ballpeen Posted January 16, 2011 Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 There is a lot of talk about rebuilding spread over the board so I though it would be good to concentrate that theme in it's own thread. To me rebuilding is a total makeover....a razing if you will. I don't see that to be the case in this instance. First we have the top of the management team in place with Homie and Heck. The vision they shared last year will still be in place this year. Shurmer is a WCO guy, who fits in with the thinking of said management team. By and large the offensive players will fit a WCO scheme. Either way we needed to upgrade the receiver position. A guy like Stuckey might actually benefit from a change in scheme. Both Watson and Moore seem to be WCO fits. Hillis, while a bruiser, is also very accomplished out of the backfield. He might have some of the best hands on the team His presence will also give us a little black and blue a team needs on occasion. One of the knocks I always had about some WCO teams....maybe this will become the NCO(north coast O) The O-line....Thomas, Steiny, and Mack can play anything, and the other need to be replaced anyway.(That isn't to say a few of the others can't up the game at this point of their career) McCoy seems a natural for this type of O. Accurate, makes good reads, sees the field, can throw on the run, and can tuck and run when the time is right. This will help him with his one big negative, less then a top NFL arm. Now we get to D. The talk is we will go 4-3 v. the 3-4 we have run since Romeo arrived. I agree. This switch will require some major re-tooling. However, we have been building a 3-4 for 5-6 years now and still have a less than adequate D. The reason is it is hard to get the players required. We need to quit acting like the D was the finished product we hoped for. It was still 3-4 players away....and even with a switch to a 4-3 will still be 3-4 players away. We need a DT, a DE, and a upgrade at backer in either scenario. This is simply a continuation of the building process. Maybe a change in the blueprint, but we don't have to start over. We have things in place that don't need to be replaced. I think this may change our focus in the draft. It seemed receiver was the top priority. Now, a D lineman might become the top priority. Either way, this is going to be fairly seamless....unless the coach sucks, we get stuck with crappy assistant coaches, and McCoy doesn't continue to up his game. What do you think?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRREBEL Posted January 16, 2011 Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 Agreed! Our defense needed an overhaul anyway.. Well put Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownB499 Posted January 16, 2011 Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 I'm warming up to the idea of the 4-3 ...we've seriously sucked at LB since 99 and still do Roth could play DE in a 4-3, though he's small he's got great technique Fujita fills your middle,and if DQ can come back we'll have depth Gocong came from a 4-3 and was a Heckert pick ,so now all you need is a strong side backer(I know thats a big "all you need") Now DT and a stud DE...like you said Peen...we needed them either way There seems to be a few stud DL in the draft,but I don't see anyone close to Suhs level As far as O...the question is what O ? We haven't had one since 99 except for a brief flash in the pan in 07 So ya...I guess we're still building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgTracker Posted January 16, 2011 Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 Definitely building, we haven't been built for success the first time. Many of the players would have been replaced under mangini next year for younger talent, that hasn't changed. But, if we switch to a 4/3 we will be rebuilding the defense. With three players added the D could have been good next year. In a 4/3 most of our linebackers are too slow and most of our linemen won't cut it either. Rubin might make a decent DT. You could try Roth and Gocong at DE but they won't be that good imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted January 16, 2011 Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 I agree that we are building. If we go to a 4-3, there may be a change in draft & free agency strategy, but at least the Management team will be on the same page. It'll be fun to watch. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 I don't see it as rebuilding, though ! I see it as adapting. We have a nice core of players, with a reletive few "desperately must have" player positions that have to be filled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterbell Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 ]New Offense New Defense New OC New DC New Head Coach That be REBUILDING FELLA'S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 i don't want to start a bitch session so please just think about this: so you scrap the HC and his assistants, install your own scheme/systems, draft players for this system and get rid of those who don't fit (i know we had to upgrade so that point is moot). so basically you're starting over, correct? where in all of your posts does anyone say "we'll keep the old systems etc. from the last staff and build upon it"? or where in shurmer's or holmgren's statements does it say we liked what eric implemented and we'll build upon that etc? exactly. thus this is another rebuild. period. quite frankly who cares about the terminology. call it what you want. anyways two years from now we'll be having the same discussion. (and believe me i hope not. but impatience is a off-shoot of being a browns fan.....it seems). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgTracker Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 After two more years I see holmgren taking over if he is physically capable because he will see that the noose is getting very tight around his neck. How many coaches will they bring in because you need to win with talent, not mirrors. I disagree that this team is close to winning. I think we need starters at the following positions RB, someone as good as hillis or he won't last another season RG RT WR1 WR2, might be that one of momass and robo could fill this role but robo will never be able to beat press coverage imho DT1 DT2 (maybe Rubin but he really is a NT) DE 1 (Roth or Gocong won't be that good) DE 2 MLB LLB RLB FS CB (I think Wright can improve upon this season, lower priority) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 I think we can all (or almost all) agree that the Browns need to be improved. We now have credible football men running things, yet many are complaining of constant change. It's a NEW REGIME folks, & we will NOT improve without change. I don't like all the change (with lousy results) that we've seen in recent years, but the FO folks implementing THOSE changes is not even CLOSE to being on a par with what we have now. At least now we'll see a definite direction. It's sort of interesting watching how REAL Pros do it. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted January 17, 2011 Report Share Posted January 17, 2011 After two more years I see holmgren taking over if he is physically capable well that kinda shoots that idea in the foot doesn't it? needs to cut down on the lard lad donuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted January 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 ]New Offense New Defense New OC New DC New Head Coach That be REBUILDING FELLA'S I don't think the O is going to be that opposed to what we have done....or more on point, i don't think it is going to require a major upgrade in so far as players. The only real player changes will be at receiver, and that is simply because ours aren't all that good. I don't think a change in terminology is going to create a major bump in the road. To me, a rebuild is with the players, and I don't think the changes you mention are going to impact that to any major degree. The changes were going to happen regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownIndian Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 I don't think the O is going to be that opposed to what we have done....or more on point, i don't think it is going to require a major upgrade in so far as players. The only real player changes will be at receiver, and that is simply because ours aren't all that good. I don't think a change in terminology is going to create a major bump in the road. To me, a rebuild is with the players, and I don't think the changes you mention are going to impact that to any major degree. The changes were going to happen regardless. WR, RT, RB + defense. We only have so many picks. Hopefully this year we will be more open to exploring free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted January 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 WR, RT, RB + defense. We only have so many picks. Hopefully this year we will be more open to exploring free agency. Again, it is no different than a week ago. I might argue RB, but I am assuming Hardesty comes back strong. You want that change of pace from Hillis?? Think Noel Devine of WVA....we can get him at the top of the 3rd.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownB499 Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 Think Noel Devine of WVA....we can get him at the top of the 3rd.. Devine's kinda small...but so is Jones-Drew...and I'd take him all day Devine has the speed to be an absolute game changer I think the major difference in the coaching change is the GM is still in place...many of these guys are his pickups Shouldn't be the total toilet flush we saw from Davis to Crennel and Crennel to Mangini Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nw220 Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 I Second you Ghoolie we dont need other teams former has beens to be are stars we need to build through the draft like we did this year, im so tired of seeing Cleveland land a FA who used to be good and think he will still produce like he did back in 98...We need are own young talented group of players to become Elite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgTracker Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 I'm not picking on you but I posted on this in another thread. By a quick estimate we need about 15 new starters but probably three less than last season. How long do you think it will take to get them? There is no choice but to fill your holes as best possible and use the waiver wire and draft to bring in younger talent. But someone has to play the 16 scheduled games. If you have experienced guys at your disposal who are better than young guys that suck then that is who you are forced to go with. Each draft there will be players who retire or leave for another team and that is how you improve your talent level, with a mix of free agents (hopefully young) and drafted players. Mangini would have replaced some of the players on this team next year when another draft gave him better talent. But someone has to play. You don't go into a game with 30 people because some of your possible players are a year or so past their peak. As an example if there were a player who could help the browns more than barton he would have been replaced. I Second you Ghoolie we dont need other teams former has beens to be are stars we need to build through the draft like we did this year, im so tired of seeing Cleveland land a FA who used to be good and think he will still produce like he did back in 98...We need are own young talented group of players to become Elite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.