DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Jim Schwartz and the Defense

I knew you would try to avoid admitting the similarities between Moore And OBJ. It's very convenient. I'm not being the board police. But once again that's a convenient way to try and dismiss someone who brought up a valid point.

Once again, how does the fact the coach was later fired excuse Moore's behavior? You do realize that you're talking about Mike LaFleur who is the current OC of the Rams, right? I think you have an issue with selective reading in this case. Steve made it plain he thought the signing of Moore was a good thing.

Moore wasn't drafted until 2021 and been with one team prior, the Jets. There are only two years of "history" to base his past behavior on. So yes, he has a history of it.

Just a slight bit of objectivity would be helpful.

What are the Browns going to say? "We just spent a second round draft pick to trade for a player we have character concerns about"? Yeah, I didn't think so. Buying into PR statements isn't something that should be advised.

Complaining doesn't include telling your OC, to go F himself. You do realize that he was benched for disciplinary reasons immediately after the incident occurred, right?

You're the one who was trying to undercut LaFleur by pointing out he had been fired, not me. It appears as though the Rams do not share your view of him. That was a convenient thing to try and make a point of as well. Especially as I've pointed out that he holds the exact same position on a different NFL team.

Here's an article for you. As I said, I think it was a good move by Berry - low cost, low loss if it doesn't work. Take the article anyway you want - just another report on Moore.

https://www.overtimeheroics.net/2022/10/20/time-for-jets-wide-receiver-elijah-moore-to-grow-up/

All I can see is video after video of Tom Brady yelling at any and everybody. If we're winning, no one will care.

Dude, he was he was benched for disciplinary reasons immediately after the incident occurred. If you choose to stick your fingers in your ears and go "la, la, la" like it never happened, that's on you. Your idea of a pointed discussion is making excuses for terrible behavior when it happens if and when you finally decide to admit that it did.

He didn't "cuss at football practice". He cussed out his coach. I understand how not wishing to acknowledge the difference makes it sound better though.

Your "big brother" comment is hilarious. I actually disagreed with him about the LB'er situation with the Browns. Sometimes I agree with you and sometimes I agree with him. But your response is a reflection of our society today. It's as if when you don't agree with someone 100% of the time, you must be against them all the time. No room for shades of gray anymore.

No matter your displeasure or utopian vision of Moore, there is a reason to be concerned moving forward based on past behavior. And it was the very recent past. That doesn't mean something bad will happen. That doesn't mean there is a cause or reason to predict it will happen. What it does mean is based on recent behavior it's something to be concerned about.

That's what a realistic gray take on things look like instead of trying to pretend it's a black or white issue.

Here's a scouting report on Moore - again, take it for what it's worth - just another opinion.

https://assets-global.website-files...df859ad7b49d_CFM21_WR-s_Moore_Elijah.pdf

Elijah Moore isn't Tom Brady. But I certainly agree with you that if the Browns are winning, virtually nobody will care about anything else. And I mean nothing else. As sad as that is.

Mac....nobody has said that linebackers don't matter.

There has been more drama on this site about Moore than Moore has created with his off field actions.

His character will become apparent soon enough. Let his actions with the Browns speak for him as a person.

Agreed. Good post. The “you weren’t there so you don’t know Jack” is a weak argument

Yep.

Thanks! The Jets game kinda broke me, and work got SUPER hectic. Now that that's mostly behind me, I'm allowing myself to hop back on the board.

I know what I said. I believe that.

I never said they aren't important. They just aren't as important as the other units.

That's exactly right. The LB's are an important piece of a D but in today's NFL not as important as a good secondary and a D-line especially edge rushers. Years back when teams played a 3-4 and offense's ran first they were probably the most important unit on D. Remember when teams came into every game and tried to ESTABLISH the run? Certainly not anymore.

Missed you, OoberN. Welcome home! Great seeing you again.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...shers-beat-out-immensely-talented-49ers/

Very interesting article about defensive position groups. Nice that the Browns are finally recognized for their edge rushers. Also, very interesting that 2 of the top ten are off the ball linebacker groups or 20% of the ranked groups. As stated about the 49ers LB group: "The duo is one of the best in the league and the backbone of a dominant 49ers defense." Maybe the LB group is not as important as the other groups in the Browns clubhouse but at least 2 winning teams think very differently.

5. Browns edge rushers
For years, the Browns pass rush began and ended with Myles Garrett -- one of the best edge rushers in the NFL. Garrett finally has a complimentary edge rusher that can help him out in Za'Darius Smith, a huge upgrade over what Jadeveon Clowney brought Cleveland last year.

Of course the pair haven't played a snap together, but their resumes speak for themselves. Garrett recorded 16 sacks last season, trailing only Nick Bosa for most in the NFL. His 73 pressures were sixth in the league and his 26 quarterback hits were tied for eighth, finishing with a 16.1% pressure rate as he earned second-team All-Pro honors. The definition of consistency for a pass rusher, Garrett has the second-most sacks (32) and tackles for loss (35) over the last two seasons, also compiling the fourth-most pressures (152).

Smith was coming off a back injury that limited him to just two games the season prior, recording his third double-digit sack season in four years. He finished with 10 sacks on the year and earned a Pro Bowl appearance.


Smith notched 78 pressures and 24 quarterback hits in 2022, finishing with a pressure rate of 16.7%. He finished fourth in the league in pressures. Of pass rushers with more than 500 defensive snaps, Smith was behind only Nick Bosa, Micah Parsons, and Trey Hendrickson in pressure rate.

Two of the top edge rushers in the NFL are on the same defensive line. The Browns pass rush should feast in 2023, even if the depth behind Garrett and Smith is still in question.

49'ers - Yes.

Ravens - not so much. R. Smith very good. Patrick Queen, please.

So what has been done to address the LB'er position during this off season under Schwartz? Is it your contention that Schwartz hasn't been current in keeping up with the changes to the NFL since he played in college? How you have so many more passing teams with multiple WR sets now than you did then? That you need to have LB'ers who can cover in the backfield? Or are you suggesting that Schwartz was insistent on upgrading the LB'er position during the off season and the Browns FO ignored him?

I can't imagine Schwartz being persuaded in coming to Cleveland without having some say in the overhaul of the defense. It seems as though you can. And while you posted how great his defense was in 2021 what you did not address was the LB position on that defense. From a consistency standpoint his top 2 LB'ers were ranked 23rd and 26th. There was no other LB'er on that roster who ranked in the top 50. While it's certainly better than what the Browns have it is a clear indication he didn't accomplish that championship defense by having the top LB'ers in the NFL by any means.

https://fftoday.com/tools/crank.php...Starters=1&View=Games&LeagueID=1

pit...I'm not relying on some FANTASY STATS but I am referring to Schwartz's ability to improve and build the Browns defense capable of winning a real Super Bowl.

I'm not sure what that has to do with the LB'er position.

It does show that Schwartz can have a very effective defense without top tier LB’s

ok

How much credit needs to go to the eagle offense. in 20Ifive, twenty fifteen, the Eagles had Chip Kelly OC and sam Bradford at @B.
Bradford had a weak TD to int ratio.
30th in yards and 28th in points bc the twenty fifteen eagle offense couldn't keep itself on the field,
which artificially would make the eagle D look worse, in twenty fifteen,
Which
would, in MY book, take away from any D improvement made by the new coordinator Schwartx in 20I6, because,
if the Offense got better Under Pederson and Wentx?
then the D would get better without improving, like drafting in Nascar, the car goes faster while using less power.

Much like the Browns, until they figure out how to play offense on game days
it won't matter HOW great they build the defense.

The Offense has to be able to keep itself on the field, or get scores when leaving the field.

and the Defense,

it needs to score points

I am really confused about how this LB conversation is still going on.

Remember back to last year's games. What sticks out about our defense?

1. Secondary breakdowns (Jets game)
2. Defensive line getting owned on running plays (see Atlanta game)
3. Questionable coaching

I'm not saying our LB group is a room of world-beaters, but they were also so far down the list of things to worry about. The only thing I might be worried about is #1 on that list since our personnel changes have been minimal (I know that we signed safeties and got rid of JJ3, but those busted coverages were usually a tandem effort between a CB and a safety, no?)... however, I think a lot of that leftover worry is mitigated by addressing #3.

I think that, to a large degree, this defense is so strong ON PAPER that we are all expecting them (and have been expecting) to be playing unbelievable ball. I have to keep reminding myself that this group hasn't done much more than disappoint so far. They gotta go out there and do it.

Still, I'm optimistic as I think we've taken steps to address each of our main weaknesses.

And there you have it. That's one of the big reasons he is no longer here. Terrible communication on the defense. Even with all of the talent in the secondary we saw some of the same thing. I still have no idea what that has to do with your seeming need to harp about the LB'ers.

There is no need, but it is what it is.

Rome was not built in a day, and linebacker was not as important as the DL for the Schwartz defense.

It is not that hard to figure out.

We could have Lavonte David and Fred Warner playing, and we would build around that. But the Browns had more urgent needs.

The defense should be improved. We will see how the Browns do against the run and if they can get off the field on 3rd downs. Can not allow teams to drive down the field resulting in a TD or FG. Schwartz's schemes should let the playmakers on D shine. Let's see if the Browns defense can get a stop with the game on the line.

Something that this discussion keeps circling but hasn't pinpointed is that Schwartz's scheme is intended to be simpler and more aggressive. From media reports that I've seen most of the blown coverage issues came from the multitude of variables in Woods' zone coverages. Guys were thinking too much and at times being confused about their assignments. Schwartz is expected to play much more man coverage. So DBs can play more instinctually.

Similarly, the DLs first priority will be one-gap penetration. Although I think there will be a heavy use of stunts to get favorable DL matchups so the front 7 can be disruptive. LBs will obviously have their run fits to support the DL.

So some of the same players who had problems with Woods' zone-heavy scheme will have different and hopefully more opportunities to make plays in the new scheme.