Skip to content

Coordinator Hirings news

The Browns Board
129 38 7.2k
  • Where is the most reliable source for finding salary caps, and what is the Browns current cap?

  • @tour2ma said:

    Quite possibly... zone blocking has turned more than a few unknown RBs into "stars"...

    Alfred Morris anybody? I'd much rather have a system that can turn a RB in to a great RB, than a great RB turn a system in to a great system.

    Yup... prolly Foster who has broken the last three years or so...

    @gftchris said:

    Alfred Morris anybody? I'd much rather have a system that can turn a RB in to a great RB, than a great RB turn a system in to a great system.

    Edwin Baker showed good one-cut aptitude... he just lacks a bit of size strength needed to break an LB arm tackle..

    @spectralcow said:

    Hey, no one would be more in support of greater emphasis on the run game than me. I've argued in favor of it ad naseum. I think Ben Tate is a solid back. I just don't know if he's going to be worth the money he's going to want. Tour2ma disagrees.

    I am also not sure if he is worth the money, but he sure as hell would fill the bill.

    I was more taking issue with statement that Ben owed his success to the O-line. In zone schemes it's really up to the back to make it a success with a decisive cut. Linemen really only have to screen off defenders.

    And for you FB lovers... you don't use one in a zone blocking scheme... at least not Kubiak's. Greg Jones was Houston's #1 FB in 2013. He played in all 16 games, but started only five. And their #2 FB??? Our old friend, Brad Smelley...

  • I hope the mention of Kubiak isn't a tease. While I'm weary about a WCO coming back to Cleveland, since Shurmur ruined my view of it, Kubiak has always been a great offensive mind. He is exactly what a rookie coach like Pettine needs on that side of the ball... Plus, Hoyer would be good fit with Kubiak, and so would Bridgewater...

  • Somebody has updated Wikipedia on the coaching staff:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Browns

    Which seems to line up with the official site:

    http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/coaches.html

    Already more vacancies than I thought there would be at this point.

  • @gftchris said:

    I think Ben Tate money could be better used on other areas which are harder to find plug-and-play starters from the draft.

    Right now we have 1 "maybe-legit" RB... I'm pretty sure we NEED to spend some money to add weapons at that position. We should spend FA money on Tate and a relatively high draft pick on a RB. RBs get hurt, and we need a little more in the cupboard than we had last year...

    Plus, a FB like somebody mentioned...

    @thenew23 said:

    Right now we have 1 "maybe-legit" RB... I'm pretty sure we NEED to spend some money to add weapons at that position. We should spend FA money on Tate and a relatively high draft pick on a RB. RBs get hurt, and we need a little more in the cupboard than we had last year...

    Plus, a FB like somebody mentioned...

    @spectralcow said:

    Hey, no one would be more in support of greater emphasis on the run game than me. I've argued in favor of it ad naseum. I think Ben Tate is a solid back. I just don't know if he's going to be worth the money he's going to want. Tour2ma disagrees. That's fine; I may be wrong. Tate might end up being fantastic wherever he goes and may end up being quite the bargain. I don't know. I just think there's a better chance that he's solid, but not worth the FA money he gets.

    I agree Tate may not be worth the money he's going to want- we've seen Denver start no-names in the backfield rack up 1,000+ yard seasons. Tre Mason or Carlos Hyde would fill the bill, and taking either would make me very happy draft day. Mason is no T-Rich IMO.

  • Tate would be a serviceable running back, most likely, in a system he already knows. But, why should we spend big FA money on a RB whose production could most likely be reproduced by a second or third rounder, or below? Instead of giving him $5m a year (or whatever it'd be) and drafting a 3rd round CB - because let's be honest, we're most likely looking offense with picks 1b and 2 - spend that money of decent CB, for example.

  • Id rather draft a young rb pair him with dion lewis then spend big money on tate

  • Tate would be a serviceable running back, most likely, in a system he already knows. But, why should we spend big FA money on a RB whose production could most likely be reproduced by a second or third rounder, or below? Instead of giving him $5m a year (or whatever it'd be) and drafting a 3rd round CB - because let's be honest, we're most likely looking offense with picks 1b and 2 - spend that money of decent CB, for example.

    @gftchris said:

    Tate would be a serviceable running back, most likely, in a system he already knows. But, why should we spend big FA money on a RB whose production could most likely be reproduced by a second or third rounder, or below? Instead of giving him $5m a year (or whatever it'd be) and drafting a 3rd round CB - because let's be honest, we're most likely looking offense with picks 1b and 2 - spend that money of decent CB, for example.

    At this point, I agree, I would rather get an RB out of the draft.....maybe a couple with out 10 picks.

  • @gftchris said:

    Tate would be a serviceable running back, most likely, in a system he already knows. But, why should we spend big FA money on a RB whose production could most likely be reproduced by a second or third rounder, or below? Instead of giving him $5m a year (or whatever it'd be) and drafting a 3rd round CB - because let's be honest, we're most likely looking offense with picks 1b and 2 - spend that money of decent CB, for example.

    At this point, I agree, I would rather get an RB out of the draft.....maybe a couple with out 10 picks.

    @the-gipper said:

    At this point, I agree, I would rather get an RB out of the draft.....maybe a couple with out 10 picks.

    I totally agree. Why buy some used tread when we have plenty of draft picks to grab some fresh legs. Running backs don't need a lot of seasoning or coaching, Grab them when they are young (not 34 like Willis ... what a bad joke that was).

    Seems like a lot of good running backs coming out early in this draft, grab a bruiser to go with Lewis and Baker/Oby.

    Zombo

  • Somebody has updated Wikipedia on the coaching staff:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Browns

    Which seems to line up with the official site:

    http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/coaches.html

    Already more vacancies than I thought there would be at this point.

    @tml1138 said:

    Somebody has updated Wikipedia on the coaching staff:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Browns

    Which seems to line up with the official site:

    http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/coaches.html

    Already more vacancies than I thought there would be at this point.

    The funny thing is the wikipedia entry for Mike Pettine had him listed as HC of the Browns before it was even announced.

  • NBC Sports just called the possibility of Kubiak coming to the Browns as the OC "unlikely".

  • NBC Sports just called the possibility of Kubiak coming to the Browns as the OC "unlikely".

    @spectralcow said:

    NBC Sports just called the possibility of Kubiak coming to the Browns as the OC "unlikely".

    Then that should mean its a done deal, right?

  • Tate would be a serviceable running back, most likely, in a system he already knows. But, why should we spend big FA money on a RB whose production could most likely be reproduced by a second or third rounder, or below? Instead of giving him $5m a year (or whatever it'd be) and drafting a 3rd round CB - because let's be honest, we're most likely looking offense with picks 1b and 2 - spend that money of decent CB, for example.

    @gftchris said:

    But, why should we spend big FA money on a RB whose production could most likely be reproduced by a second or third rounder, or below?

    Because he's a proven back at the NFL level and we can afford him?

    Ice Dawg19 said:

    Wade Phillips as - DC

    Wade is strictly a 3-4 guy... He's not exactly a "taylor-your-Defense-to-your-personel" kind of guy.

    Pettine is going to bring one of his staffers from the Bills to be a DC...

    You read it here first...

  • tate, schmate.

    grab some laundry guy in the 5th round. he'll be the next curtis martin.

  • Based on Fosters injury history I would not be surprised at all to see the Texans keep Tate. Having said that he didnt have a season last year that will drive his value as high as he would like on the market.

  • I read where Pettine wants an ex HC on his staff. With Kubiak apparently out of the mix it will be interesting to watch. Other than that, I wouldn't be surprised to see mostly younger guys. We'll see.

    Mike.

  • Will not be Jim Schwartz....he has replaced Pettine in Buffalo

  • can anyone say dick jauron?

  • To be honest, I'm hoping for all young, new coaches and coordinators. Let's frickin' build something special with some new innovative coaches that only need a shot. I saw enough of former head coach Norv Turner's offense last year to last me a lifetime............ I'm in hook, line and sinker.

  • Steve Spagnuolo?