@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

None at all.....I have no clue what'll happen either, but here's what Im hoping for.....

1) Better Defense, that will afford us more offensive opportunities....

2) Better ball control once we are on offense, that will get us more plays(and, of course, scores)...

So, if those 2 things happen(big if, I understand)......then I'd hope for increases in both our passing and rushing totals....using last years #'s as a guideline and a modest increase in opportunities, here's my wild guess....

Passing....approx 530 attempts @ 7.3 yds for 3800 total yards.....

Rushing....approx 520 attempts @ 4.3 yds for 2200 total yards....

I think this would be a realistic increase, and while still middle of the pack kind of numbers, probably more than good enough for a really strong defensive team....

Fingers crossed

@mudfly said:

I'm all over the place. No worries.

@mudfly said:

I don't think we'll have 10% less running. On the contrary, I was saying we'll have 10-15% more running that Flip showed in Oakland.

My McCown prediction was based solely off of his career averages, nothing else. Probably an underrepresentation, considering everything else we've discussed recently.

@tour2ma said:

Agreed.......wasnt Flip only the QB coach at Oakland?.......I wouldnt think he was the source of their offensive philosophy....

It's been my impression that he was adopting much of the O scheme we already had in place, with a few of his own twists.....as opposed to bringing us Oaklands O scheme.....that way we weren't learning a whole new system again.....

TCPO......you're starting to make me nervous with the offensive predictions...HA!....1000 less yards passing AND 10% less running?.....

Im hoping for increased offense(both pass and rush), boosted by more opportunities due to improved defense......fingers crossed

1) Andy Lee can absolutely boom the football

Cleveland’s new punter hit the 70-yard marker on at least two of his punts, prompting return men to jokingly complain if he could take some heat off the ball. Coach Mike Pettine said it was a tough choice to let Spencer Lanning go, but the Browns believe Lee provides an upgrade to the punting position.

“It was difficult, but that’s life in the NFL,” Pettine said. “We felt we had an opportunity to make our team better. There was a Pro Bowl punter out there and we felt the cost associated was obviously very manageable.”

I'll take the over, TC... I can see us running even more than we did last year.

Two reasons:

• Pet sets the tone and his OC will march to his orders... especially if when the D improves over last year.
• With the depth added to the O-line we will run more effectively even should the 6th man be "up".

@wargograw said:

We won't be running as frequently, no. Oakland finished dead last in the league last year in rushing percentage - only rushing on like 38% of plays.

However, I don't think that's indicative of what will happen this year, I put us more in the 45-48% range. You have to remember that Oakland's backfield was a mess last year. MJD got hurt, DMC was garbage (and also hurt, I believe), and Latavius Murray ended up taking over.

I think we'll see a more creative rushing game, with a higher YPA, and a rather even distribution of carries (unless someone absolutely takes off).

that will be a breath of fresh air.

@tour2ma said:

Id say it's a realistic possibility....Ill take the 40% option, please.....

@mudfly said:

I agree. We'll be in major trouble if the yardage isn't made up somewhere. I'd love to see us lead the league in rushing yards this season.

A studly defense should contribute to better field position, meaning less yards for our offense to travel. Same goes for a better return game.

But...assuming our O line is back and we have improvement at RB and WR...and that we had 3600 yds passing last year, then 2700 yds in 16 games would be a big drop off(way worse)....wouldnt it?

If it happens, then I at least hope we add an extra 1000 or 2 to our running stats.....or we are in HUGE trouble.....

@mudfly said:

Cant disagree here....though I would say that Hoyer was pretty good weeks 1 thru 10, then was fairly terrible for his last 5 starts.....

So, while I dont expect McCown to be notably better than Hoyer was(weeks 1-10), I do expect him to be more consistent....and less likely to get rattled like Hoyer did......

Hoping all those extra years of experience get him(and us) through the tough times with better results.....(fingers crossed)...

I sure as hell hope we have more than 2700 yds passing though......yikes!

Those stats were McCown's average game (taken by dividing his yards/completions/TDs/INTs by his number of games) extrapolated over a 17 game season.

It would be a more precise average if I removed the stats from games he didn't start, but I just didn't have that kind of time. It was a rush job.

Either way, I exoect us to hover around the 3,000 yard mark, if preseason has been any indication.

Interesting take on the impact paying a Punter a Mil-a-year more than his predecessor will have on negotiations with Gip...

http://espn.go.com/blog/cleveland-browns/post/_/id/14118/tashaun-gipson-had-to-notice-when-browns-added-salary-with-andy-lee

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Cant disagree here....though I would say that Hoyer was pretty good weeks 1 thru 10, then was fairly terrible for his last 5 starts.....

So, while I dont expect McCown to be notably better than Hoyer was(weeks 1-10), I do expect him to be more consistent....and less likely to get rattled like Hoyer did......

Hoping all those extra years of experience get him(and us) through the tough times with better results.....(fingers crossed)...

I sure as hell hope we have more than 2700 yds passing though......yikes!

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

That's my point exactly. The Bucs had the weapons, but not the protection. We have the protection, but not the weapons.

McCown is a facilitator - give him talent (and keep him standing), and he should distribute to the appropriate target. We have solid, young, undervalued talent at our skill positions. Some of them will surprise. But they aren't nearly enough to be relied upon...which is what I'm worried about.

We don't have big, dominating redzone threats at WR and TE and a proven every down back who is just as talented receiving out of the backfield as he is running between the tackles.

All Chicago's OL had to do was keep McCown relatively clean, which they did (5th in pass pro per Football Outsiders). On paper, our offensive line should keep him clean and should make enough holes for our RB's to run through. What remains to be seen is whether our undersized, shifty WR's can make McCown look good, like Chicago's giant ones did.

Obviously then I missed the point. Not the first time... not the last... in fact I may still be. But if it is that of the three, offensive facets Chicago had right in '13, O-line, Run game and WRs, the one that a QB can influence the most is WR... then we agree.

What I find telling from the Bears' '13 season is that Josh's and Jay's completion percentages were very close and their TDs were roughly proportional to their starts. Only their INTs were grossly different. Not sure if Mc's low INT figure is the mark of a "facilitator"; it is the mark of a game manager.

Problem for the Bears' was that when your Defense ranks 29th in yards allowed and 30th in points allowed, then you actually need a little more gun-slinging and a little less managing from your QB. I don't think any of us expect this problem in '15.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

I don't see him being worse than Hoyer, but I also don't see him being much better, either. As a matter of fact, I feel like they'll be just about the same, when all is said and done.

Two things put me in the "he'll be better" camp:

1. I get the feeling that Mc is mentally tougher... or at least that the "pressures" won't be as great on him, i.e., no home-town thing and not being hell bent to prove he's the starter.

2. Mc's stronger arm... 45 yards will not be our air attack's effective range.

@wargograw said:

Cher

Madonna

Bjork

Sting

Bono

Charro

Beck

Enya

Flea

Pink

Moby

Prince

Sade

Sinbad

Rihanna

Donovan

Wynonna

Alshon?

@wargograw said:

Good eye!

It's become so ingrained in me that I didn't even realize I was doing it. Not necessarily a S.Car fan per se, I'm still a Buckeye fan through and through...but all of my friends are alums, so I've become partial to S.Car over Clemson.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

The faith that I have is moreso in our offensive line, runningbacks and offensive coordinator. I think McCown can have a season somewhere between what we saw in Chicago and what we saw in Tampa, but I don't expect even lower-level greatness out of him. I expect a very similar performance to what we saw from Hoyer, although McCown will be working to groom Manziel more than Hoyer ever did...and that's where his benefit lies.

People like to credit our offensive line and say "why can't McCown have a Chicago-like season?"

The answer - we don't have Forte, Alshon, Marshall and Bennett.

We may have equivalent talent in Johnson, Mayle and Housler, but that's top level homerism at it's finest. I expect Housler to surprise, I expect Mayle to develop into a receiver akin to what Greg Little could have been, and I think Johnson has the ability to become a very dynamic receiving back ( a la Forte). But I don't expect that this year.

Ha. Know how I know you're an SC fan? "Last name, Alshon, last name, last name."

@d-bone said:

I don't see him being worse than Hoyer, but I also don't see him being much better, either. As a matter of fact, I feel like they'll be just about the same, when all is said and done.

If I had to throw some stats on it, I'd go for a season like:

238 completions - 408 attempts | 58.3% | 2,703 yds. | 15 TD | 14 INT | 76.2 Rating