Grossi: Browns Will Not Take Crabtree
-
* Boston College defensive tackle B.J. Raji is back on the rise after reports of a positive drug test proved false. He's very much in the mix with the Browns at No. 5. Drafting Raji might result in more four-man fronts for the Browns. Also, Shaun Rogers would move to right end in the base 3-4 front. If the Browns pass him up, Raji is not expected to get past Jacksonville at No. 8 or Green Bay, for sure, at No. 9.
still sounds good to me. and Shaun Rogers belongs at DE-he's too disruptive at the nose. having him play at the end position allows for more flexibility.
don't forget about Robaire Smith Tupa, he may still be our best 3-4 D-Lineman after Rogers.
Shaun Smith makes for a better plug at nose and Raji behind him keeps us ridiculously fresh in the rotation. a line consisting of Williams, Smith at NT, Robaire, and Rogers would redefine the damn game.
i don't know how anyone could stop them if they lined up unbalanced like that.
-
* Boston College defensive tackle B.J. Raji is back on the rise after reports of a positive drug test proved false. He's very much in the mix with the Browns at No. 5. Drafting Raji might result in more four-man fronts for the Browns. Also, Shaun Rogers would move to right end in the base 3-4 front. If the Browns pass him up, Raji is not expected to get past Jacksonville at No. 8 or Green Bay, for sure, at No. 9.
still sounds good to me. and Shaun Rogers belongs at DE-he's too disruptive at the nose. having him play at the end position allows for more flexibility.
don't forget about Robaire Smith Tupa, he may still be our best 3-4 D-Lineman after Rogers.
Shaun Smith makes for a better plug at nose and Raji behind him keeps us ridiculously fresh in the rotation. a line consisting of Williams, Smith at NT, Robaire, and Rogers would redefine the damn game.
i don't know how anyone could stop them if they lined up unbalanced like that.
he's too disruptive at the nose.
Is there such a thing in the 3-4?
-
disruption to the opponent is good. disruption to your own defensive effort is not. as he "got skinny" it's more of benefit at the End position than for your nucleus to constantly check out and scope out the other teams backfield. it needs to be a constant the other players can depend on. push is good, vacancy is not.
the number of downs converted last year by opponents who anticipated his effort and their O-line simply gave way proved this last year, don't you think? while his penetration looked impressive it was often by design.
-
Macklin may be the choice.....guy is a playmaker. Orakpo back in the hunt...don't see raji a brown...it might very well be sanchez if they don't want crabtree.....hell for the money we are gonna spend....might as well be a playmaker on O...jmo
Macklin may be the choice.....guy is a playmaker. Orakpo back in the hunt...don't see raji a brown...it might very well be sanchez if they don't want crabtree.....hell for the money we are gonna spend....might as well be a playmaker on O...jmo
i've been thinking that maclin is guy too. there have been no bad reports about him on or off the field and he has the tools for the nfl. if we traded braylon to ny, we should definitely take him
-
What funny is that this FO and Staff has everybody guessing and nobody really has a clue...................
That's a sign that we may have a group that really knows how to treat this process.
In any case I believe they have done their homework and whoever they pick or whatever trade they make will be well thought out and agreed upon by all.
Personally, I don't have a clue because every person in that top group has been dissed for something. I hope they have some teams interested in trading if Sanchez falls to them or they have a trade in place if they decide to take Sanchez.
-
he's too disruptive at the nose.
Is there such a thing in the 3-4?
Is there such a thing in the 3-4?
I don't know why anyone thinks Rogers can play DE....
They would run sweeps and pitches to his side alllllllllllllll day.
-
Is there such a thing in the 3-4?
I don't know why anyone thinks Rogers can play DE....
They would run sweeps and pitches to his side alllllllllllllll day.
AdaM said:
I don't know why anyone thinks Rogers can play DE....They would run sweeps and pitches to his side alllllllllllllll day.
isn't that what Backers and DB's are for?
forcing an opposing team to play your game is what has made all great teams great.
-
Is there such a thing in the 3-4?
I don't know why anyone thinks Rogers can play DE....
They would run sweeps and pitches to his side alllllllllllllll day.
AdaM said:
I don't know why anyone thinks Rogers can play DE....They would run sweeps and pitches to his side alllllllllllllll day.
I'm with you, DL isn't the playmakers in a 3-4 and Mangini definately said he is running a base 3-4. LBs are your playmakers in a 3-4 and that's our biggest need, along with WR.
-
AdaM said:
I don't know why anyone thinks Rogers can play DE....They would run sweeps and pitches to his side alllllllllllllll day.
isn't that what Backers and DB's are for?
forcing an opposing team to play your game is what has made all great teams great.
isn't that what Backers and DB's are for?
forcing an opposing team to play your game is what has made all great teams great.
Big problem.... backers and DB's don't play on the line. That means whatever they ran at Rogers side would work every - single - time.
-
I'd love to see them pick Raji and forget about the 3-4 and just play the 4-3. This team is not loaded with talented LB's.
Not sure what the LB alignment would be with a 4-3 but I'd have to think it could be done.
Maybe Wimbley-Barton-Jackson?
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote! - "Ben Franklin" -
isn't that what Backers and DB's are for?
forcing an opposing team to play your game is what has made all great teams great.
Big problem.... backers and DB's don't play on the line. That means whatever they ran at Rogers side would work every - single - time.
AdaM said:
Big problem.... backers and DB's don't play on the line. That means whatever they ran at Rogers side would work every - single - time.i disagree. the Backers and DB's would swarm the ball carrier and tackle him for a loss every - single - time.
-
AdaM said:
Big problem.... backers and DB's don't play on the line. That means whatever they ran at Rogers side would work every - single - time.i disagree. the Backers and DB's would swarm the ball carrier and tackle him for a loss every - single - time.
i disagree. the Backers and DB's would swarm the ball carrier and tackle him for a loss every - single - time.
So you would have the DB's and LB's cheating to Rogers side and they would run it the other way for a TD.
Rogers can not play DE, sorry.
He can play NT in a 3-4 or G in a 4-3, maybe fullback in goal line situations. Thats about it.
-
I'd love to see them pick Raji and forget about the 3-4 and just play the 4-3. This team is not loaded with talented LB's.
Not sure what the LB alignment would be with a 4-3 but I'd have to think it could be done.
Maybe Wimbley-Barton-Jackson?
I'd love to see them pick Raji and forget about the 3-4 and just play the 4-3. This team is not loaded with talented LB's.
Not sure what the LB alignment would be with a 4-3 but I'd have to think it could be done.
Maybe Wimbley-Barton-Jackson?
on passing downs a tandem of Raji/Rogers in a 2-5-4, a 2-3-6 or some other incarnation would be a nightmare for an OC.....if we had the other players to pull it off successfully.
mmmm kool-aid.
-
AdaM said:
Big problem.... backers and DB's don't play on the line. That means whatever they ran at Rogers side would work every - single - time.i disagree. the Backers and DB's would swarm the ball carrier and tackle him for a loss every - single - time.
i disagree. the Backers and DB's would swarm the ball carrier and tackle him for a loss every - single - time.
I agree with you Fringo....I see the 3-4 DE as a guy that has one repsonsibility. To fill the C gaps and not allow blockers to reach the next level. This give the LB's the opportunity to fill lanes and stop the run.
-
I'd love to see them pick Raji and forget about the 3-4 and just play the 4-3. This team is not loaded with talented LB's.
Not sure what the LB alignment would be with a 4-3 but I'd have to think it could be done.
Maybe Wimbley-Barton-Jackson?
on passing downs a tandem of Raji/Rogers in a 2-5-4, a 2-3-6 or some other incarnation would be a nightmare for an OC.....if we had the other players to pull it off successfully.
mmmm kool-aid.
on passing downs a tandem of Raji/Rogers in a 2-5-4, a 2-3-6 or some other incarnation would be a nightmare for an OC.....if we had the other players to pull it off successfully. mmmm kool-aid.
Too much specializing. If that worked everyone would do it. It does not work and thats why we have the 2 base types, 3-4 and 4-3.
Both base sets are a compromise of the other. I would say a 3-4 is better against the run and a 4-3 is better against the pass. The reason they don't specialize in say a 2-5 on running downs and a 5-2 on passing downs is because the offense can just do the opposite and everyone is out of position.
-
I'd love to see them pick Raji and forget about the 3-4 and just play the 4-3. This team is not loaded with talented LB's.
Not sure what the LB alignment would be with a 4-3 but I'd have to think it could be done.
Maybe Wimbley-Barton-Jackson?
I'd love to see them pick Raji and forget about the 3-4 and just play the 4-3. This team is not loaded with talented LB's.
Not sure what the LB alignment would be with a 4-3 but I'd have to think it could be done.
Maybe Wimbley-Barton-Jackson?
That's the problem, Mangini said he is running a 3-4..............period. He said that the first day he was here and I wouldn't expect him to change his mind. But, in a 4-3 Wimbley doesn't fit anywhere, he would be an undersized DE. Jackson is a protypical ILB and Barton is a ILB, so you have no OLBs.
-
i disagree. the Backers and DB's would swarm the ball carrier and tackle him for a loss every - single - time.
So you would have the DB's and LB's cheating to Rogers side and they would run it the other way for a TD.
Rogers can not play DE, sorry.
He can play NT in a 3-4 or G in a 4-3, maybe fullback in goal line situations. Thats about it.
AdaM said:
So you would have the DB's and LB's cheating to Rogers side and they would run it the other way for a TD.Rogers can not play DE, sorry.
He can play NT in a 3-4 or G in a 4-3, maybe fullback in goal line situations. Thats about it.
there is an old saying in sales that goes "the day you think you know the customer better than he knows himself is the day you should get out of the business."
that guy defines intangible. sweeps, pitches, rolls take time and can be seen a mile away--when you expect them. once you understand how a team will play you, you can anticipate it, and shut them down every time. Rogers can line up many places against many different teams to achieve many different outcomes. we can check a couple off the list based on last year.
-
So are we going Defense with #5 pick ? Im happy with us not having Crabtree. I would prefer if we trade down .... Maclin is a good offensive option ... how is the Kenny Britt dude ? Is he more the possession type or a BE type ?
-
on passing downs a tandem of Raji/Rogers in a 2-5-4, a 2-3-6 or some other incarnation would be a nightmare for an OC.....if we had the other players to pull it off successfully. mmmm kool-aid.
Too much specializing. If that worked everyone would do it. It does not work and thats why we have the 2 base types, 3-4 and 4-3.
Both base sets are a compromise of the other. I would say a 3-4 is better against the run and a 4-3 is better against the pass. The reason they don't specialize in say a 2-5 on running downs and a 5-2 on passing downs is because the offense can just do the opposite and everyone is out of position.
AdaM said:
Too much specializing. It does not work and thats why we have the 2 base types, 3-4 and 4-3.Both base sets are a compromise of the other. I would say a 3-4 is better against the run and a 4-3 is better against the pass. The reason they don't specialize in say a 2-5 on running downs and a 5-2 on passing downs is because the offense can just do the opposite and everyone is out of position.
who's talking base sets? as a Browns fan you should know all about Marty-ball, which obviously means i'm talking about the quarter/prevent type sets that are used quite frequently in games by teams with the right personnel.
If that worked everyone would do it.
if everyone had those players they might be doing it, but they don't and we do. remind me again how many teams have converted back to 3-4 in the last two seasons? not only is it more flexible, it's less predictable and w/ the right personnel you can hybrid into 4-3 and even 2-5 sets, like they did last year. 4-3 D-Lineman lack the bulk to flex into a 3-4.
a 5-2 team would probably have a worse record than the Lions did in '08.....but i think you meant a 2-5, right?
the league is constantly evolving and you need to evolve with it. and when you trace the evolution you find the ingenuity of the Paul Brown's, the Lombardi's, and the Bill Walsh's are part of the reason the evolution took place to begin with.
think about LT (the orig, not the guy they put in fresh in the second half of games after someone else wore out the D.) he is responsible for the way the game is currently played. it's time to break the mold again.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login