Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Browns Draft Strategy beginning in 2016


jcam222

Recommended Posts

there is only one option for us at #1, which is very likely where we'll pick. We have to go BPA. No more drafting for need, that can happen in the later rounds. We have to start drafting talent, period. Right now that's Bosa to me. We need a big strong edge that can throw lineman off him and get around them with both strength and technique. That's Bosa. If Joey Bosa were to be put on this team "right now"....he might be one of the best run stoppers on the team and frankly might be the most polished pass rusher too save perhaps for Armonty.

 

I dunno, we've drafted talented pass rushers before but for some reason they don't really develop right. I have no explanation for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Hartline and Hawkins will both catch 70 balls. Hartline will be offensive MVP.

 

Z

 

Hartline- 8\123

Hawkins- 10\112

 

That will project to around 40\500

 

The problem is obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the Nixon administration, there is exactly one case of a Super Bowl being won by a team with a below-average QB having a below-average season: the 2000 Ravens. Super Bowls are most commonly won by great QBs, and with very few exceptions the rest are won by really good ones. Some Super Bowl teams have very good running games, some have mediocre ones, and some have really bad ones. Some teams cited for the idea that you can with an offense based around a great running game rather than efficient passing actually prove the opposite. The 2003 Buccaneers were horribly led by Michael Pittman’s 3.5 yards a carry. The 1990 Giants also had a replacement-level running game and an efficient passing game. The Patriots had a mediocre running game in 2001 and a terrible one in 2003.

 

It’s not complicated. The NFL is completely dominated by pass offense and pass defense and has been for a loooong time. The marginal quality of your running game isn’t terribly important, and you don’t need to invest in an expensive running back to get a good enough running game.

 

A great quarterback and a below-average running game is a great offense. Barry Sanders and a mediocre quarterback is a mediocre offense.

 

Draft a QB and receivers and stop the insanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the Nixon administration, there is exactly one case of a Super Bowl being won by a team with a below-average QB having a below-average season: the 2000 Ravens. Super Bowls are most commonly won by great QBs, and with very few exceptions the rest are won by really good ones. Some Super Bowl teams have very good running games, some have mediocre ones, and some have really bad ones. Some teams cited for the idea that you can with an offense based around a great running game rather than efficient passing actually prove the opposite. The 2003 Buccaneers were horribly led by Michael Pittman’s 3.5 yards a carry. The 1990 Giants also had a replacement-level running game and an efficient passing game. The Patriots had a mediocre running game in 2001 and a terrible one in 2003.

 

It’s not complicated. The NFL is completely dominated by pass offense and pass defense and has been for a loooong time. The marginal quality of your running game isn’t terribly important, and you don’t need to invest in an expensive running back to get a good enough running game.

 

A great quarterback and a below-average running game is a great offense. Barry Sanders and a mediocre quarterback is a mediocre offense.

 

Draft a QB and receivers and stop the insanity.

 

Beginning to think that way. Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Ladainian Tomlinson for all their collective greatness have exactly two Championships between the four of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the Nixon administration, there is exactly one case of a Super Bowl being won by a team with a below-average QB having a below-average season: the 2000 Ravens. Super Bowls are most commonly won by great QBs, and with very few exceptions the rest are won by really good ones. Some Super Bowl teams have very good running games, some have mediocre ones, and some have really bad ones. Some teams cited for the idea that you can with an offense based around a great running game rather than efficient passing actually prove the opposite. The 2003 Buccaneers were horribly led by Michael Pittman’s 3.5 yards a carry. The 1990 Giants also had a replacement-level running game and an efficient passing game. The Patriots had a mediocre running game in 2001 and a terrible one in 2003.

 

It’s not complicated. The NFL is completely dominated by pass offense and pass defense and has been for a loooong time. The marginal quality of your running game isn’t terribly important, and you don’t need to invest in an expensive running back to get a good enough running game.

 

A great quarterback and a below-average running game is a great offense. Barry Sanders and a mediocre quarterback is a mediocre offense.

 

Draft a QB and receivers and stop the insanity.

 

One could argue that the 2012 season with Flacco (given his performance before and subsequently after the superbowl run is average with blips of good play here and there) could be thrown in with Dilfer.

 

It's possible Russell Wilson could be listed in this category. He's still yet to win a game as a QB when the Seahawks defense surrenders 24points. Who drives the ship there?

 

To address a few points.

 

- The 2003 Bucs had a GARBAGE offensive line.

- The Pats running game in 2001 wasn't bad at all. Their defense was their hallmark

- The Pats running game in 03 was solid as well. Unless you've forgotten Rudi Johnson came in for Dillon after injury? Rudi averaged over 4ypc. So their running games and passing concepts very much complimented one another. Toss in having the leagues leading scoring defense, and that's what you get.

 

Keep in mind, while Peyton and the Colts were on the way to rewriting record books in 04 - they still couldn't get by New England and their balanced attack. Likewise in 2007 being a passing dominated team, the Pats fell short of the prize to the G-men and their defensive front/running game.

 

My theme is this - There is more than one way to skin a cat. In absence of having the HOF field general, teams have successfully fielded competitive squads with augmented rushing attacks, PAP, and great defenses. That's what allowed the Niners resurgence, Kansas City to make the playoffs, Cincy to look like a current contender, The Texans to rise from the ashes of 'expansion disaster', The Hawks to finally get over the hump, allowed the Steelers to claim a Superbowl with a sophomore QB and many other examples.

 

 

Finding that sure thing at QB might be the most rare hit in ANY sport, save for perhaps a perfect game. It's much more logical to take the opposite approach lest you end up with the Blaine Gabberts, Jaemis Winstons, Brandon Weedens, etc etc.

 

In closing, our QB was more than good enough to win today. A lack of discipline leading to penalties, defensive inconsistency and a couple ticky tack calls(non calls) were the culprits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams don't win championships without a quality passing game. Authentic football is not, and hasn't been since Nixon resigned, about the running game. Here are the adjusted [100 is league average] passer ratings for the SB winning QB:
2014: Brady 111 [Obviously misleadingly low]
2013: Wilson 119
2012: Flacco 103, 9 Y/A 0 INT in postseason
2011: Eli 111
2010: Rodgers 124
2009: Brees 132
2008: Roethlisberger 97 (Lifetime 112)
2007: Eli 89 (Over 100 6 of next 7 years)
2006: Peyton 126
2005: Roethlisberger 122
2004: Brady 114
2003: Brady 107
2002: Johnson 121
2001: Brady 111
2000: Dilfer 98
1999: Warner 136
1998: Elway 119
1997: Elway 113
1996: Favre 130
1995: Aikman 122
1994: Young 147
1993: Aikman 129
1992: Aikman 118
1991: Rypien 130
1990: Hostetler 110
1989: Montana 149
1988: Montana 117
1987: Williams 126
1986: Simms 100
1985: McMahon 111
1984: Montana 134
1983: Plunkett 109
1982: Theismann 122
1981: Montana 122
1980: Plunkett 101
1979: Bradshaw 110
1978: Bradshaw 126
1977: Staubach 125
1976: Stabler 140
The 2007 Giants are probably the closest to the anecdotal case for ground-and-pound fetishists — Eli wasn’t very good for much of the regular season, and that team had a really good running game. But by the playoffs, Eli had transformed into the not great but solidly above-average QB he’s generally been ever since. And, more to the point, the Giants — who outscored their opposition by about 20 points in the regular season — are almost certainly the weakest Super Bowl team ever. Flags fly forever and they beat perhaps the greatest team ever assembled and more power to them, but if your strategy for building a championship team is “build a .500 team and have it overachieve in the regular season and get hot at the right time and win 3 straight coin-flip playoff games against significantly better teams,” well…good luck with that.
The marginal quality of your running game isn’t terribly important, and you don’t need to invest in an expensive running back to get a good enough running game.

No question that you need a good defense. But the one constant for SB winners is a great passing game -- without that, nothing else matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spreading the ball around too much?

 

When Barnidge and Johnson are your #2 & #3 in receptions, we have a problem. Benjamin is the only one of the group that is (hardly) putting a scare in the opposition. 16\4= 4 receptions per game.

 

I'm waiting for that big-time Bowe breakout game- he hasn't caught a pass yet- but his bank account caught a flood of Benjamins- of the Franklin variety, not Travis. :)

 

"Free Josh Gordon", except I doubt McCown could get him the ball on fly routes. I'll respect you opinion on this Tour- but it sure looks like teams aren't respecting the Browns ability to beat them deep, and crowding the line. On paper, we had the superior line to the Chargers, but it sure looked like McCown was under far more duress than Rivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'll respect you opinion on this Tour- but it sure looks like teams aren't respecting the Browns ability to beat them deep, and crowding the line. On paper, we had the superior line to the Chargers, but it sure looked like McCown was under far more duress than Rivers. Hoorta

**************************************

This is what I keep seeing. I mean, Andy Dalton is no "elite qb". But look at the

talent they have on offense.

 

Look at the Packers' offense. Rodgers is struggling. But look at their wr's on the injury report:

 

Davante Adams - Questionable

Randall Cobb - Probable

James Jones -Probable

 

Aaron Rodgers:

"I think, is a Pro Bowl-caliber player. Without him and Jordy, we have to find somebody who can attack the outside. We didn’t sustain drives,”

 

http://prod.www.packers.clubs.nfl.com/news-and-events/article-game-editorial/article-1/Aaron-Rodgers-confirms-offenses-struggles/f4e79b82-e5ae-4e87-8052-e4a365c72bce

 

It’s especially nice the Packers defense played as well as it did on Sunday, otherwise this one might be in the loss column. The stats accurately portray the Packers’ struggles on offense.

  • Eighty-six yards rushing.
  • Four of 13 on third down.
  • Three giveaways, which included two Rodgers interceptions and a Rodgers fumble.
  • An 82.8 passer rating, which is satisfactory for a lot of quarterbacks; Rodgers, however, is the best quarterback.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...