|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
You can build around a lot of things, but receiver???
Naaa....they are accessories.
They might be like air conditioning...you don't want to do without, but you don't start there.
JMO
I'm not saying they should be THE defining building block of your offense but after what I've seen this season I think they're far more important than "accessories."
Just ask Baltimore. Their slow receiving core was the difference between them and the Steelers last night. The team full of burners won.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Just ask Baltimore. Their slow receiving core was the difference between them and the Steelers last night. The team full of burners won.
That is way too simple of an answer, not only for that game, but in general.
Take a look not only at the box score, but the tape, and you'll see far more intricate circumstances than burners at the WR position.
Cincinnati had a lethal WR unit and bombed.
Oakland's never been anything but burners and they've been mostly woeful.
WR's are important ... they're not exactly plug 'n' play ... but they're a piece I'd look to fill in later than sooner.
If you get a crack at a guy like Andre Johnson, you take him, but otherwise I'd say it should take a backseat to other areas of concern.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
If you get a crack at a guy like Andre Johnson, you take him, but otherwise I'd say it should take a backseat to other areas of concern.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125 |
Quote:
Quote:
Not only did we pass on Ngata, we gave him to the Ravens..
Not only did we give him to the Ravens, we bragged about tricking them into giving us a 6th round pick to do it. Savage spoke of that bit of flim-flam trickery as though it were his shinning moment.
I wasn't that mad when we did it because we picked up Ted Washington (who I remember zeroing in on his domination of the Panthers when NE won the Superbowl). Plus, with that 6th round pick we got a NT by the name of Rubin (who now is not that much of a drop off IMO).
Also, can you imagine Wimbley and Suggs coming off the edge on the Ravens? Or even worse Suggs at DE (back then he was a hybrid de/lb) and Wimbley coming right behind him? Wimbley easily could've been the perennial Probowler in Baltimore and six years later we would be discussing our decision of Ngata over Wimbley.
It's time to look at the bright side: Wimbley for McCoy. Heres to McCoy tearing it up next season (if we get him a #1 WR).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 |
Quote:
That and you also need the cohesion of playing together, you can't be blowing up the roster every 2-3 years.
They've been blowing up the roster every 2-3 MONTHS!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
Quote:
Wimbley easily could've been the perennial Probowler in Baltimore and six years later we would be discussing our decision of Ngata over Wimbley.
Good point.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,654
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,654 |
Until you have a QB, you do not stand a chance of winning games.
Rivers and Manning make average WR's good ones.
Find the QB, Pressure the QB, and your team will win games.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 73,440
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 73,440 |
just an FYI...we didn't acquire Rubin with that 6th Round Draft choice...we acquired Babatunde Oshinowo.
Rubin wasn't until the 2008 Draft
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,068
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,068 |
Are you overlooking Arians? I presume some post-season stuff counts as = success. 
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
yeah lol we already addressed that 
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 974
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 974 |
If we switch to the 4-3 we have to draft all D, if not the browns will be unwatchable.
Go after FA/trade talent for a WR.
We're trying to throw the ball downfield and he checked the ball down to Trent Richardson and the Indians on the choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,077
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,077 |
I think it's imperative to build from the inside out. As important as WR's are, they simply won't be fast enough to be 30 yards downfield in the 1.75 seconds a bad OL will give a QB.
Besides, we've had fast WR's in the past: Antonio Bryant, Quincy Morgan, Braylon Edwards all come to mind without a second's worth of thought. I'm not saying they were the best receivers, but truly, Ammo: rare was the time they'd catch a 25 yard pass in stride and start streaking for the house. In '07, all those BE highlight catches came as a result of throws being too high, too wide, too behind him... Now a good number of those throws were just bad tosses, but how many came from QB pressures from the line collapsing?
Another case in point: Matt Millen tried to build an O around a slew of 1st round WR's for years, and that team went nowhere. Damaged QB's can't throw to receivers of any typw. Bad QB's can't deliver the ball. Hurried and harrassed QB's, even Tom Bradys and Peyton Mnnings can't get the ball downfield effectively. Millen's experiment was a disaster- and for sound football reasons.
I think in our own clunky, lurching way, we've done it right, at least lately. We grabbed Joe T, Steiny, and got Mack after letting Hank go. When our 1sts were healthy early this year, even our right side was doing pretty well. Seeing Colt in the middle of the season was a treat. The line held up well... and when it didn't, Colt seemed to have a knack for scrambling to daylight.
Then... he'd toss the ball- and we'd easily see that the last link wasn't yet forged.
I understand your question, but think that WR's are players you get AFTER you can protect your QB. We're almost there now with 3/5 of our OL set. An emphasis on quick passing short-intermediate routes will require quick guys with good hands more than big, fast field-stretchers (although one on the roster might be nice...) but no... I STILL believe you should build the core of your team first.
My prioritized heirachy, in order of importance:
1. OL
2. QB
3. RB/WR (tossup)
jmo... others' mileage may vary.
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 125 |
Quote:
just an FYI...we didn't acquire Rubin with that 6th Round Draft choice...we acquired Babatunde Oshinowo.
Rubin wasn't until the 2008 Draft
I forgot all about baba. Yea - he was pretty bad although he was a top 5 rated 3-4 NT when he came out. We have Rubin nonetheless.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,795 |
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
I think it's
1) QB
2) OL
3) WR
4) RB (because most RB's are products of their lines)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 175
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 175 |
"order of importance for the offense game" I'll play  QB, LT, RB, #1 WR, rest of o-line, backup RB, TE, other WRs. If you have a couple backs that can catch and run you can do a lot more things with them than WRs. But looking at this team we have enough girth. Give me some speed, anywhere and everywhere. Defense I'm looking at you. So, to the topic creator, no I don't believe you can build a team around WRs. But they are your best options for a big play TD and we could use some of those but you can't build a team around a position that won't touch the ball more than 10 times a game or tackle.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
After taking a lookie see at your priority list something occurred to me.. when they have the combines and guys take the wonderlic test, the rule of thumb is that NFL teams wants the guys closest to the ball to have the highest scores. In other words they want intelligent centers, QB's, NT, OL and so forth. It's no surprise they don't expect much from the WR's, they are the farthest from the ball.. and not the brightest people on the team. They are simply fast guys that have the ability to catch the ball. It's funny that your list mirrors what they want as far as intelligence goes.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
WRs should be, at the very least, moderately football intelligent.
They often have to see and read the same pre-snap reads as the QB, and make the same adjustments. If they don't, they'll be in the wrong place at the wrong time. A WR in the wrong place at the wrong time will often create INTs for their QB. Worse, they'll often create easy INTs that go back a long way.
I think that takes a fair amount of football IQ. Many WRs come across as pretty damn stupid when you hear them speak .... but they have to be moderately "football smart" or they'll be just another guy with speed who will be out of a job rather quickly.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
Quote:
I think that takes a fair amount of football IQ. Many WRs come across as pretty damn stupid when you hear them speak .... but they have to be moderately "football smart" or they'll be just another guy with speed who will be out of a job rather quickly.
Fair point and I would agree with that. There does have to be something between the ears as far as football smarts go. But lets make an example.. I don't think a Plaxico is at the same level as a Sean O'Hara.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
Perhaps.
The Center has to make all of the line calls. It's complicated, but probably no less complicated than a WR reading zone vs man, where the safety is, is there a blitz and a hot route, is there an audible .... and so on.
All of these guys have to have a modest amount of intelligence somewhere. They may not communicate well or be terribly book smart, but they have football smarts somewhere.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
We digress. The thread is about building around the WR. I disagree to that and agree with the posters that say you build from the inside out.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
Well, given that the WR is dependent upon the QB and the OL to a large extent ..... then I wouldn't go grabbing WRs as a first step.
I do think that a lot of the WRs in the playoffs are "average" types. Hines Ward does everything well, but isn't a big burner type. Wallace sure looks like a superstar, and he was a 3rd rounder. The rest are a good bunch, but none that put the fear of God into anyone.
Green Bay has Greg Jennings, who is their most explosive WR, and then a bunch of guys who are good, but not necessarily great. Driver averaged 11 yards/catch this year. Their other guys are more servicable than anything else.
Chicago has Knox, and he's a good WR. He has a decent average per catch, but wasn't a 1000 yard receiver. He also only had 5 TD catches all year. The rest of their WR corps is decent.
The Jets probably have the best overall WR corps. Edwards and Holmes were both drafted to be #1 recievers, and they have been at times. Cotchery is a solid 3. They might have the best 1-3 talent at WR out of the playoff teams. They also probably have the greatest inconsistency at WR.
So .... I think that you do need 1 really "plus" WR ... and several good receivers. I agree that you should build the depth while first addressing the more important building blocks.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
Take a look at the Bears. What did their offense do from last year to this year? The brought in Mike Martz.
Im no advocate of Martz but he realized you need to work with what you've got, and when he started realizing that the Bears had no O-Line he spread the wr's out even further. So I am starting to think that you need at LEAST a weapon of a wideout (or your QB will be scrambling for his life) .. but I'm starting to believe more and more that you need the guy calling the plays to be top-notch before you can worry about wideouts.
Would you take a lineup of [insert any offensive coordinator here] with our current wideouts and trust that he could get cribbs more involved and at least create routes which create seperation for momass and robiskie? Or would you rather wait for 3 more drafts to acquire a burner and a top possesion receiver but have them coached by a guy like daboll again?
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Quote:
Until you have a QB, you do not stand a chance of winning games.
Rivers and Manning make average WR's good ones.
Find the QB, Pressure the QB, and your team will win games.
I wish you were working for the Browns. After 11 years of stink I'm not confident the Browns understand these concepts. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
j/c
I'm not saying yes or no the the whole "Building with WRs" point...
But in reply to those that say it doesn't work because of Matt Freaking Millen's epic failure in Detroit? That's a little ridiculous...
Charles Rogers - Injury Prone
Roy Williams - Pro Bowl WR (Not so much now though) Was later traded by a competant FO for 2 #1s (Take that Jerry Jones)
Mike Williams - Out of football for a year, didn't take care of himself physically (until now apparently)
Calvin Johnson - Pro Bowl WR, Legit #1
The umbrella of Matt Millens horribleness causes a stench that makes everything seem even worse than it already is.
Building through WRs isn't wrong because Detroit failed to do it. That's like saying building through the Dline is wrong because we drafted Brown and Warren and it didn't work...
The right players makes anything work...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Building through WRs isn't wrong because Detroit failed to do it. That's like saying building through the Dline is wrong because we drafted Brown and Warren and it didn't work...
Exactly... the whole concept of "building around" means that after you get talent at that position, you GO BUILD AROUND IT. Matt Millen never did that. He got his WRs but he never went and got his QB, he never built their running game, he never built their defense.
You can build around any group on the field... you can build around WRs, you can build around a stable of running backs, or an OL or a DL or a secondary.. you can build around any of it. All "building around it" means is that you acquired that talent first, you still have to go acquire the other talent.
If the Colts had drafted Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne first and THEN drafted Manning and Edgerin James, did they build around the WRs? 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
There are many ways to build a team, they mostly depend on what you already have. Starting from scratch, you start in the trenches. That's the first mistake the Browns made when they came back into the league. They started with scrap heap linemen and spent the #1 pick on a QB with no protection and no help.
Our situation isn't that dire, we have the left side of the O-Line, maybe a RG, (unknown at this point,) and a serviceable RT (when healthy) and a center. We need to draft a young RT, but IMHO our (particular) up-coming priorities are:
Starters: DL (2-3), LBs (1-2), WR (#1 & Slot), OL (RT), RB (1) & DBs (SS & RCB).
Back-ups & Developmenta: DL (2-3), LBs (2-3), QB (1), OL (LG & RG), RB (1), DB (1-2), TE (1)
At the minimum, I see high priority as 2 DL, 1 ILB, 1WR, 1 RT, 1 RB & SS (or RCB, if Elam is retained). Assuming two of these players are immediate starters from the draft, (rounds 1 & 2) and if we get lucky with a 3rd rounder, that leaves four impact starters minimum that we need from FA or through trades, and somewhere between 9-13 developmental & back-up player acquired through trades, the draft & FA. I may be wrong, (Shurmur & Heckert could keep and/or re-purpose many of the players we have, though I doubt they will,) but I expect to see a turnover in the neighborhood of 21-24 players, most coming this year if the players are there to be had.
So to answer your question, IMHO you do not build a team around WRs, and you certainly do not build the Browns, (moving forward,) around WRs. We have way too many other critical needs at this point.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hfMNC7T.jpg) "I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
I'm assuming Brown gets moved to Safety and *gulp* EW goes back to CB. That just leaves a Nickle CB which can be found in FA/Late Draft. (Do we still have Coye?)
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
So to answer your question, IMHO you do not build a team around WRs, and you certainly do not build the Browns, (moving forward,) around WRs. We have way too many other critical needs at this point.
I truly think the 2010 Cleveland Browns with 2 legit starting receivers (think DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin) have a much different record even with Colt McCoy as a rookie. There's only so much you can do offensively when the defense stacks the box. We can point to how the Steelers used to be able to run the football at will in the early 2000's...some of that was because they had Ward and Burress to put the fear of God in the defenses so they didn't stack the box. Does that make us Super Bowl contenders? Good God no, but it puts us closer to where we want to be.
And I also don't think Peyton Hillis wears down in the final weeks of the season, either, because we would a) be throwing more and b) there would be less defenders in the box so he has less contact to avoid.
Last edited by Ammo; 01/17/11 01:18 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 |
j/c
I don't think you need a burner type. I think though that you need someone who can always gain separation one on one. Speed is a factor here but it's not the only one. There are other ways to do that... like being physical with the corners and vert is good too.
You need someone that the defense has to double all game and they still can't completely cover. For the longest time the Chargers this year with their vaunted offense had Antonio Gates, Malcolm Floyd... and whoever else they could plug in.
I think with Robo, Momass, Cribbs, Hillis, Watson and Moore... if perhaps AJ Green is the guy everyone thinks he is... there will be more time for these others to do what they can do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Quote:
I'm assuming Brown gets moved to Safety and *gulp* EW goes back to CB. That just leaves a Nickle CB which can be found in FA/Late Draft. (Do we still have Coye?)
Possibly, but I'd expect another "Haden" type CB at some point, though you're right, if we retain EW, it may not be a priority this year. Brown at safety is interesting, but I'd like to see us get younger there, not older.
Yes, we do have Coye, raw I'm sure, but I'm an original "Coye Pimp". I'd love to he how he develops, especially under a new coach who may a fresh perspective on him. Felt Coye must have had a change of attitude to actually make it back to the team and onto the field. We'll see.
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
The question is, If you're going to draft AJ Green with the #6, why not just send it to Arizona for Larry Fitz (barring the fact theyd still probably want more)
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm assuming Brown gets moved to Safety and *gulp* EW goes back to CB. That just leaves a Nickle CB which can be found in FA/Late Draft. (Do we still have Coye?)
Possibly, but I'd expect another "Haden" type CB at some point, though you're right, if we retain EW, it may not be a priority this year. Brown at safety is interesting, but I'd like to see us get younger there, not older.
Yes, we do have Coye, raw I'm sure, but I'm an original "Coye Pimp". I'd love to he how he develops, especially under a new coach who may a fresh perspective on him. Felt Coye must have had a change of attitude to actually make it back to the team and onto the field. We'll see.
A different defensive system may be the best thing for EW. I assume part of his problem, aka seemingly disinterested, was the style of Defense Rob wanted our Corners to play, more one on one/being physical while he sends the house. Which just isnt EWs style.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Charles Rogers - Injury Prone
Roy Williams - Pro Bowl WR (Not so much now though) Was later traded by a competant FO for 2 #1s (Take that Jerry Jones)
Mike Williams - Out of football for a year, didn't take care of himself physically (until now apparently)
Yet, everyone thought those players were nearly no brainers as high 1st round picks. No one thought Millen should have taken them all, but at the same time no one doubted their talent and status.
And that right there is why I wouldn't take a receiver high in the 1st round. Holmgren was always against that as well. Then, against his typical better judgment he took Koren Robinson at number 7 overall at Seattle. He was certainly much less than spectacular.
I don't see the Browns taking a WR in the first unless it's late in the first. We need trench players so badly. Heckert is said to be an inside out guy. We'll see.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
However, after observing the NFL for the past several seasons, I'm starting to believe you build around a group of receivers and a QB.
I have never felt that way at all.
Most teams get their wideouts in various places in the draft plus FA.
We know we do, my thoughts are if we should be changing our thinking on this board about the importance of WR's. I've heard the phrase "You don't build around WR's" a lot.
U don't build around receivers U build around your QB.U get the type of recievers your QB will need to succeed with.The line has to built and a solid RB ,and U incorporate the recievers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Quote:
Quote:
So to answer your question, IMHO you do not build a team around WRs, and you certainly do not build the Browns, (moving forward,) around WRs. We have way too many other critical needs at this point.
I truly think the 2010 Cleveland Browns with 2 legit starting receivers (think DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin) have a much different record even with Colt McCoy as a rookie. There's only so much you can do offensively when the defense stacks the box. We can point to how the Steelers used to be able to run the football at will in the early 2000's...some of that was because they had Ward and Burress to put the fear of God in the defenses so they didn't stack the box. Does that make us Super Bowl contenders? Good God no, but it puts us closer to where we want to be.
And I also don't think Peyton Hillis wears down in the final weeks of the season, either, because we would a) be throwing more and b) there would be less defenders in the box so he has less contact to avoid.
Not arguing with the points you make here, obviously a more threatening passing game opens up the defense a little, but great blitzing teams do not care who your receivers are. Or your QB for that matter. Did you see the NE/Jets game? I stand by my position that you do not build a team around WRs. (See thread topic.) 
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Quote:
A different defensive system may be the best thing for EW. I assume part of his problem, aka seemingly disinterested, was the style of Defense Rob wanted our Corners to play, more one on one/being physical while he sends the house. Which just isnt EWs style.
Good point. Question is, will he continued to get burned badly by decent WRs, or return to his old form under the new system. I hope for the latter, fear the former. We'll see.
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
Quote:
Quote:
A different defensive system may be the best thing for EW. I assume part of his problem, aka seemingly disinterested, was the style of Defense Rob wanted our Corners to play, more one on one/being physical while he sends the house. Which just isnt EWs style.
Good point. Question is, will he continued to get burned badly by decent WRs, or return to his old form under the new system. I hope for the latter, fear the former. We'll see.
I think that Eric Wright - like Anthony Henry, Leigh Bodden and even Brandon McDonald - have always done FAR better when playing Zone. When they are left out there 1-on-1 and left exposed like Ryan's defense tended to do, they were torched. Come to think of it, Sheldon Brown and Joe Haden are the first two corners we've had here in a LOOONG time that haven't gotten routinely torched when they sit in Man Coverage all day. Moving back to the sort of defense that Romeo, or even Butch, ran and the guys we have should look even that much better.
Just my $0.02 on our CB's and EW.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
jc...
Regarding our Oline, they're good at the moment, but everyone but JT and Mack are 30+ years old. What is this team going to do when Joe Thomas says to himself, "I'm the best left tackle in the game, why am I wasting away on such lousy teams?" and bolts in free agency? If you don't think that this is a very real possibility you're fooling yourself. He doesn't owe the team or the city anything, and they can't just slap the franchise tag on him year after year.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum "You don't build your team around
WR's"...or do you?
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
