Chalk up another Browns signing, Malik Jackson
-
He was one of the very best DLs on the Denver SB winning team. This is an excellent addition if he plays close to that level still. Inside pressure and excellent run stopper.
-
Zombo said:
Seems you have a high opinion of Billings. I see him as #4 right now.
Z
Billings is a day 1 starter and easily our best nose.
Billings is a day 1 starter and easily our best nose.
I hope so. I know we had high expectations when we signed him.
Has anybody seen the guy...meaning coaches etc.? My fear is it isn't hard for a guy like that to gain weight if he isn't active. It's easy to keep consuming 4000 calories a day, but if he isn't burning 2000 a day with exercise he could show up for camp weighing 360 lbs.
-
Long interview w Akron Beacon-Journal from February. "I've never seen a big man move like he does" - trainer. Sure, in-season shape is different but he's definitely keeping after it while away from team facilities.
TLDR - He'll be ready.
-
Zombo said:
I see him getting 4th most snaps.
Z
Neat.
-
Would not surprise me to see Berry trade Sheldon Richardson ..... or at least restructure his $12m salary that is due.
-
Would not surprise me to see Berry trade Sheldon Richardson ..... or at least restructure his $12m salary that is due.
-
There is No reason to move Richardson.
He is situated here and has a season under his belt in Woods system. He’s one of our only vets. We have no cap issues as we’ve covered our needs and have 8 picks coming.
Moving on from him and finding an equal replacement given the circumstances doesn’t move the needle.
Woods expects an awful lot out of his Dline. We need fresh bodies there. -
An actual extension for Richardson is what I see, he's actually been the anchor for our rebuilding efforts and to let him go would be a mistake imo
-
Would not surprise me to see Berry trade Sheldon Richardson ..... or at least restructure his $12m salary that is due.
Would not surprise me to see Berry trade Sheldon Richardson
not a good idea, he's by far our best DI.. he was deservedly the #13 overall pick his draft year and everyone else was.. later.
Elliot has been very underwhelming, Malik is a decent rotation piece but rotation-level and only for the lesser playcount of a rotational player [ask him to do more and he wears down], Billings is solid [#11 DI free agent after 2019, fun 2016 draft rankings.. check out #100] but best thought of as a run-stuffer.
We could rotate Richardson out to DE to spell Myles and/or Takk if there's not as much confidence in the DE depth.. Sheldon's endurance is pretty great, and he played the DE spot at NYJ.
-
Well maybe we add Bama's Christian Barmore to the mix as our 1st round pick. Now that there is a player. He may still be there as BPA if we are lucky.
-
-
-
Zombo said:
You just strike me as ... not smart.
And a bit of a limited vocabulary.
Zombo
Mea Culpa
Your curious foresight at Billings snap count seemed to lack the educational component that I prefer seeing my colleagues football opinions based upon before posting. Ergo, I gave you a snide, yet mostly dismissive response. If I were to put in the time to give the reasoning behind the numbers I would compile, I don't presume you would offer me that same courtesy in a good faith debate.
Nope, not intelligent or articulate at all.
-
Zombo said:
Billings, despite everyone thinking he was some hot shit free agent last year, was just a depth pick up on a one-year $3.5 Million contract (Jackson being paid a million more) , and while the best "nose", I see using him mostly only on first downs, and then replacing him with the faster guys that can get after the QB. He's a run clogger, but not an every down guy.
So the guy coming in on 1st, 2nd and short yardage downs will get less snaps then the guys coming in on 3rd and obvious passing situations? Fact is Billings almost exclusively has that 1gap plugger role on this team, Malik being a pitch count distant 2nd AND health dependent per you.
Doesn't bode well for the snap count.
edit: Billings is also 25 and as we've seen, this front office is particularly fond of these younger role players with some upside. Billings, provided he builds on the good showing in Cincy, might be sticking around longer.
-
Zombo said:
You just strike me as ... not smart.
And a bit of a limited vocabulary.
Zombo
Mea Culpa
Your curious foresight at Billings snap count seemed to lack the educational component that I prefer seeing my colleagues football opinions based upon before posting. Ergo, I gave you a snide, yet mostly dismissive response. If I were to put in the time to give the reasoning behind the numbers I would compile, I don't presume you would offer me that same courtesy in a good faith debate.
Nope, not intelligent or articulate at all.
Mea Culpa
Your curious foresight at Billings snap count seemed to lack the educational component that I prefer seeing my colleagues football opinions based upon before posting. Ergo, I gave you a snide, yet mostly dismissive response. If I were to put in the time to give the reasoning behind the numbers I would compile, I don't presume you would offer me that same courtesy in a good faith debate.
Nope, not intelligent or articulate at all.
"Your colleagues"? We are your colleagues, aren't we? Browns fans on the Browns Board. If you don't think we are your colleagues then who, pray tell do you consider to be your "colleagues".
-
Zombo said:
Well, you just handed him second down when I said only first. We will be in stop the pass, get the quarterback, mode more than stuff the run mode, which is the reality of the NFL now, and why we will mostly be in a 4-2-5, and why we are dumping dough into our secondary.
I see Jackson on the field more, and if Elliot takes a huge step then he can keep them both off the field.
But I'll guess we'll see. Didn't mean to make it a whole thing. But, we're Super Bowl contenders now, and I don't see having Billings in there as a rotational guy is any kind of great news, but folks seem to be talking themselves into thinking he's something that he's not.
You can go back to being dismissive, thats fine, I don't think I have another Andrew (Is it Andrew?) Billings post in me.
Z
I think it is now a 50/50 proposition that we could be taking an interior Defensive lineman with our first round pick. What that does for Billings/Elliot/Jackson and their playing time, I don't know. Vastly reduce it for someone I wager.
-
Mea Culpa
Your curious foresight at Billings snap count seemed to lack the educational component that I prefer seeing my colleagues football opinions based upon before posting. Ergo, I gave you a snide, yet mostly dismissive response. If I were to put in the time to give the reasoning behind the numbers I would compile, I don't presume you would offer me that same courtesy in a good faith debate.
Nope, not intelligent or articulate at all.
"Your colleagues"? We are your colleagues, aren't we? Browns fans on the Browns Board. If you don't think we are your colleagues then who, pray tell do you consider to be your "colleagues".
We are your colleagues, aren't we?
Yes, I was referring to posters on TBB as colleagues. No, I do not include you in that list.
Zombo said:
Well, you just handed him second down when I said only first. We will be in stop the pass, get the quarterback, mode more than stuff the run mode, which is the reality of the NFL now, and why we will mostly be in a 4-2-5, and why we are dumping dough into our secondary.
I see Jackson on the field more, and if Elliot takes a huge step then he can keep them both off the field.
But I'll guess we'll see. Didn't mean to make it a whole thing. But, we're Super Bowl contenders now, and I don't see having Billings in there as a rotational guy is any kind of great news, but folks seem to be talking themselves into thinking he's something that he's not.
You can go back to being dismissive, thats fine, I don't think I have another Andrew (Is it Andrew?) Billings post in me.
Z
Not sure if you've missed the last 15 years, but the majority of teams run nickel and dime 65+% of the time. In order to combat the offensive speed, we saw defenses shift to more MOFC looks (single high) when C3 and C1 became all the rage, sprinkle in your flavor of quarters if you like (here and there). Then, to prevent matchup issues with bigger bodies like LB's or smaller bodies like nickel CB's - NFL offices and coaches started looking for plus size safeties who couldn't cut it playing on a hash consistently. Giving them the flexibility of being physical and quick enough to run with TE's and interior receivers, but big enough to play down low and not get blown off the ball or boxed out on assignment. Offenses adjusted by spreading for power. Which is why you saw so many bigger backs wear down defenses - Gore, Beast Mode, AP, Matt Forte, Arian Foster... etc etc. So having beef on the DI is crucial. I need at least one good body to anchor because there are times I'm going to have to play lighter box counts.
-
We are your colleagues, aren't we?
Yes, I was referring to posters on TBB as colleagues. No, I do not include you in that list.
Zombo said:
Well, you just handed him second down when I said only first. We will be in stop the pass, get the quarterback, mode more than stuff the run mode, which is the reality of the NFL now, and why we will mostly be in a 4-2-5, and why we are dumping dough into our secondary.
I see Jackson on the field more, and if Elliot takes a huge step then he can keep them both off the field.
But I'll guess we'll see. Didn't mean to make it a whole thing. But, we're Super Bowl contenders now, and I don't see having Billings in there as a rotational guy is any kind of great news, but folks seem to be talking themselves into thinking he's something that he's not.
You can go back to being dismissive, thats fine, I don't think I have another Andrew (Is it Andrew?) Billings post in me.
Z
Not sure if you've missed the last 15 years, but the majority of teams run nickel and dime 65+% of the time. In order to combat the offensive speed, we saw defenses shift to more MOFC looks (single high) when C3 and C1 became all the rage, sprinkle in your flavor of quarters if you like (here and there). Then, to prevent matchup issues with bigger bodies like LB's or smaller bodies like nickel CB's - NFL offices and coaches started looking for plus size safeties who couldn't cut it playing on a hash consistently. Giving them the flexibility of being physical and quick enough to run with TE's and interior receivers, but big enough to play down low and not get blown off the ball or boxed out on assignment. Offenses adjusted by spreading for power. Which is why you saw so many bigger backs wear down defenses - Gore, Beast Mode, AP, Matt Forte, Arian Foster... etc etc. So having beef on the DI is crucial. I need at least one good body to anchor because there are times I'm going to have to play lighter box counts.
Yes, I was referring to posters on TBB as colleagues. No, I do not include you in that list.
Why not?
-
I agree. Billings was on a 1 year prove it contract last year that has pushed to this year.
-
A DT in the draft that I'm intrigued by is Iowa's Daviyon Nixon. He has potential to be a penetrating disruptive player in the inside, but I'm not quite sure how high he will be drafted. I've seen people talking about him sneaking into the first round, and I've seen mock drafts not have him listed in the first two rounds. I know Barmore is getting more pub on here, but I think Nixon might be what the Browns need.
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