Jump to content

Vee-Rex

Members
  • Content Count

    187
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Vee-Rex

  1. I wouldn't be upset if our worst O-line starter was just average. Teller is the safest bet. Forbes is a wildcard. With this virtual offseason we're having, Forbes will have to clearly and definitively show SOMETHING in order to win that RG spot.
  2. Glad there has been no news but this feels a bit premature. Won't feel good until week 1.
  3. Probably talking about when he tried to trip that Ravens player during a kickoff return.
  4. Myles had 7 sacks in 11 total games. But I agree - hopefully Wills can be a solid player year one and blossom into an impact player going forward.
  5. Fully agreed. Take away his comfort areas (middle of the field) and mix up coverages + blitzes. Set the edge on every down. Someone made an interesting point - teams that play him a lot seem to do quite well defending him. Chargers in 2018 playoffs, Browns in 2019, Titans in 2019 playoffs. He had one of his worst games of the year against the Steelers in week 5. While we can't predict what strides he continues to make, I do think if his ball placement doesn't improve the same the NFL will do a lot better defending him in 2020 than 2019.
  6. Yeah, Chubb isn't a route runner. He could still be a proficient receiving back if he catches the ball with a little space. His vision, acceleration, and ability to break tackles are all superb. He's not gonna do much before the catch but after the catch - look out.
  7. I read it as "the ypc is a big deal". Which it is. 1.1 is nothing to sneeze at - which is why he made the Eric Dickerson/Trent Williams comparison. I think Chubb is clearly better. Mixon is awesome but I don't think he's close enough to be viewed as a 'wash' with Chubb. You can talk about offensive talent all you want (even though in 2018 it would closer than you think) but when I watch Chubb as a runner he is simply better, and that's dating back to his time at Georgia (pre-injury) vs. Mixon at Oklahoma. He blows Mixon away with advanced stats too - it's just disingenuous to suggest
  8. Agree. I don't care what the name is - he's still a rookie QB. The fact that people are automatically crowning this dude is funny to me.
  9. And I'm telling you - teams have tried that. There's no simple approach to it. You have to be aggressive AND conservative depending on the situation, and focus on limiting the portions of the field where Lamar is most dangerous. The more you open yourself up to big plays, the easier you make it for them to hurt you. It's not as easy as "Make Lamar make that throw". Harbaugh will stubbornly run Ingram 5 times in a row down the pipe while you're sitting there blitzing the edges and giving up 5-8 yards per run. They have a dynamic offense. I'm arguing against the notion that you will "send 6
  10. This isn't Madden. Someone like Greg Roman would figure that out in no time. The Ravens throw a lot of screens and wheel-routes out of the backfield which would punish that kind of aggressive defense. Man coverage against Lamar isn't always the best thing either. There's a reason why zone coverage is a decent option against scrambling QBs - many defenders have their eyes on the QB. They're a lot quicker to react if he tries to take off or make a play with his arm. Go watch the Rams/Ravens game last year. Wade Phillips stubbornly ran a ton of man coverage and Lamar torched them with b
  11. This is what is so apparent to me. How much WORSE could it have gone? Not talking about injuries here because obviously that's always a concern, always will happen, and can't be measured, but in terms of performance... I really don't see how it could get worse. Chubb was excellent and STs were solid, but that's it. We finished 6-10 in SPITE of: Schedule turning out to be more difficult than thought, with the Browns facing the strongest defenses throughout the first 12 games (Steelers x2, Jets, Bills, Patriots, Broncos, 49ers, and the Rams + Jets weren't slouches either). I mean, come on.
  12. To be fair, they're asking questions the casual fan is interested in. The casual fan does not know Mike, Will, Sam, or defensive coverages and gap responsibilities.
  13. For the Browns, here is how I have the tackles rated: 1. Thomas 2a. Becton 2b. Wills 3. Wirfs I am not very low on Wirfs, I'm just very high on Becton and think he could flourish (as JT put it) under Callahan. I'm honestly okay with any of them but I prefer any of the top 3. Andrew Thomas is a no brainer for me at #10.
  14. Let's say Thomas, Wills, Wirfs, Becton, and Simmons are gone by #10. Would you be okay with trading down to pick up another 2nd and using it to acquire Trent? We'd still have our own 2nd and could draft someone like Cleveland. Imagine after the first two rounds we came away with - Trent Williams, Ezra Cleveland, and someone with our 1st round pick. Winfield or something.
  15. I'm against trading for Trent Williams as much as you are... but if we get him, my butt cheeks will clinch in optimistic joy.
  16. This is very well said and probably put more eloquently than I could put it. We'd be fools to pretend like we KNOW how every piece is gonna fall within the next two years, "thus we should go ahead and blow our money on guys like Williams and Clowney because we know exactly how everything is going to play out" If Garrett has a full year and dominates (like we expect), we'll be looking to pay him after this year. And he'll either match or surpass Aaron Donald as the highest paid defensive player.
  17. I'll trust the actual analytics guys and their evaluation on whether or not we should be blowing everything within the next 2 years. You don't build your team through risky mega contracts in free agency, you use FA to infuse a much needed part or two and build through the draft. The more your team is built through big free agency contracts, the more holes you'll be looking to fill each draft year. Everyone seems to be acting omniscient about how things will play out in the next two years and it's clouding their judgment, IMO. The point in having a decent chunk of cap space is to act as a
  18. True, but the amount it goes up is still an unknown, right? So I think it's smart to be very cautious. I wouldn't be mad if we spent big money on someone but I can see how the conservative approach is desired as well.
  19. If I'm not mistaken, we have a lot of rollover cap space because we carried it over. You don't gain rollover cap space back. So let's say for example we sign Trent to 20 million for one year and let him walk next year. We will be at 24 million, not back up to 44 million. This is why it's imperative to use that money on cornerstone pieces that we know will be here for awhile.
  20. Stefanski's offense is about creating a marriage with the pass and run. The more receivers you have on the field, the less convincing you are to a defense that you may run the ball. This is why tight ends are valuable in his offense - they are the perfect marriage between run (blocking) and pass (receiving). That's why we signed Hooper for 11 million and will utilize him with Njoku. That's why we traded for a very talented FB who grades out extremely well and will get plenty of snaps. This IS the type of offense Stefanski likes running, man. I'm not opposed to looking for a 3rd receiver b
  21. With the new CBA we can have 55 (instead of 53) players on the roster. 48 (instead of 46) players active. A good returner can get a touchdown or two during the year, and lots of big yardage returns. That could very well be the difference in a game, which could impact the playoffs. We could be 9-7 instead of 8-8. Point is, if he's good, we would be idiots to cut him just because he's "only a returner". The Hilliard/Landry experiment as returners is hopefully over with.
×
×
  • Create New...