DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns 2025 Schedule

The first leaks are coming out prior to the May 14th official announcement of the NFL schedule. The first leaks have been about the international schedule of 6 games and the Browns are going to London to play the Vikings. Per typical NFL fashion, the Browns are giving up one of their scheduled 9 home games to travel to London. Considering the Brown 4-year record on the road, sacrificing a home game is a slap in the face by the NFL.

WORST NFL TRAVEL TEAMS THE LAST 4-YEARS
1. Panthers______7-27
2. Bears________ 7-27
3. Giants________9-25
4. Browns_______9-25
5. Jets_________10-24
6. Jaguars______10-24

The Browns are also the only AFC North team to be playing an international game in 2025.

As a FYI, the Vikings are 19-15 on the road the last 4-years and firmly entrenched in the top-10 road teams in the NFL the last 4-years.

If I were expecting us to be good this year, I'd probably be getting more riled up about this.

JMHO, Vikings are breaking in a new QB too, last year means zip.....on any given Sunday.....Go Browns!!!!

Considering we were 2-6 at home last year, I'm not sure playing in Cleveland was particularly advantageous, either.

Can't argue with that statement. However, over the last 4 seasons the Browns are 20-14 .588 at home compared to 9-25 .265 on the road. Losing a home game certainly appears to be a huge difference in the chance to win than on the road. I'll stick by my point, "Considering the Brown 4-year record on the road, sacrificing a home game is a slap in the face by the NFL."

Same number of traditional home and away games and one "neutral" site game overseas. Oh the horror. How could they?

Seems like making a big deal out of standard NFL practice to me.

There's nothing wrong with allowing UK Browns fans to see the team in person, too. The NFL is a business. Going global brings in more revenue streams.

There's nothing anti-Browns about it.

Two things…

They doubled the win total at home from on the road.. that’s a joke before anyone blasts me.

In all seriousness though, two negatives when it comes to young QBs playing 1) having to play on the road in a hostile environment. 2)Having to play at home when you aren’t the unanimous starter in the eyes of the fanbase. It can become more hostile than a road game.

The games across the pond are about as close to a neutral playing field as you can get. I wish we could play multiple games over there this year.

Slow news day,Steve?

Feeling bored?

You don’t have the complete schedule but you’re starting a thread about the schedule?

OUCH OUCH OUCH

I'm expecting 2 primetime games .. probably later in the season when Sanders is expected to start

I'll guess:

TNF at Pittsburgh
MNF vs Green Bay

Honestly, I've already resigned myself to us playing for draft position.

I certainly don't see the whole, "The NFL is out to get the Browns!" picture you're portraying here.

When did that happen?

It's quite simple. The Browns have one of the worst road records in the league over the last 4-years. Giving up a home game in Cleveland while making it a road game significantly hurts the Browns.

To double down on the scheduling, the Vikings have 2 games international in consecutive weeks. A flight from Cleveland to London has a flight duration of 9 Hr and 30 M+. Add in the 5-hour time change and you get a significant disadvantage vs a team already there and adjusted to the time.

There have always been complaints about the effects on the body flying East to West even though with the time change by clock it is only about 2 1/2 hours. The effects on the body will be multiplied 7+ times going to London because in time adjustment you're looking at 14 hrs 30m+ on the clock.

Having traveled for work most of my career, I can say flying West has less effect on the body than flying back East. That same clock difference of 2 1/2 hours going West becomes a clock effect of 8 hours coming back East. Going to London from Cleveland will double that clock time of 14 hrs 30+ and its effect.

Dude... we went 3-14 last year, and our home record was 2-6. Travel effects are the least of our worries.

It's the hyperbole that's over the top.....


And as for "international travel"? To get to Europe the closest route is over the Atlantic ocean. The further east you are in The United states the closer Europe is.

I think your manufacturing a story that doesn't exist.

Dude, when you're coming off a 3-14 season and have shown that you win more than twice as many games at home than you do on the road over a 4-year period, it's a worry losing a home game. The Browns may have larger worries but having any kind of plus heading into the season (like an extra home game) originally planned is a value. However, then losing it is just another worry on a season with huge question marks already.

Worry for the fan base maybe. But not a "slap in the face" by the NFL. There will be seven international games this coming season.

A total of seven teams will be playing a home game in these international games.

In London it will be the Browns, Jets, and Jaguars.

In Berlin it will be the Colts.

In Madrid it will be the Dolphins.

In Dublin it will be the Steelers.

And in São Paulo, Brazil it will be Chargers.

Good football teams win games. We are not a good football team right now.

Focusing on a slightly lower probability of winning 1 game when you finished last in the division (and it's not close) seems really silly to me.

Put another way... if what you're saying is true, we'd need at least 6 more home games for this to make any difference at all.

I just want to point out the historical irony of the Vikings playing multiple games and always being the "Visitors"... in the British Isles.

I suspect they will sack London.

I noticed this also. Two international games back-to-back and you don't lose any home games? Not having to go to Pittsburgh or Cleveland with their loud supportive fan bases with basically a rookie QB is a huge advantage.

I'm glad to get the overseas game now. Assuming this team improves before the new stadium is ready, it's better to get these games in now rather than later.

You made the slap in the face proclamation before the Vikings already being over there was known.

If that had been your complaint earlier, fine. I do think the Vikings having extra time to acclimate is a competitive advantage.

I don't think international games can really be lumped in with regular away games, though. They're a different animal. It's not the opponent's field.

Would us having an "extra" home game have been "fair?" I mean we're so much better there according to you.

It seemed an over the top response to something that seemed fairly reasonable. The league's aim is parity and profits, not giving the Browns advantages. Not slapping them in the face, either.

It's business, not "personal."

Schedule comes out tonight. I bet we open at home against a division team. Just a guess

Steelers at Browns Week 1 from reports

Ugh.

@ Jets week 1 is what I saw.

I'd prefer us start out with easier opponents. On the off-chance we do get our feet under us (especially the offense) before the season is lost, having those divisional games later could help us.

I'm seeing Bengals in Cleveland, but we'll see for sure at 8.

Wouldn't hate that one. Notorious slow starters and a defense that's not great and could be dealing with a holdout from their best defensive player.

The Browns are 5-1 against the Steelers at home over the past 5 years, 0-5 against them on the road... so, as long as it's a home game, I feel pretty good. At this point, they might have a rookie in the lineup at QB as well. No news on the Rodgers front. I wouldn't mind seeing Rodgers in there though, Myles, Maliek and Mason can pin their ears back. Will Howard probably can move better than Rodgers these days.

You're completely missing the point/humor..... Vikings. Visitors. Viking Invaders. In London and Ireland.

The NFL made a funny joke by not having the Vikings be a Home team in either game.

I understand the thinking, but in the end all opponents are hard.

All I care about is our guys come out game 1 and are ready to play. In the past we have run camp cupcake and it takes 3 games to be in game shape.

You can't run a camp trying to prevent injury. I am not saying be stupid but come the opener our guys need to be blowing snot.

Browns announce the 2025 schedule
https://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/browns-announce-the-2025-schedule

Week Date Opponent Time TV Tickets Packages
1 Sept. 7 Cincinnati Bengals 1 p.m. FOX Buy Tickets Buy Packages
2 Sept. 14 at Baltimore Ravens 1 p.m. CBS
3 Sept. 21 Green Bay Packers 1 p.m. FOX Buy Tickets Buy Packages
4 Sept. 28 at Detroit Lions 1 p.m. FOX
5 Oct. 5 Minnesota Vikings (London) 9:30 a.m. NFL Network
6 Oct. 12 a Pittsburgh Steelers 1 p.m. CBS
7 Oct. 19 Miami Dolphins 1 p.m. CBS Buy Tickets Buy Packages
8 Oct. 26 at New England Patriots 1 p.m. FOX
9 BYE
10 Nov. 9 at New York Jets 1 p.m. CBS
11 Nov. 16 Baltimore Ravens 4:25 p.m. CBS Buy Tickets Buy Packages
12 Nov. 23 at Las Vegas Raiders 4:05 p.m. CBS
13 Nov. 30 San Francisco 49ers 1 p.m. CBS Buy Tickets Buy Packages
14 Dec. 7 Tennessee Titans 1 p.m. FOX Buy Tickets Buy Packages
15 Dec. 14 at Chicago Bears 1 p.m. FOX
16 Dec. 21 Buffalo Bills 1 p.m. CBS Buy Tickets Buy Packages
17 Dec. 28 Pittsburgh Steelers 1 p.m. CBS Buy Tickets Buy Packages
18 TBD at Cincinnati Bengals TBD TBD

I guess the London game replaced our Thursday night game? No prime time games isn't a complete shocker.

Unfortunately, I could see us opening 0-6.

yeah the first 6 games are NOT easy. Tough to have them all in a row

The schedule looks to be very tough to start the year but teams; surprise and disappoint every year. 7 of the first 8 games are against teams with winning records last season and 6 of those games' vs playoff teams. The last 9 games are against only 4 teams that had winning records last season and 3 of them playoff teams.

Somehow the Defense needs to find its 2023 selves. The run game returns to being top 5 in the league with the rookies having big years, and Flacco can use his experience to manage a ball control offense instead of having to throw for 300 yards a game.

Looking at the schedule, I expect the Browns to let Pickett start the season against a tough opening slate of games and to see if Pickett has anything worth salvaging/further time developing. From there, I suspect one of, if not both, rookies to get an opportunity so the Browns can evaluate if it is necessary to draft a QB in round 1 in 2026.

Joe Flacco is the break glass in case of emergency vet if the others look so bad in camp they are unplayable.

Here is the Jags schedule which is worth noting since the Browns own their first round pick.....

It does. It may not be prime time in a traditional sense, but it is an exclusive game. Either way, I don't care about those. We have a lot of 1PM kickoffs....I like that.

5 of our first 6 games are against playoff teams. We'll be out of playoff contention by the end of September.

13 1 PM kickoffs Doing my former old fat white guy with no rhythm dance, now called the skinny, no ass, stick figure shake.

I'm hoping for 10-12 wins but realistically 4-6 wins tops is my prediction.

we will start out like 2-8 and finish like 4-13

j/c:

I'm completely fine with having zero primetime games and all but three games slated for 1PM. I prefer Sunday 1PM games over any other day/time.

Me too Memphis.

I do usually like 1-2 primetime games, especially if they're at home (I like SNF and MNF) ... but I actually prefer the 4:25 kickoff the most. We rarely get them tho

The only reason I like primetime games is because I live out of market and I refuse to buy the game day season ticket whatever it’s called. But I’m neither surprised nor upset that there aren’t any.

Since 2018 we’ve split the division 3–3 every season except two, and one of those was 3-2-1. I expect that to continue. So running it down, I predict:

5–12 to 8–9.

We’ll be more competitive if for no other reason than we don’t have the turd under center for more than half the season, but we just don’t have enough solidity in key positions to really vye this year. If Joe ends up the quarterback, we’ll have a slew of 2–3INT losses and we’ll see picket or the others sooner than later. My only (perhaps irrational) hope is that Gabriel turns out to be the real deal early.

If we’re hovering near the bottom of the league with 5 to 6 games left and we haven’t seen much of Gabriel or Sanders at that point I suspect we will then. Either one of them balls out or they definitively don’t. In either scenario we will have clarified the draft strategy for next year. My biggest complaint about this quarterback room and this year’s draft in general is that it really muddies what exactly the plan is for next year’s draft. Are we really gonna be able to get a good enough look at all the quarterbacks not named Joe to get a sense if there’s a real future there or not?

We have to see how the season goes and how our young QB’s play but if there’s any doubt at all about their ability then we should draft a QB high next year. We have a golden opportunity next year that we may not have again for a long time.

I don't think "we" need to get a huge look at the rookie QB's. They do. As you said, if things have gone south for the bulk of the season I feel pretty sure "we" will get a look at them in the end. But this coaching staff will get a look at them all season.

You didn’t tell me you were 87 years old! 😏😀

I love the primetime games and 4pm games. The games have a bigger feel to them.

A full slate of 1pm are for the irrelevant franchises.

Only 2 games past 1pm start, I like it. Only west coast game is at the Raiders. London game sucks but rest i can deal with.

I get that. But taking 2 QBs with 2 of your 7 total picks means you're at least trying to solve the problem this year. Which means you better feel confident about your ability to effectively evaluate them in a single year. I agree that next year is primed for a top QB pick and I predicted (hoped) they'd trade back for that very reason. When they did so, it confirmed it for me. Taking a QB later didn't necessarily tank that strategy, you want a young backup to work with your new stud and Gabriel, on paper anyway, is about the perfect backup profile. But using two picks kinda speaks to a different goal and a different assessment protocol for the year, even if they are late picks. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong.

I understand that no primetime games is a black mark, but I'm another one that prefers 1pm games.

If they had selected a QB earlier in the draft process I would agree with you. I think at the point in the draft where both were selected indicates that they felt confident they could find a solid backup QB while at the same time taking a long shot flyer they might stumble onto a franchise QB in the process. But hey, who knows. Your guess is as good as mine.

But there's one thing for sure nobody, okay well maybe not nobody , but the vast majority of people would agree with. If they find a franchise QB in next years draft and one of these two pans out as well, you have an asset much more valuable than the draft invetsment you made on them.

It's all about salary! If Sanders and/or Gabriel become a top 15 ranked quarterback, you have one, maybe two, average quarterbacks for the next few years for under a million each per year.

Now, they are not forced to take a quarterback in the next two drafts.

As Pitt pointed out and if you do draft a potentially better quarterback in the next two years, you have high draft capital in both Sanders and Gabriel.

Browns want Sanders and Gabriel to become average. Pickett is good in the preseason for possible trade bait.

Having PIckett playing well and the two rookies struggling is not ideal. Pickett will want to get paid next year.

I believe a lot is riding on these two rookie quarterbacks.

It’s a brutal playing schedule and anything better than one win after W5 can’t realistically be expected.
With a bit of luck maybe 3W when bye week comes and hopefully we can double that figure when the season ends.

Going by experience from other demanding sports it’s highly likely that Flacco who earlier this year passed 40 will decline physically and lose some of his previous sharpness.
Going by stats from the last couple of seasons has his decline already begun and it would be unrealistic to believe that he will perform similar to what we saw in 2023.
I want to believe in miracles but the odds aren’t in his favor.

I simply can’t see him survive more than 5-6 weeks especially if we start in a similar way we ended the last season.

Yes, it's an NFL schedule.

Predicting wins and losses before teams are even down to 53 is an even more suspect guessing exercise than usual.

I agree. I really don't like late kicks.

I agree. We will see them playing early in the season. If one takes off, great. I will be thrilled if one or both of the QB's give us enough tape where we don't have to draft a QB in next years draft.

as important as anything is the Jags schedule - we need them to LOSE

I understand how the league scheduling system works but for a team that only won 3 games we have a tough schedule. Jacksonville is much easier than ours.

We'll see.

It will be interesting to see how their season goes. I think the inexperience on that coaching staff could show up.

Maybe they'll end up being great, but some major growing pains would not surprise me at all.

Nah!

We’re ranked between 28-32 by bookies, respectable media and many others with inside knowledge. Anything better than 7W must actually be labeled as a small success.

Not saying the Browns are going to make a similar jump but I am sure the Texans 2 years ago and the Commanders last year were not predicted to have the success they had. Every year 1 or 3 teams surprise and 1 or 2 teams disappoint. Last summer many experts expected the Browns to have a good year. That clearly did not happen. In 2023 there was no expectation the team would finish 2nd in the AFC North and make the playoffs but they did. Bottom line is yes alot of what if's would have to take place for the Browns to have a level of success. Flacco or another QB would have to have a decent season, the run game would have to have a strong year, and the defense return to being top 5 to 10 in the league. But anything is possible maybe to probable. The experts just look at the past to predict the future many times they are right but in some cases every season in the NFL they are wrong.

We're "ranked" there in May. No one has seen this year's team actually even practice as a full squad doing 11 on 11. We don't know who the QB will be or how they will look here this year. We don't know how players have/will progress/regress. We don't know what we're doing schematically on offense.

"Inside knowledge" is frequently reckless speculation. Respectable media isn't quite an oxymoron, but measured takes are less incentivized than sensationalized ones.

And Shedeur Sanders was predicted to be a first round draft pick by many as well.