Go #$!& yourself San Diego"

  • (I got thirsty, so you're only getting an eleven-pack this week. Deal.)

The OBR Top Stories