We (Schobert) will miss his block-eating run Defense, but he was no help to our pass rush. Covey showed better balance in his line play all year long and Brantley came on late.

Supposedly we have interest in Texas' Poona Ford...

@jbluhm86 said:

I may be in the minority here who thinks that this trade was an excellent one, so I'll try to explain my reasoning:

To begin, you first have to look at the position that Danny Shelton plays in relation to the scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to run. Shelton is a classic 3-4 run-stopping nose tackle; however, Greg Williams employs a base 4-3 defensive scheme, of which Shelton is a poor fit. As mentioned by another poster on this thread, Shelton played less than 50% of the defensive snaps last year and I don't think that, if the Browns kept him, his playing time would improve.

Next, let's examine Shelton's contract details. For the past 3 years, Shelton has been making roughly 2 million dollars per season, and would make around another 2 million dollars if he stayed this season. While 2 million dollars does not seem like a great deal of money in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it is a poor use of resources on a player who does not indeed fit the defensive scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to employ, and the money could be used more efficiently elsewhere. 

Finally, we need to examine Shelton contract details in relation to his potential free agent status. According to current the NFL collective bargaining agreement, the Browns would have had until May of this year to decide whether or not they wanted to pick up Shelton's 5th year option on his rookie contract. If not, he would have become a free agent after this upcoming season, and would have, with almost 100% certainty, have left the Browns for a different or better team, and the Browns would have ended up losing him anyway. If, however, the Browns had picked up his fifth year option, Shelton's salary next year would have been the average of the top 10 defensive tackles contracts in the NFL this year. This averages out to between roughly 8.1 million to 13.6 million depending on which defensive scheme the NFL ruled that the Browns were running under. Under this metric, the Browns would have paid Shelton four to six times his current salary cap hit for a player who still wouldn't fit the defensive scheme that the Browns were trying to run, and who would have most likely left in free agency after his fifth year anyway, so what would the Browns have gained in this deal?

By trading Shelton away, Dorsey and the Browns received a decent draft pick in exchange for the Patriots removing an ill-fitted player's potentially big salary cap hit; a player who would have probably left as a free agent anyway, leaving the Browns with nothing. Now the Browns can use that pick and the money they saved to go after a player who better fits what they're trying to run.

Hope this helps.

This is pretty typical. We love a guy. Then he gets traded and we love the trade. Then we go 0 - 16 because at the end of the day, the Browns are STILL not acquiring any top fukcing playmakers. Same old schidt, and again you guys just fukcking fall into order like dildoes in a wine box.

in Sewage we trust, In Williams we trust, in Hue we trust, now we have another jackoff................... IN DORKEY WE TRUST.

Hue Jackson is the head coach, the Browns ain't going nowhere............................

@medicineman said:

Not to mention the Bills benched him twice last season because he was playing so shitty but he is going to come here and clean up this dumpster fire? Come on man.

And despite that...he led them to their first playoffs since 1999.   If they had left him in instead of letting Nathan Peterman in to throw 5 Ints, their playoff position may in fact have been a bit better.  They may have been able to get a matchup with the more vulnerable Chiefs rather than the Jags.  They still had a close game vs. the Jags...who should have made it into the Super Bowl, really.

@tiamat63 said:

The issue with simplifying things to 3-4 and 4-3 is that you're not taking into consideration alignments, gap responsibility and assignment.        Sure with a 4 man front you're likely to play more (or exclusively 1 gap assignments) but you still have an interior player that draws and holds double teams or would be on the receiving end of chip end from another guard/center.  There is a reason Aaron Donald gets favorable looks and a lot of 1 on 1 draws based on alignment alone.  That isn't his role to be big in the center.   If you put Donald at the nose,  what makes him great is likely to suffer.

Of course you can have one gap "34" by looking no further than Wade Philips and what Denver did under his watch there. Personnel remained largely the same, although with differences in deployment.    

Haloti Ngata was a solid interior presence for Detroit and he's played as a 3-4 nose his entire career save for when subpackages moved him around.   Point being is his primary responsibility along the defensive front changed very little when going to the Lions.  Likewise when you saw Snacks go from the J-E-T-S to the Gmen.  Or somebody like Shaun Rodgers up there then coming to Cleveland... Poe in Atlanta.    I could go on with examples here.

Point being, and what I'm trying to sum up, is that this board and many others outside of it are still hung up on the classic '3-4'  '4-3' moniker and that simply doesn't exist in the modern NFL.    Today's defenses run so many different fronts and subpackages that still make Danny effective in coach Williams "43".       

He would still be on the field around the same number of snaps as the previous regime because he'll be subbed out in passing situations or expected passing downs in favor of a pass rushing presence.     Shelton is a lane clogger, pure and simple.  If anybody remembers the 2014 season you'll know just how badly we needed that hence his drafting.    It's not sexy, it's not flashy, but god damn it, i you've played inside backer or safety - you appreciate not seeing a lead just breeze through a hole with a back right behind him.  

True

Its about "gaps" and "techniques" on the DL. 

Some guys can move all over and play every technique and all 3 downs. Other guys specialize in a couple of techniques like Shelton. If there is no run threat there is likely no need to have Shelton in there unless you want to just rush 3 and drop 8 in coverage like so many teams do today.

@mld-woody said:

Looks like we're drafting Mo Hurst now..

In the 8th round?

@tiamat63 said:

Brantley won't be the one trying to replace Danny - that will fall on Jobi's shoulders.  Provided he too, can stay healthy.

Either way, DT depth just became a draft factor.  

Or...FA factor.  

But, as I said elsewhere, and as I heard,  it seems that Shelton was not a 4-3 DT fit.  More of a 3-4 NT fit.   In addition to Ogunjobi, Coley, Brantley, Meder on the inside, I see perhaps Ogbah also doing some inside duties...to fill that depth factor.      And that could mean this team may be highly interested in taking Chubb in the draft.

Fair to say?

@jiggins7919 said:

..how hard is it to draft in the first freaking round?! Lord,  

we lost a hour sleep so get a early start..  https://www.dawgsbynature.com/2018/3/10/17104576/which-players-on-the-cleveland-browns-could-become-roster-casualties  

@stillmotion said:

Precisely what I was saying. Shelton is likely to leave anyway, and most likely doesn't want to be here. The deal makes sense and will free up resources for people who want to play here.

I have to admit, at first I was pissed. I just didn't see why we'd trade a solid player for so little. But then I read that Shelton only played in 44% of the defensive stats, and he wasn't really a great fit in our 4-3. So ultimately it makes sense, I think I'm just so overly frustrated by losing yet another first round pick. Also, we're probably going to lose ANOTHER one when we ship out Corey Coleman. I actually want to be wrong and hope we keep him because we wouldn't get value and I sincerely believe he has what it takes to be a meaningful player. But...how hard is it to draft in the first freaking round?! Lord, we fans are all so frustrated because we study the players we want, our team NEVER DRAFTS them, and then we trade down and take someone our fans don't want, and the cycle begins all over. 

It....isn't....that....difficult. Draft the best players that you've RESEARCHED and don't trade down like a bunch of asshats. 

@hoorta said:

Guess you can't keep everyone happy...  

Did you bother to look at Taylor's stats before you start labeling him garbage? Since being the starter for the Bills he's a 92 QBR guy, 51 TDs to 16 INTs. He's a massive improvement over the turnover machine we shipped off to Green Bay. Not only that, I can make a serious case Taylor was throwing to WRs that were even worse than what the Browns had last year. The more I've researched it, the better I like this trade. His $16 million contract is in line with a mid level starter, and won't be a cap buster like Cousins would have been. BTW, Taylor is 6'0" tall- meaning Dorsey won't have any problems drafting a certain 6'0" quarterback from Oklahoma if he checks all the boxes.  

Taylor's Stats:  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaylTy00.htm

All this did was create more bs. We are going to draft a qb and when Taylor does not win games from the get go people are going to be crying for the rookie, Just like they did for Quinn and Colt and JF and all the rest. We have seen it before LIKE EVERY EF'N YEAR.

@jbluhm86 said:

I may be in the minority here who thinks that this trade was an excellent one, so I'll try to explain my reasoning:

To begin, you first have to look at the position that Danny Shelton plays in relation to the scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to run. Shelton is a classic 3-4 run-stopping nose tackle; however, Greg Williams employs a base 4-3 defensive scheme, of which Shelton is a poor fit. As mentioned by another poster on this thread, Shelton played less than 50% of the defensive snaps last year and I don't think that, if the Browns kept him, his playing time would improve.

Next, let's examine Shelton's contract details. For the past 3 years, Shelton has been making roughly 2 million dollars per season, and would make around another 2 million dollars if he stayed this season. While 2 million dollars does not seem like a great deal of money in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it is a poor use of resources on a player who does not indeed fit the defensive scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to employ, and the money could be used more efficiently elsewhere. 

Finally, we need to examine Shelton contract details in relation to his potential free agent status. According to current the NFL collective bargaining agreement, the Browns would have had until May of this year to decide whether or not they wanted to pick up Shelton's 5th year option on his rookie contract. If not, he would have become a free agent after this upcoming season, and would have, with almost 100% certainty, have left the Browns for a different or better team, and the Browns would have ended up losing him anyway. If, however, the Browns had picked up his fifth year option, Shelton's salary next year would have been the average of the top 10 defensive tackles contracts in the NFL this year. This averages out to between roughly 8.1 million to 13.6 million depending on which defensive scheme the NFL ruled that the Browns were running under. Under this metric, the Browns would have paid Shelton four to six times his current salary cap hit for a player who still wouldn't fit the defensive scheme that the Browns were trying to run, and who would have most likely left in free agency after his fifth year anyway, so what would the Browns have gained in this deal?

By trading Shelton away, Dorsey and the Browns received a decent draft pick in exchange for the Patriots removing an ill-fitted player's potentially big salary cap hit; a player who would have probably left as a free agent anyway, leaving the Browns with nothing. Now the Browns can use that pick and the money they saved to go after a player who better fits what they're trying to run.

Hope this helps.

Precisely what I was saying. Shelton is likely to leave anyway, and most likely doesn't want to be here. The deal makes sense and will free up resources for people who want to play here.

@jbluhm86 said:

I may be in the minority here who thinks that this trade was an excellent one, so I'll try to explain my reasoning:

To begin, you first have to look at the position that Danny Shelton plays in relation to the scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to run. Shelton is a classic 3-4 run-stopping nose tackle; however, Greg Williams employs a base 4-3 defensive scheme, of which Shelton is a poor fit. As mentioned by another poster on this thread, Shelton played less than 50% of the defensive snaps last year and I don't think that, if the Browns kept him, his playing time would improve.

Next, let's examine Shelton's contract details. For the past 3 years, Shelton has been making roughly 2 million dollars per season, and would make around another 2 million dollars if he stayed this season. While 2 million dollars does not seem like a great deal of money in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it is a poor use of resources on a player who does not indeed fit the defensive scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to employ, and the money could be used more efficiently elsewhere. 

Finally, we need to examine Shelton contract details in relation to his potential free agent status. According to current the NFL collective bargaining agreement, the Browns would have had until May of this year to decide whether or not they wanted to pick up Shelton's 5th year option on his rookie contract. If not, he would have become a free agent after this upcoming season, and would have, with almost 100% certainty, have left the Browns for a different or better team, and the Browns would have ended up losing him anyway. If, however, the Browns had picked up his fifth year option, Shelton's salary next year would have been the average of the top 10 defensive tackles contracts in the NFL this year. This averages out to between roughly 8.1 million to 13.6 million depending on which defensive scheme the NFL ruled that the Browns were running under. Under this metric, the Browns would have paid Shelton four to six times his current salary cap hit for a player who still wouldn't fit the defensive scheme that the Browns were trying to run, and who would have most likely left in free agency after his fifth year anyway, so what would the Browns have gained in this deal?

By trading Shelton away, Dorsey and the Browns received a decent draft pick in exchange for the Patriots removing an ill-fitted player's potentially big salary cap hit; a player who would have probably left as a free agent anyway, leaving the Browns with nothing. Now the Browns can use that pick and the money they saved to go after a player who better fits what they're trying to run.

Hope this helps.

The issue with simplifying things to 3-4 and 4-3 is that you're not taking into consideration alignments, gap responsibility and assignment.        Sure with a 4 man front you're likely to play more (or exclusively 1 gap assignments) but you still have an interior player that draws and holds double teams or would be on the receiving end of chip end from another guard/center.  There is a reason Aaron Donald gets favorable looks and a lot of 1 on 1 draws based on alignment alone.  That isn't his role to be big in the center.   If you put Donald at the nose,  what makes him great is likely to suffer.

Of course you can have one gap "34" by looking no further than Wade Philips and what Denver did under his watch there. Personnel remained largely the same, although with differences in deployment.    

Haloti Ngata was a solid interior presence for Detroit and he's played as a 3-4 nose his entire career save for when subpackages moved him around.   Point being is his primary responsibility along the defensive front changed very little when going to the Lions.  Likewise when you saw Snacks go from the J-E-T-S to the Gmen.  Or somebody like Shaun Rodgers up there then coming to Cleveland... Poe in Atlanta.    I could go on with examples here.

Point being, and what I'm trying to sum up, is that this board and many others outside of it are still hung up on the classic '3-4'  '4-3' moniker and that simply doesn't exist in the modern NFL.    Today's defenses run so many different fronts and subpackages that still make Danny effective in coach Williams "43".       

He would still be on the field around the same number of snaps as the previous regime because he'll be subbed out in passing situations or expected passing downs in favor of a pass rushing presence.     Shelton is a lane clogger, pure and simple.  If anybody remembers the 2014 season you'll know just how badly we needed that hence his drafting.    It's not sexy, it's not flashy, but god damn it, i you've played inside backer or safety - you appreciate not seeing a lead just breeze through a hole with a back right behind him.  

@baconhound said:

I wish someone could explain this

I may be in the minority here who thinks that this trade was an excellent one, so I'll try to explain my reasoning:

To begin, you first have to look at the position that Danny Shelton plays in relation to the scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to run. Shelton is a classic 3-4 run-stopping nose tackle; however, Greg Williams employs a base 4-3 defensive scheme, of which Shelton is a poor fit. As mentioned by another poster on this thread, Shelton played less than 50% of the defensive snaps last year and I don't think that, if the Browns kept him, his playing time would improve.

Next, let's examine Shelton's contract details. For the past 3 years, Shelton has been making roughly 2 million dollars per season, and would make around another 2 million dollars if he stayed this season. While 2 million dollars does not seem like a great deal of money in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it is a poor use of resources on a player who does not indeed fit the defensive scheme that Greg Williams is attempting to employ, and the money could be used more efficiently elsewhere. 

Finally, we need to examine Shelton contract details in relation to his potential free agent status. According to current the NFL collective bargaining agreement, the Browns would have had until May of this year to decide whether or not they wanted to pick up Shelton's 5th year option on his rookie contract. If not, he would have become a free agent after this upcoming season, and would have, with almost 100% certainty, have left the Browns for a different or better team, and the Browns would have ended up losing him anyway. If, however, the Browns had picked up his fifth year option, Shelton's salary next year would have been the average of the top 10 defensive tackles contracts in the NFL this year. This averages out to between roughly 8.1 million to 13.6 million depending on which defensive scheme the NFL ruled that the Browns were running under. Under this metric, the Browns would have paid Shelton four to six times his current salary cap hit for a player who still wouldn't fit the defensive scheme that the Browns were trying to run, and who would have most likely left in free agency after his fifth year anyway, so what would the Browns have gained in this deal?

By trading Shelton away, Dorsey and the Browns received a decent draft pick in exchange for the Patriots removing an ill-fitted player's potentially big salary cap hit; a player who would have probably left as a free agent anyway, leaving the Browns with nothing. Now the Browns can use that pick and the money they saved to go after a player who better fits what they're trying to run.

Hope this helps.

number '00'  with VETTEDAWG as my name.  (It's a 2000 Corvette...ordered from the factory....currently, 34,000 miles.... - I was VetteDawg on other forums)

@texasag1969 said:

The top 3 QBs seem to be coin flips anyway.

This I don't agree with.   (I agree that NY may not take a QB)

When you're looking at the most important person for the whole football organization, you don't use a coin flip.  When professional evaluators sit down and evaluate the 4 QB's they WILL come to a conclusion as to which one best fits the situation of that organization.  I just don't see it being an intelligent thing to do, that you pick a player to tackle people and leave the guy who can throw TD passes to chance.

@hoorta said:

I learned my lesson about that years ago Mike. I still have a Couch jersey gathering dust somewhere in the basement. My solution is to use #46 (Don Fleming's retired number) and put my name on the back. Never goes out of style. I'm about due for a new one, because my old Reebok one has seen better days. 

Larry, you have GOT to be kidding me!  

I have an orange #46 with my name on back (CANTONMIKE) too. Same reasoning...46 is Don Fleming's retired number, year browns founded, & my birth year.

Mike

@orion said:

Certainly shines a brighter light on Chubb.

...but if we take QB and NY takes QB, does Indy take Barkley?

I'm not so sure NY takes a QB. They might go for the G though. If Chubb sits there @4 I take him over anyone else, but if he is really our first target then don't try to play games and hope he's there. Just take him. The top 3 QBs seem to be coin flips anyway. Now that Taylor is on board, take whomever is left if you see them all about equal.

@hoorta said:

I learned my lesson about that years ago Mike. I still have a Couch jersey gathering dust somewhere in the basement. My solution is to use #46 (Don Fleming's retired number) and put my name on the back. Never goes out of style. I'm about due for a new one, because my old Reebok one has seen better days. 

I have a Mathews Jersey (Brown) with My name on it and a Thomas Jersey in white...

@canton-mike said:

All I can say is......

"Well there goes ANOTHER jersey!". Shelton's is his original Browns' #71, which was changed to #55 when Mack left. Danny then signed it for me with his new #55 & he wrote "Throwback" on it.

1) I'm not buying another until they change 'em in 2020 unless I can get a vintage Clay Matthews Jr #57 for a decent price.

2) From now on, no more buying current players jerseys.

Mike

I learned my lesson about that years ago Mike. I still have a Couch jersey gathering dust somewhere in the basement. My solution is to use #46 (Don Fleming's retired number) and put my name on the back. Never goes out of style. I'm about due for a new one, because my old Reebok one has seen better days. 

@medicineman said:

We already lost a 3rd rd pk for Hemoroid Taylor or what ever his gay butt name is. At this point they will trade Gordon for a 2023 7th rd pk........Fukn stupid. The only half way decent player we got so far was that wr from the Phins., Other than that I don't like what they did or are trying to do.

Guess you can't keep everyone happy...  

Did you bother to look at Taylor's stats before you start labeling him garbage? Since being the starter for the Bills he's a 92 QBR guy, 51 TDs to 16 INTs. He's a massive improvement over the turnover machine we shipped off to Green Bay. Not only that, I can make a serious case Taylor was throwing to WRs that were even worse than what the Browns had last year. The more I've researched it, the better I like this trade. His $16 million contract is in line with a mid level starter, and won't be a cap buster like Cousins would have been. BTW, Taylor is 6'0" tall- meaning Dorsey won't have any problems drafting a certain 6'0" quarterback from Oklahoma if he checks all the boxes.  

Taylor's Stats:  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaylTy00.htm