<![CDATA[Offense or defense]]>Everyone wants to argue over who the browns should take in the draft, if they should take a qb again or work on the defense, or the offensive line. Well I say pick one. Either the defense of the offense. The browns have had little success with drafts and as little success developing top picks aside form a few. I feel that the browns should focus on one side only and only take drafts and fa in the off-season. We have learned from our division a team can win a Super Bowl with a shitty offense (Trent dilfers) ravens who's coach once told him get me three points and we will win. So the browns could load the d but is the offense good enough to score answer would be yes. On the other hand should the browns go offense and only offense, do what the cowboys are doing. An offense that controls the line a chews up time of possession to win. There d is really bad and have not forces a turnover since before Halloween. The question is can the browns fix the offense enough to out score the other team. But in my opinion fix one side at time, but which side is closer

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/45012/offense-or-defenseRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 10:27:14 GMTThu, 01 Dec 2016 17:23:38 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Sat, 03 Dec 2016 14:38:05 GMT]]>

@tour2ma said:

WTF was clamoring for Sneed when he was sent packing in 2014?

Seems like we have a WR per year that flashes or plays well in the preseason, then is cut w/o an obvious reason or explanation....then he goes elsewhere and does well......while we continue to look.....

And now, we step out and draft 4 of em.....and 3 look cuttable.....(new word).....

And it's weird, because WR is a position weve been trying to improve every year....

Some recent examples would be Charles Johnson, Minnesota.....Willie Snead at NO......Taylor Gabriel at Atlanta......even that Josh Lenz kid everyone loved so much, led our team in catches and yards(ala Gabriel), then was waived.......

And....yes.....I know none of these guys are stars(though Snead is pretty good).....it's just odd to see so many preseason - top producers cut from a team that is so bad...

And a touch infuriating when they go to better teams.....and produce.....while we burn 4 draft picks or keep WR's who dont.....

And we got lucky with Pryor, because we cut him once....then brought him back(whew).... just imagine if he was busting out for another team this season.....oy!

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659991https://brownsboard.com/post/659991Sat, 03 Dec 2016 14:38:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Fri, 02 Dec 2016 15:44:59 GMT]]>

@gumby73 said:

Tyler Gabriel, Travis Benjamin & Willie Sneed Approve this Post...while Terrell Pryor wants his "Millions Back America" to stay in Cleveland for this same old Shi$

WTF was clamoring for Sneed when he was sent packing in 2014?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659821https://brownsboard.com/post/659821Fri, 02 Dec 2016 15:44:59 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Fri, 02 Dec 2016 11:46:38 GMT]]>

@wargograw said:

I'm on board with all D players plus one good FA OL.

Holy Shit war hell must have frozen over. We totally agree. 😁

And credit to Mud for bringing up the FA route to fix the C position.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659761https://brownsboard.com/post/659761Fri, 02 Dec 2016 11:46:38 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:02:38 GMT]]>I'm on board with all D players plus one good FA OL.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659747https://brownsboard.com/post/659747Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:02:38 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Fri, 02 Dec 2016 01:53:20 GMT]]>

@calfoxwc said:

that isn't them as much as it is the offense can't work with mediocre qb'ing and the poor play by the right side of the oline.

add in a few injuries... nah.

Tyler Gabriel, Travis Benjamin & Willie Sneed Approve this Post...while Terrell Pryor wants his "Millions Back America" to stay in Cleveland for this same old Shi$

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659719https://brownsboard.com/post/659719Fri, 02 Dec 2016 01:53:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Fri, 02 Dec 2016 01:21:51 GMT]]>that isn't them as much as it is the offense can't work with mediocre qb'ing and the poor play by the right side of the oline.

add in a few injuries... nah.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659712https://brownsboard.com/post/659712Fri, 02 Dec 2016 01:21:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:50:27 GMT]]>

@calfoxwc said:

that's a weak case, Tex. They have a comprehensive, elaborate criteria for drafting now.

Character/ work ethic, football iq, etc comes into play finally.

"too early" by what standards? going by the usual rankings by experts? Gilbert? Richardson?

They weren't taken "too early".

The Browns, with their elaborate, excellent, new criteria, eval'ed what players fit their lockerroom, their team,

and their goals.

And you progress down throught the draft, players fall off your list, and you pick accordingly. It isn't as much when,

but who are picked. I'm with how they did it.

They have mostly produced either nothing or a lot of drops. So by that standard they were too early as a group.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659700https://brownsboard.com/post/659700Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:50:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 21:51:23 GMT]]>One side or the other? Exclusively? A whole new kind of stupid...

The needs assessment takes care of position prioritization, AKA determination of "which side is weaker". It's a combination of your assessment of the personnel you have and the importance of each position. You then marry that assessment to your prospect assessment to create your board. However, in performing "the ceremony" the more you use "need" as anything more than a tiebreaker, the more you endanger your draft... the more you end up drafting Wheezies... and JFFs... and...

The above process is what our FO did in 2016. It's how we ended up with 8 of our 14 picks being Offensive players. In no small part due to the clear determination that we had ignored, or at least under emphasized, the WR position for far too long. I think most of us believe that an inflated need was in play here.

We will do the same thing this year... hopefully minus artificial need inflation... like picking exclusively on one side of the ball.

Which side will be favored? Dunno... but signs seem to me to point to the D. Total of 79 players are currently under contract: 42 Offense, 33 Defense, 4 ST.

55-man Roster: 28 O - 24 D - 3 ST

14-man IR/Res: 8 O - 5 D - 1 ST

10-man PS... : 6 O - 4 D

Stat-wise? Flip a coin...

30th in Total Offense; 30th in Scoring Offense

31st in Total Defense; 31st in Scoring Defense

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659653https://brownsboard.com/post/659653Thu, 01 Dec 2016 21:51:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 19:21:35 GMT]]>and, Jiggins, it's tough. Yes, it's early, and Seth got banged up, etc.,

But I had high hopes for HIggins, and we didn't see him but for a few plays here and there.

I don't get it. I guess the offense he played in messed him up on his adapting to the pro game or something.

It would be interesting to hear Hue speak on that.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659624https://brownsboard.com/post/659624Thu, 01 Dec 2016 19:21:35 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 19:18:38 GMT]]>that's a weak case, Tex. They have a comprehensive, elaborate criteria for drafting now.

Character/ work ethic, football iq, etc comes into play finally.

"too early" by what standards? going by the usual rankings by experts? Gilbert? Richardson?

They weren't taken "too early".

The Browns, with their elaborate, excellent, new criteria, eval'ed what players fit their lockerroom, their team,

and their goals.

And you progress down throught the draft, players fall off your list, and you pick accordingly. It isn't as much when,

but who are picked. I'm with how they did it.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659622https://brownsboard.com/post/659622Thu, 01 Dec 2016 19:18:38 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 18:55:31 GMT]]>It's way too early to make a determination about our WR's we just drafted, but I'm not very happy about them right now. I know Taylor Gabriel is playing for a terrific offense, that has a smart QB and amazing running game, but are you telling me that our rookie WR's are better than him? Charles Johnson? Travis Benjamin? Does anybody see Jordan Payton playing a down this year? He almost made a terrific catch 6 weeks ago, but haven't heard his name since. Anybody seen much of Ricardo Louis? Ole Stonehands McGoo hasn't done much in a long time.

Again, it's early...but I'm not happy. That being said, I WAS encouraged by Seth Devalve and Higgins' recent game. It's VERY early, and I'm NOT calling anybody a "bust", but I can tell you I was hoping for a bit more results. I really wanted to see one of the rookies step up and make a statement. To be fair, Coleman missed a shitload of time, but that kind of opened the door for another young guy to step up, and nobody did.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659621https://brownsboard.com/post/659621Thu, 01 Dec 2016 18:55:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 18:29:03 GMT]]>

@calfoxwc said:

and their drafting criteria is excellent, for a change.

4 WR's. Most too early. Rest my case.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659618https://brownsboard.com/post/659618Thu, 01 Dec 2016 18:29:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 18:24:05 GMT]]>If we take trubisky at 1, i wouldnt be adverse to trump hem trading up again to take a good pass rusher or o lineman. Badically we need to handle one side of the line FA and use the draft on the other.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659617https://brownsboard.com/post/659617Thu, 01 Dec 2016 18:24:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:55:05 GMT]]>I do think we're unlikely to do much about WRs, maybe pick one up if the value is so great, but assuming we resign Pryor, he and Coleman should be a nice 1a and 1b with Hawkins and the rookies.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659604https://brownsboard.com/post/659604Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:55:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:53:39 GMT]]>Nothing wrong with going Garrett or Allen first, OL 1b, corner 2a, TE 2b or whatever.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659603https://brownsboard.com/post/659603Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:53:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:49:42 GMT]]>Picking by position need has been a big problem for this team. Gilbert over Aaron Donald because we needed a corner to play press man one example. Let alone all the quarterbacks.

Just hope we now have a FO that will take BPA no matter what

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659602https://brownsboard.com/post/659602Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:49:42 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:40:42 GMT]]>Yea, no. I don't think you can say: We have 13 picks in the upcoming draft...and we will only be picking defensive players....and all of our FA attempt will be only for defensive players. (or insert offense in lieu of defense).

Half the guys you pick will end up being waste...because you won't be able to keep that many of them without being totally out of balance.

Good teams....good drafts are balanced somewhat equally between offense and defense. We can't just go an entire year without addressing the deficiencies on both sides of the ball.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659598https://brownsboard.com/post/659598Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:40:42 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Offense or defense on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:26:51 GMT]]>no nfl team goes all one side or the other. The Browns have blown draft picks in the past, big deal.

This is new age, excellent HC and staff (okay, not happy with Horton, but generally speakinig)....

and their drafting criteria is excellent, for a change.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/659587https://brownsboard.com/post/659587Thu, 01 Dec 2016 17:26:51 GMT