DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Fire Joe Woods

Both Mayo and Flores teams, NEP and PIT, play a base 3-4 defense. Mayo has only 4-years of NFL coaching experience as an inside LB coach and has never coached anything but a 3-4 base in the NFL. Flores has never been an NFL DC but has 12 years of NFL coaching experience and 3 additional years as the Dolphins HC. 11 of his 12 years as a coach was with NEP who play the 3-4 base and the 1 year at PIT with the 3-4 base. As the HC of the Dolphins, Flores team ran the 3-4 base there too.

I would find it strange to be interviewing people for the DC position whose experience is only coaching the 3-4 base.

It had to be done. This is a good start, but a lot of work needs to be done for the Browns just to be division title contenders.

I would have to question the intelligence of switching to a 3-4. Not because it is an inferior defense. All defenses have strengths and weaknesses. That is why I kinda laugh at statements that guys like Warner make when saying I know how I would attack it. Of course you do. He also knows how he would attack a 3-4 defense or a standard 4-3 defense.

Instead, I am questioning the personnel that we have to play in a 3-4.

In a 3-4, you need a massive, block-eating, run-stuffing NT. We have no one who is close to that. So, there is one hole we have to fill. But, to be fair, we didn't have that one guy at DT to do the same things in the 4-2-5. It's just even more important you have that type of player in a 3-4.

Next, you need bigger DEs. Guys like Cam Heyward, Calais Campbell, JJ Watt, etc. Who are those guys on the roster? Myles? Maybe he could get it done. Thomas, Winovich, and Wright are smaller DEs. More holes to fill.

Your OLBers are guys who really get after the passer. Guys like Chandler Jones, Khalil Mack, TJ Watt, Bradley Chubb. Think of guys like Andre Ware, Suggs from Baltimore, Freeny w/the Colts, Harrison w/the Steelers, etc. Even more holes to fill.

This is one of the primary reasons I despise firing coaches. It buys the organization time for the new guys to get "their guys."

I almost forgot. What kind of ILBers do you think are the best fits for a 3-4? Big, strong guys who can fill gaps and be a force in the run game. Both the Mike and Jack are integral in stopping the run and also getting a deep enough drop on passing plays because the OLBs are usually rushing. Think Ray Lewis, Patrick Willis, Bart Scott, Jerod Mayo---the guy who we are considering to fill the DC position. Do we have those guys? Maybe TakiTaki and Ragland? Are they really starters? Not sure about that. Also, what does that mean for guys like JOK? What about all the DBs we have accumulated to fit our 4-2-5?

I agree. A change is defensive basic formation will require a lot of player turnover. Tough enough under normal circumstances, a real bear with no 1st round pick for 2 years. I think we also gave away a 3rd this year in the Watson deal. I don't think we have the draft capital or cap room to accommodate a scheme change.

I could be wrong, but I think it would be a big mistake.

I agree w/the draft thing, but I think the Cap thing is overblown. We will be okay there.

I just don't like creating holes when you already have holes to fill. Sashi used to drive me nuts w/that.

I am just wondering what the thought process of Depo and Berry are? I'd seriously like an answer to that. They can't possibly think that changing the scheme will solve the defensive issues, can they?

That's your chosen HC and FO - remember - stability. Besides, it looks like Berry is looking for a mid-season replacement if needed so a scheme change is purely secondary in the thought process. This sure looks like Berry is putting in safeguards because he's not taking an arrow for Stefanski. I hope I'm wrong, but it sure looks very suspicious. Right now, it looks like to be able to upgrade the defense it'll take 6 of the front seven being replaced to upgrade the unit - not counting the DB's. If that cannot be accomplished, then the defense will be weaker than it is this year. Maybe Berry is thinking filling the 3-4 base slots will be easier.

I would prefer to talk to an adult.

Why the hate - I'm just talking football. The exact same questions I have are the same questions many others have here. If you have something to contribute - GREAT. If you insist on spewing hate, please grow up.

What in the world are you talking about??

For the record, Berry and Stefanski were not my "chosen" GM and HC. I thought firing Dorsey was ignorant. I wanted either McDaniels or Dan Campbell as HC.

I seriously would like to hear from guys who like to talk real football in regards to switching schemes when it comes to our current roster. I won't name you all, but guys like Milk, Fate, Memphis, bonefish, etc., rather than some agenda BS. Concerned or not?

So much hate in your posts. I have my opinion on why the Browns could be interviewing people for the DC that have ran nothing but a 3-4 base in their careers. There must be a reason that would include retooling the entire defense. One other football note, the NT position would require at least 2 players of equal size and ability since players can't play every down. When there's talk of such a scheme change the backups have to be included within the positions of need. So actually, instead of 6 of 7 needing replaced in the front 7 it would be closer to 10-11 players needed to switch from the 4-2-5 to the 3-4 base.

I'm not the X's and O's type you tend to give me credit for, but thanks. Since I'm not, I'll look at some of the ancillary arguments. You made a great case for the amount of change that would require, FORT nailed another nail on the head... "I don't think we have the draft capital or cap room to accommodate a scheme change."

I would be more in favor if we were in a different act of 'the open window'. The window is no longer being raised, it's being closed. Still wide enough to keep it propped at almost any cost... but probably not that one... not without some very tough decisions.

Looking at the DL situation, it's easy to respond to your previous comments with "so what, it's in shambles anyway". Your bright spot is "maybe Myles could adapt"; but yes, holes everywhere. But, there is a lack of talent across the board for either scheme. When you get into the LB argument, it starts to appear that we have a bunch of pieces that don't fit the puzzle.

So, it seems, the only way to make this commitment may be more dependent on what has gone on behind closed doors... hear me out.


If Myles is unhappy and wants to move on, trading him would be about the only thing to facilitate a scheme change. It would (could) solve most of our cap problems for the next two years, and would recoup much needed draft capital... including a first round pick. This sounds crazy, and I'm not advocating it. It just seems like the only feasible plan for such a change. But that change would actually be predicated on Garrett being unhappy, and entertaining all options because of it.

And again, I'm mostly just spit-balling based on a possible situation that may be taking place in Berea. We can poo-poo it and act like there is no 'writing on the wall', but tell me... how surprised would you really be if you started to hear rumors that Garrett wanted to move on? I've heard enough of them lately, and they're compounded by the mindless notion that Myles isn't worth his weight, doesn't do his part, is only interested in stats, and all the other b.s. that would make a player less likely to have any loyalty left for an angry fanbase.

Sorry for doing nothing to add intelligent discussion to your actual question. But if things don't turn around next year, ^ this IS the elephant in the room.

Personally, I do not think the 4-3, 3-4 base defense matters much anymore as it might have in the past. As a whole, NFL defenses were in their base personnel package less than 25% of their total snaps on the season. So for me, I really don't care if the new guy runs a 3-4, 4-3, 4-2-5.

Here is a good read on the topic.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/s...personnel-cowboys-and-bills-abandon-base

Thanks for answering. I didn't intend to imply anything about one's football intelligence. I meant to imply those who would prefer to talk about football and what the FO/HC are thinking rather than saying things like these are your guys and other crap like that.



I probably misspoke there. The Browns would probably line him up as "Edge" in the OLBer position and have him rush the passer. He has the power to play DE in the 3-4, but that would be a waste of his talents. Rushing the passer takes priority. Regardless, we would need two new DE starters and backups, as well.

Regarding your trading Myles talk:

I've been thinking of suggesting that it might be worth considering trading Myles ever since he started running his mouth. That is not good leadership. Point thumbs; not fingers. I haven't brought it up because of all the agenda crap on there. No one wanted to draft Myles more than me when he came out of A&M. Go back and check. Guys were saying he was lazy and unmotivated. Not me. I championed him from the get-go. He's a great player. I don't view him as an effective leader, though. We could get a King's ransom for him. On the other hand, we will never find anyone close to being as good as he is.

Maybe we can revisit that conversation in another thread in the future. Best to keep this one about DCs and schemes.

Thanks Milk. That's the kind of stuff I was looking for. That Outsiders article was awesome. What's crazy is that I knew that [not the exact percentages, but base has been trending down for years] and it never crossed my mind when I asked my questions.

I still wonder about personnel a bit, but that was excellent educational information. Thanks again.

What about Schwartz?

Woods is fired

Now there is a DC Candidate thread

Can we discuss potentials for the opening there ?

I really don't want to come here to talk about potential DC Candidates

Okay ! My choice, I won't come here any more !

Bye Joe !

Trading MG would be stupid period

Switching to a 4-3 will mean three years of retooling with NO first-rounders. No thank you in the loudest voice I can muster.

Do you mean a 3-4?

j/c:

So, we have 4 candidates thus far for our next DC. Mayo, Flores, Schwartz, and Desai. All four were working this past year in the NFL. Would we had been able to hire any of those guys had we fired Woods during the season, like some folks wanted?

That's what the term interim is for. Nobody usually hires a permanent replacement mid season. So yes, the Browns would still have the same choices as they do now.

YES, doh.

Hmmm.........I thought I posted this opinion yesterday? Guess not.

I don't think any of those 4 coaches would have left their teams during the season to become a DC for the Browns. Are there examples of guys abandoning their teams while the season is going on to accept a coordinator role w/another team?

That's why the Browns would have named an interim DC until seasons end. At this point in time they would have been looking at exactly the same choices they are now. I think we would both agree that in the grand scheme of things firing him mid season wouldn't have accomplished much on the field of play. What it would have done was to immediately set the tone that they would not accept his level of performance to the rest of the coaching staff as well as the players. Instead the Browns waited until the season was over to send that message.

The Freddie/Greg Williams situation actually played out here. I thought that would have helped you understand how this interim coach thing works.

That would have been dumb. Who on the staff would be an upgrade over Woods? Fire a guy just to fire him? Pfftttt

Once again you must have forgotten the Freddie/Gregg Williams situation. I don't think anyone believed that Williams would be an upgrade either. Yeah, sending your players and coaching staff the message that the Browns were not going to accept a sub par performance would have been a dumb idea. Let me ask you, the Browns finished the season 7-10. Exactly what harm would it have done to have replaced Woods and send that message?

I don't really care what they did in that situation. As I said, as far as on field performance I don't think it would have made a damned bit of difference. The Browns didn't make the playoffs so it really doesn't matter in that regard. But your claim was that the Browns wouldn't have a shot at hiring any of the candidates they are interviewing now when we both know an interim DC would have been named and they would be looking at the exact same candidates now.

I am assuming that since I did not receive an answer, that we would not have been able to hire any of our 4 candidates to be our DC this past off-season. Thus, I think that not firing Woods during the season and replacing him a nobody on the staff or hiring a guy who was available, such as Zimmer, Fangio, etc would have been a bad move especially since the defense did improve quite a bit after some folks wanted Woods fired. I realize that some folks don't like to give the Browns any credit, but I believe they made the right move by retaining Woods during the season and firing him immediately after the season.

The Kitchens/Williams Situation was replacing the HC (Hue), which as usual (aside from Indy this year) is interim from within.

I don't recall anyone bringing in an outsider mid-season to replace a coordinator.

Yet he was still fired at seasons end. So it would appear that he didn't improve the defense enough to keep his job. And since a new DC won't be running the exact same version of D what difference does that make anyway? And yes the Browns would have the same candidate list now to choose from as they would if they had fired Woods mid season.

Like I said, they could have sent the message then or now. It really didn't make any difference. Did you think firing Freddie mid season was a good idea when it happened? Because that seemed to work out pretty well. There seems to be a lot of prognostication about what the best move would have been concerning the results on the field would have been over the remainder of the season. But there's no way of knowing any of that.

What we do know is that they sent a message that his job performance wasn't cutting it. That message may have helped more if they had made that statement when they first arrived at that decision. Maybe showing everyone that if they don't do their job it will not be tolerated would have been a good thing. Of course I understand how some may think tolerating incompetence for a longer period of time was the wise choice. Okay, no I really don't understand it.

Nobody even mentioned bringing in someone from the outside mid season. All that was stated is that the Browns would have the same choices now that they would have had if they fired Woods mid season and named someone the interim DC during the season.

I was referring the Vers comment

Sorry about that. Your response was directed to me.

He likes to change things around so he can argue.

I will stand by my opinion that I think the Browns made the correct call in waiting to fire Woods until after the season. That doesn't mean I am correct, but I think it was the most logical move for the Browns to make.

I agree. The Browns missed a perfect opportunity to send the message to the team that what was going on defensively was unacceptable and that performance that doesn't meet expectations would be dealt with accordingly. Even though the whole world had come to the conclusion that Woods most likely would be replaced, the lack of action showed weak leadership and a half ass commitment to the excellence of the defense. The worst part was the Browns missed a golden opportunity to see which coaches and players would step up to show leadership on a defense in turmoil. That boat has sailed now without seeing demonstrated leadership skills from the HC, FO, Assistant coaches or players.

The other part that occurs every year is the constant excuse that the Browns don't have the proper personnel. A lot of the issues the Browns have this off season is the same as they had last off season - DT, WR, LB - same problems - same result that the FO didn't address. Or did they?

Vince Lombardi said:
“The measure of who we are is what we do with what we have.”

No team has all pros at every position. Strong leadership that develops trust is the cornerstone of a culture of winning. Considering both topics, lack of leadership continues to raise its ugly head. The Browns can add players and change asst. coaches, but to achieve greatness and a winning culture they still need to find a real leader.

You must have missed that his comment was for you, not me. i guess he just likes to argue.

j/c:

Reading is hard for some.

Hell, you can't get past what the words decision or ruling mean. You know the old saying about glass houses.

No, because we didn't fire Freddie mid season.