DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Thunder and Lightning, the Chubb/Hunt pairing.

As a possible respite from the usual discussions this time of year, I want to explore the potential to be seen from the pairing of Chubb and Hunt. Let's assume they get league average blocking (y'know) and a good pass/rush balance.

How good do you think they could become?
How much influence will Stump have in that process?
Will the Stefanski scheme utilize them effectively?

If they do well, what are the chances they could stay together a few years? Become legendary? Thunder and Lightning!

I think Chubb is going to be a legend all on his own

Pretty good. I think Hunt is overrated a bit on here but he is still very good. Chubb is elite.



I think it's impossible to know.



Nick Chubb is a perfect match for Stefanksi's scheme. Hunt is a bigger question mark. I doubt we see them on field together as much as we did last year.



Zero. This probably be Hunt's last year with the team.

"Zero. This probably be Hunt's last year with the team."

It might be. But if he plays this year, IMO, his value will go up. his last full season he had 1600 yds. I might be wrong, but when he was suspended he had 1100 yds. The dude is as good as most say, to think otherwise is to not look at his history.

Hunt has proven himself to be elite as well.... he just hasn't lived up to that level here with only Freddie calling plays. It's well-known what he did in KC and what he could return to.



The rest is unknowable and can't even really guess at until we see how they are used and how much they are used together at the same time - or, will we make the mistake of only using Hunt as a 3rd down back?


I hate to say it, but I wouldn't be surprised if Hunt is traded. I think the tender we give him will reflect a willingness to trade instead of a "don't even talk to him unless you're going to throw a 1st rounder down". I think we'll promote some lesser RB and go for a FB.
I wish we'd use Hunt & Chubb as the FB for each other, instead.

That's what I'm talking about. That would be a nightmare for other teams. Either is capable of busting a long one. Use a fullback, but when they are both in one or the other becomes the fullback. Having one or both of these guys fresh in the fourth quarter would be great. The stress from the two of them should wear on defenses. Using a fullback would add to the threat, especially if they sign one who can run routes and has good hands. But he needs to be a lead blocker more than anything. A good fullback can blow open holes.

Add in a large former TE that can switch to being a true FB and you can either have him in the backfield with the two of them or motion him out wide... or start him out side and motion him in to block, and even do it as a diversion on one side while Chubb lead blocks for Hunt out the other side, maybe even with a pulling guard.... That TE blocks any chase downs from the backside.

Out of that same look, and even that same motion, you could go play-action and have that FB go out on a slant for a pass.

I don’t want either of them being the lead blocker if the assignment is to either take on LBer’s or DT’s to create a hole .. no thanks ...

I’d much rather go split back ...

Nice thread topic.

I think the FO will probably get rid of Hunt at some point. Maybe before the season? Maybe during the season? Maybe after the season? I doubt they keep him longer. But, I have no factual evidence. Just a hunch on how they operate.

Personally, I would like to see them stay together for multiple years. Both guys are excellent backs. Chubb is a better runner. Hunt is a better receiver and much better blocker. He certainly is a more willing blocker. He opened holes for Chubb last year. I didn't see Chubb doing much blocking for Hunt. I am not saying that Chubb is selfish. He is my favorite player on the team. It's just an observation.

I know that no one will want to believe this because guys are either all good or trash, but I think Freddie actually did a very nice job of using both Chubb and Hunt last year. I think that the new coach should follow Freddie's lead on that one. Freddie was not a good HC, but he did a good job of handling those two guys.

Interesting take on the "willingness to block" observation. Chubb is not selfish as you said, he just ain't a blocker. Hunt showed he can and is willing to block.

Reminds me a little of Byner and Mack. Mack was not a selfish player by a long shot. And he was the bigger back. But he did not block. Byner was a vicious blocker and great pass catcher. Both really good runners. Need some give and take to share the load. I hope Chubb and Hunt are provided the same opportunity that Marty provided Byner and Mack. Would be fun to watch develop.

Very good post!

Run the Wishbone and call it a day.

I agree, but to play devils advocate - this FO loves numbers and value right? Isnt Hunt of great value with the return he could provide on the field vs. the investment financially into him?

I would say they try to move him if they can, simply because of the PR stuff - but I wouldn't be surprised if they kept him around either.

Does seem like we have another Mack and Byner only better...

You ask good questions,, can't wait to see the answers play out...

In all honestly...with Hunt's pass catching and blocking...he is probably a better fit for Stefanski's offense than Chubb. JMO. That doesn't mean I want to trade Chubb or even elevate Hunt above him...I expect to see a lot of 21 and 12 personnel this year with a smattering of 11. And I think Chubb and Hunt will be pretty interchangeable in those formations with few exceptions. I think that is a nightmare for defenses if we get adequate play calling this year. Add in the threat of Odell and Jarvis...and we are talking about the same hype as last year.

So as defense I attack about the only thing I can attack...the QB or QB by way of the OL. Bakers inexperience and the OLine issues were the obvious target for defenses...Add in the lack of practice time with his receivers and poor play calling and we get last years vastly unreached potential but statistically decent offense. Sure Bakers INT's are big factor, but I sort of tie that in with the lack of practice time and the being the focal point of defenses. I mean we had 2 1000 yd receivers and just short of a 1500 yd back.

If we can get Baker comfortable and allow him to gain timing with his receivers during the weeks...We should see a vast improvement. Having quite a bit of play action will help that as well.

And back to the topic of Thunder and Lightning...I think we will be better off with both...and will be looking for a lopsided offer in our favor before even considering trading Hunt. (who I think is the player easier to move or get offers for as Chubb appears planted/intrenched.)

It will be interesting to see what they tender him at. If we lose him...it will probably not be for a lack of trying to keep him. JMO

Good point ... I think Hunt is more like Cook than Chubb is.

When you have that due and Stefanski’s zone blocking O and PA stuff ... I think it’ll be awesome

Chubb & Hunt essentially nearly identical passing game stats in 2019. Same average. Hunt had exactly one reception more than Chubb.

People need to let go of the notion that Chubb isn't a back that can catch it out of the backfield. He's more than proven that he is.

His pre-draft "reputation" for not being that is exactly what many said it was.... his college offense just didn't do it. HE does it just fine and has shown as much in back-to-back seasons.

J/c:

I think Chubb, Cook, and Hunt are all fairly different.

I do think a Chubb-Hunt option package out of 21 personnel could be interesting. Disguise whether Hunt is a lead blocker or pitch man to the outside. Also could do dive/sweep options. Maybe even throw in a half back pass off a pitch to Hunt that Chubb comes across and runs a wheel route inside of... or maybe add Jarvis/OBJ to the action on a fly motion as they're probably better throwing options (and could keep a pitch option in play.) There is undoubtedly some risk in adding pitches, but it'd stress the heck out of defenses. Probably something you'd show in the preseason to make teams worry about, but would rarely actually pitch it during the regular season, more just to make defenders hesitate for just that extra little bit of time.

And Hunt played in half of the games.

but was used totally differently. We simply chose to not use Chubb that way. It's not that HE can't, it's that WE didn't.

Hunt was a 3rd down MACHINE catching balls.

Especially this one on 3rd and 3...

MOSSED!

j/c,

If we tender Hunt with any tender less than a 1st round tender, then he is as good as gone.

In which case, we will have tipped our hand as to our future plans concerning Hunt, because we have the cap space to pay him a first round tender.

I never said Chubb couldn't do these things...As far as catching though...Hunt is a more natural pass catcher...It isn't a dig at Chubb...(heck that Cincy catch was unreal). I mean Hakeem Olajuwon was a better block artist than Michael Jordan....that doesn't mean Jordan couldn't block...or even that he wasn't good at it...

As a runner...Hunt is pretty darn good...but Chubb is better. As a pass catcher...Chubb is pretty good too...But Hunt is better...

I am not so sure I see them as Thunder and Lightning...Lightning is usually a scat back that is just speed galore...and I don't see that as Hunt. It is more like Sledge Hammer and Baseball bat...Both will deform the heck out of you but in different ways...LOL

good post

Understood completely. I just wanted to address the seemingly pervasive thought that Chubb isn't or can't be a guy that catches out of the backfield.

For clarification purposes. I was one of the guys who said that Hunt was a better receiver. I was NOT knocking Chubb's ability to catch the ball. I was just pointing out that running routes and catching the ball are great strengths of Hunt's. I meant no disrespect towards Chubb.

We all remember Mack and Byner. Remember Csonka and Kiick?

and Mercury Morris

Czonka, Kick, and Mercury Morris Three headed monster!

My earliest Browns memory is the 72 playoff loss to the Dolphins. Mike Phipps did NOT have a good game. My old man grumbling and cursing to bed. here i am doing the same thing many decades later.

Morris was a later addition. First it was just the 2, and they were...hard to defend.

Csonka and Kick were rookies in 1968; Morris's rookie year was 1969. All 3 were on the team for the Dolphin's Dynasty years. In 1972, Morris and Csonka became the league's first tandem 1000 yard rushers with Morris gaining exactly 1000 yards and Csonka 1117 yards, while Kick was the only player to rank in the top 15 in both receptions and rushing yardage in both 1970 and 1971. He led the Dolphins in receiving in 1970 and was second in 1968 and 1971.

J/c

I’ve never seen a set of RBs as good as we had last year (and that was only for half the season). I’d imagine Stefanski is drooling with the prospects of having both at his disposal

I think it would be a great duo...but don't think Hunt will be on the team next season...his career is going up in smoke likes Josh's....

You say that, but he has not got in any trouble from the league after this last thing. The new CBA is going to remove penalties for weed, and I think he will have no issues with the league.

If it was me, I put a first round tender on him. My fear is if he is let go, he will be pursued by teams like Pittsburgh and Baltimore. There is no way I want him on any team in the division.

I know I'm a dreamer, but I have this vision of Chubb and Hunt being together for more than just a year or 2.

Chubb is a humble man. He has an immense talent. People respect him. Hunt respects him. Hunt seems grateful for the chance at redemption offered by his hometown team. It's possible, unlikely but possible, that the combination of gratitude and respect might allow Hunt to accept a hometown discount to keep the pair together.

I guy can dream, can't he? (I know, to the club he's an asset.)

Good thing he didn't have a bottle or vodka open or anything in a car....

A bottle of vodka that had been opened, was capped at the time, in a back pack, in the back seat. Try again.