Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Desmond Bryant

Desmond Bryant

The Browns Board
98 25 4.2k

  • Why? You need to understand, and I have said this to many already, that we only have one spot settled on the DL. That is NT. Rubin has that spot down for sure. After that we have two 3-4 spots with Taylor and Winn. Can Winn play the spot, can Taylor play the spot. Our coaches don't know. Maybe Winn is good, but Taylor doesn't cut it, maybe Taylor plays better than Rubin at NT? Too many questions to not add somebody.

    Ruining threads since 1897.

  • Perfect for a 3-4 defensive end.

  • Why what? Why did we sign a huge young guy to play DE?

    Z

  • Z Zombo

    Why what? Why did we sign a huge young guy to play DE?

    Z

    Zombo said:

    Why what? Why did we sign a huge young guy to play DE?

    Z

    Ba-zing.

    Ruining threads since 1897.

  • Quite frankly I don't see how this subpar team can't use the help any way the front office sees fit. I reserve any judgement until at least halfway through next season. This is a clean slate with some young talent and some players that wouldn't be on a lot of other good teams in the NFL.

    Who let the DAWGS out??
    👍

  • This is Desmond Bryant, coincidentally this is how I looked when I heard they signed him.

    Desmond-Bryant-mug-shot.jpg

    "All Truth Passes Through Three stages. First, It Is Ridiculed, Second It Is Violently Opposed, And Third, It Is Accepted As Self-Evident" ~Arthur Schopenhauer

  • Im guessing he will be back at DE. That was his position in college.

    Take haloti nagta he is listed as a nt but you see him at end and standing up at times.

  • I want to see how you look after learning he went to Harvard on an academic scholarship.

    Ruining threads since 1897.
    👍

  • Taylor, Rubin, Bryant, Winn, Hughes... That's a lot of talent for our front 3. Word is Rubin may be expendable now, but I disagree, even if we draft a true 3-4 DE. These 5 guys make up an excellent DL rotation for a 3-4, in my opinion. Plus, Kruger and/or Sheard moves up to DE at times. Pretty vicious... on paper

    Let's see what else happens... desperately NEED at least one quality CB

    #Justsayin'
    The GipperT 1 Reply

  • He graduated from Harvard is 6'6, plays in the NFL and made $32 Million today BNB ... How did your day go?

    Z

    ClevelandFanForLifeC 1 Reply

  • The starters will be bryant/rubin/taylor, with winn/hughes giving them a break.

    Taylor is perfect at DE because he's significantly more athletic than rubin. Ngata is actually a DE, the DT in baltimore is kemoeatu.

    Bryant had the 4th most QB pressures of all DT's in the NFL last year. So now our starting DL are all above 300 pounds and are all great against the run.

    We do still need Rubin -- no reason to let very good players leave when they're signed to reasonable deals, and the players behind them aren't proven.

    The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown

  • Remember this when looking at bryants stats from last year. He only started 8 games.

    Ruining threads since 1897.
  • Z Zombo

    He graduated from Harvard is 6'6, plays in the NFL and made $32 Million today BNB ... How did your day go?

    Z

    Zombo said:

    He graduated from Harvard is 6'6, plays in the NFL and made $32 Million today BNB ... How did your day go?

    Z

    Got paid $32.1 million for being awesome. Beat that.

    once a fan, always a fan. married to a steeler fan. aaaaaaaaah! --andy

  • I see us trading one of those guys. My bet is on Taylor. I think we might be able to get a 2 and something else for him.

    ClevelandFanForLifeC B miktoxicM 3 Replies
  • VaporTrailV VaporTrail

    I see us trading one of those guys. My bet is on Taylor. I think we might be able to get a 2 and something else for him.

    @vaportrail said:

    I see us trading one of those guys. My bet is on Taylor. I think we might be able to get a 2 and something else for him.

    That's what I'm thinking. I like Phil but don't know if he's necessary. I think that with the guys we have now, we could do some damage up front but Banner and Co. may have another plan. We will see.

    once a fan, always a fan. married to a steeler fan. aaaaaaaaah! --andy
  • VaporTrailV VaporTrail

    I see us trading one of those guys. My bet is on Taylor. I think we might be able to get a 2 and something else for him.

    @vaportrail said:

    I see us trading one of those guys. My bet is on Taylor. I think we might be able to get a 2 and something else for him.

    I like that option, then pick up a late rounder to fill the spot, work in progress.

  • No trading of any current DL. Winn and Hughes are unproven. Taylor/Rubin/Bryant is a good DL group, the D had significant problems shutting down the run last year, and Rubin is still on a reasonable contract for a difference-maker at his position.

    Hughes and Winn are both smaller in size than Rubin and Bryant, and neither have played in the 3-4 in the pros.. so we can't say conclusively that both will be good. I want them to succeed, I hope they're great.. but we can't confirm that as of today.

    Also: Did the Browns shut down the run on any 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 last year? I can remember exactly zero times, and everyone in this thread proposes we trade away one of our starting DT's when we have a need to improve our run defense? Bad idea. Yes, Rubin's value is high -- because he is good, and we should keep him for the same reason.

    Another problem with the idea of "making a trade" is that there's always the magical fantasy that we will receive equal value in return. That almost never happens. Bill Simmons has a term for it.. the pu-pu platter.

    We're always talking about the need to improve at certain positions.. and then, the instant we actually have an unquestionable strength on the team, you want to trade away key reasons why it's a strength? That's insane.

    The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown
    👍

  • I actually agree with you, I'd rather us keep all 5 of these guys. That rotation would be disgusting. I'm just not sure how the FO is going to value it. Taylor is worth a 2 and maybe a 4, and it's something that the FO will consider. We can address another need without creating a hole with those picks. Which is more valuable?

  • VaporTrailV VaporTrail

    I actually agree with you, I'd rather us keep all 5 of these guys. That rotation would be disgusting. I'm just not sure how the FO is going to value it. Taylor is worth a 2 and maybe a 4, and it's something that the FO will consider. We can address another need without creating a hole with those picks. Which is more valuable?

    @vaportrail said:

    I actually agree with you, I'd rather us keep all 5 of these guys. That rotation would be disgusting. I'm just not sure how the FO is going to value it. Taylor is worth a 2 and maybe a 4, and it's something that the FO will consider. We can address another need without creating a hole with those picks. Which is more valuable?

    We already achieved the value by drafting Rubin in the 5th and he's become nearly an allpro. Obviously Taylor in the first is significantly more athletic than Rubin.

    There's zero certainty the picks you make would be as productive as Taylor or Rubin are already.. that's why it's called the pu-pu platter, because you trade away an all-pro and get a bunch of crap in return.

    The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown
  • U Unsympathetic

    @vaportrail said:

    I actually agree with you, I'd rather us keep all 5 of these guys. That rotation would be disgusting. I'm just not sure how the FO is going to value it. Taylor is worth a 2 and maybe a 4, and it's something that the FO will consider. We can address another need without creating a hole with those picks. Which is more valuable?

    We already achieved the value by drafting Rubin in the 5th and he's become nearly an allpro. Obviously Taylor in the first is significantly more athletic than Rubin.

    There's zero certainty the picks you make would be as productive as Taylor or Rubin are already.. that's why it's called the pu-pu platter, because you trade away an all-pro and get a bunch of crap in return.

    @unsympathetic said:

    We already achieved the value by drafting Rubin in the 5th and he's become nearly an allpro. Obviously Taylor in the first is significantly more athletic than Rubin.

    There's zero certainty the picks you make would be as productive as Taylor or Rubin are already.. that's why it's called the pu-pu platter, because you trade away an all-pro and get a bunch of crap in return.

    Rubin was a sixth round pick but it's a good point either way. Keep all of them IMO. It can't hurt to have 5 guys that can essentially rotate and play all 3 positions. They all may not be an ideal nose tackle or 3-4 DE but they are all capable of rotating through both positions for a series or set of downs. Rubin at NT and Bryant and Taylor starting at ends and you have a solid core.

Log in to reply