|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 468
All Pro
|
OP
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 468 |
I was just considering what our Offensive Philosophy should be....So hear it goes....  .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) We need a Leader at QB(Whoever that Eventually turns out to be)....IMO the issue should get resolved quickly under Holmgren.... 2) Build in The Trenches !....IMO the whole right side of the OL should be upgraded & depth added.... 3) WRs need to step up as they gain experience(  Although having a Good QB would help....) 4) Draft/Acquire Speed.... 5) Encourage Discipline & Accountabilty.....Mangini IMO is doing just Fine in this area   ....Cry Babies Need Not Apply.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Offense itself should be focused around Ball Control & Good Clock management = Lineup correctly & use the clock....We Must be able to run the ball = Old Fashion Smash Mouth Football....The passing game should be centered around short to medium range passes and yards after the catch....Obviously , we should have the ability to go deep if needed , but normally IMO we should be sticking to High % plays that should be easy to execute and be sucessful , IF ,--Our Guys Continue To Suck It Up And Play Hard Nosed Football ! .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So Tell Me What You Think About My Proposed Ideas Or Add Your Own Ideas....
The Mammal
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 830
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 830 |
To score more points than the other team. IMO identities/philosophies are built around the players you have. I dont see anyone on this team worthing of building a philosophy around. But if I had to guess, with Mangini we will be sticking to the power run game in general.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850 |
Build the right side of the o-line in this years draft, and run run run..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,882 |
Quote:
Build the right side of the o-line in this years draft, and run run run..
+1
Having a great offensive line enables a team to impose it's will against the opponent.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Punchsmack/punch.gif) “...Iguodala to Curry, back to Iguodala, up for the layup! Oh! Blocked by James! LeBron James with the rejection!”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,394
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,394 |
Pound the rock.
Re-sign Vickers, get a RG or RT, and hope you have enough semblance of a passing game to be competitive.
And play defence.
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
I don't know, kicking ass and scoring more points than the opponent?
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
I was just considering what our Offensive Philosophy should be
What does anyone think it 's gonna be?
WCO..some variation of it..thats what it'll be.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
Quote:
I was just considering what our Offensive Philosophy should be
SCORE.....WIN
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545 |
I think it should be abn extremely physical team that runs the ball damn near at will ..... and plays exceptional defense. The QB can be protected through this scheme, and the game does not always have to ride on his arm. This is especially important in Cleveland, in the dead of winter, when John Elway would have passes take off in the Lake Erie artic blasts.
Ironically enough, this is the recipe that the Jets have followed to get to the AFC Championship game. Who helped that team? Well .... a guy we happen to have in Cleveland now.
I should also mention that thi is my own preferred offensive scheme as well. There is just something beautiful about watching my team beat down another team ... that team knowing that we are running the ball ... yet they cannot do a damn thing to stop it, even with 8 or 9 men in the box. If we had a playmaker at QB, we could then burn the crap out of the other team with a very safe passing game .... because there would be 1 on 1 coverage across the field ..... and 1 step could mean going the distance.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Whomever the QB is, he's likely to be an inferior player for this upcoming season. That's either the inaccurate and skittish Quinn, an over-the-hill veteran, or a rookie that isn't ready for the bigtime yet. That means a system which lends itself to easier throws. Holmgren's influence with the WCO means the TE and RB's should be far more involved in the passing game, so acquiring those players should be important.
Harrison can be a good receiver, though he dropped a few too many passes last year.
Vickers hasn't had many opportunities, but from what I've seen he looks like he can catch well enough for a full-back.
It's my opinion we need another running back who isn't on this roster. The best guy to fit the bill of what our offense could use is likely to be released from San Diego: Tomlinson.
I've watched numerous SD games this year. LT isn't the same guy he was six years ago, but he also isn't the washed-up bum that the media is believing. The offensive line of the Chargers is simply not very physical. There haven't been any holes to run through over the last couple of years, and that's why the Jets were so-able to thoroughly dominate them.
One needs look no further than the numbers of Sproles, who clearly isn't a washed-up veteran. He managed to average only 3.7 yards per carry this season himself.
LT was damaged goods for most of 2008 and ran behind a bad line in 2009. While not the same player of years past, he isn't finished IMHO.
Furthermore as it pertains to what we'd need out of our backs, LT has been a gifted receiver during his career. From 2001-2008 he never caught any fewer than 51 catches. He's also a very strong pass-blocker.
Long-time star RB's who reach the twilight of their careers rarely stay with their original teams when facing a reduced role and contract. They often move on, and I think LT will. He's the ideal back to fit into any WCO, and to trust our offense with Harrison and a bunch of guys nobody around the league has ever heard of would be an unnecessary risk.
Going back to philosophy, Quinn can't operate unless he's dinking the ball down the field. If he's going to stand a chance of being the starter again, which is possible, then the offense needs to be catered to iffy QB's of his stature because even if he's not the guy, his replacement will be iffy as well for various reasons.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,123
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,123 |
Quote:
It's my opinion we need another running back who isn't on this roster. The best guy to fit the bill of what our offense could use is likely to be released from San Diego: Tomlinson.
I've watched numerous SD games this year. LT isn't the same guy he was six years ago, but he also isn't the washed-up bum that the media is believing.
Toad:
I trust you realize that a commitment to LT is strikingly similar to Savage's grabbling of JLew... and that we should be still shopping the draft ranks for a stud RB during the next 2 cycles.
If we only had 2 good-to-decent years from Jamal, it's logical to assume that getting Tomlinson puts us on essentially the same time table for finding his replacement.
Thinking as a GM, would the money paid to LT be better spent on someone fresh out of school, if such a back could be found? Shouldn't we be committed to a "grow your own" policy in Berea... and if so, why wait?
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 830
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 830 |
Id be for drafting one high, and paying LT. The rookie to develop, and the veteran to show him how. To me that is almost always a good way to go, as long as LT would be happy in that role.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
It's a legitimate counter-point. No two ways about it. Conventional wisdom says successful teams build through the draft and not through free-agency.
So why should anyone consider what I just said when it flies in the face of wisdom?
There are numerous reasons which I'll touch on, but the primary reason is because of the position itself.
Unlike the vast majority of positions, RB is by far the most instinctual, and thus requires a shallow learning curve. Where many positions require two or even three years (or more) before the investment in the player can begin to pay off, RB's come into the league virtually ready to start right out of the gate, or in the case of non-first rounders, they are at least capable of being major contributors. Shon Greene of the Jets is the perfect example of that.
So why do I mention this, when it could be argued that it'd be smart to draft a RB first instead of spending money on a guy who may only have a couple of good years left?
It comes back to a perfect phrase you used: "Grow our own" (And no, we're not talking about hippy-cabbage  ) indicating the philosophy of developing..............developing...............our own talent.
We have so many holes on this team that in order to have a contender in a couple of years, we have to start drafting......and developing......talent now.
So again, one could ask why we'd spend money on an aging war-horse when we can draft one?
The answer is because unlike most positions, useful RB's can be found in abundance. They can be acquired in the draft, in free agency, and via trade. I couldn't ask for a better example than to look at our very own team, where we didn't have a 1000-yard rusher for a quarter-century, then managed to get two, one via trade, then another via free agency.
Now, getting back to my point about RB's being instinctual, sure, we could lose LT's ability to play all-together in two seasons, but since the position is so easily filled, finding yet another replacement isn't a big issue. Once we have both sides of the ball in good shape, we can then draft a home-grown RB early and plug him right in to an offense which is ready to go.
Moving on to other reasons which I alluded to, with an offense which is going to be loaded with inexperienced skill position players, even if we drafted a RB in the 1st, having someone back there who can rush for 1000 yards and catch 60 passes brings an element of understanding and stability to a unit that won't have much of either in 2010.
Then there's the last factor I'd been considering: Leadership.
People can say that Jamal Lewis gave us a leader but I never bought it. Once he was gone it was proven that he really wasn't a leader at all, but rather just a veteran presence. LT would give the offense some instant leadership from a respected veteran who did all the things right, which is something Lewis could never say. This is something no rookie RB is going to bring to the team.
So..............Can an argument be made that we'd be smarter to just draft an early RB instead of going after someone like LT? Sure, and it could easily work out. However, since it's so easy to find RB's that come right in and play from day one, I think it'd be smarter for this team to draft for other positions that are harder to find in free agency and trades. If money was an issue, obviously someone like LT would make less sense, but we're in a great position even if there is a cap, so that isn't a consideration.
I like the idea of fixing a problem through free agency when other problems are more likely solved through the draft. That seems to be the best and most useful way of spending our resources while simultaneously addressing all the problems facing this team going into 2010.
Like all my ideas it's a long-shot, but some of my ideas have included drafting Joe Thomas a full year before he came into the NFL, and trading for Rogers a full year before it happened 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
the only problem I would have is that how many 30+ RBs who have carried a heavy load have been able to go to a new team and give them a boost?
the odds are heavily in favor of Tomlinson on the Browns = Emmitt on the Cardinals.
but, if we could get Tomlinson to wear Gerard Warren's old number....and then trade for McNabb and get him to wear Couch's....
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331 |
Quote:
the only problem I would have is that how many 30+ RBs who have carried a heavy load have been able to go to a new team and give them a boost?
What name that comes to my mind is Stephen Davis. When did he go to the Carolina Panthers ?(Not sure if he was 30) He had a very good first season there though if i'm not correct. JL's first year he came in here he was in the later part of his career coming off a very unproductive season, like LT, and he did well. Behind this O-Line he'd have done even better.
If Tomilinson wants to join the Browns, I'm all for it. He just has to know that he'll probably be running alongside Harrison. But there will def be enough carries to go around.
And Thomas Jones jointed the Jets and was 29 when the season started. That's pretty close to 30, and Thomas Jones has done very well for the Jets. Given he had far less carries than LT throughout the course of his career, but LT was far more talented than Jones ever was. So may be we can call that a wash?
UCONN HUSKIES 2014 Champions of Basketball
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,701
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,701 |
I get to see a decent amount of LT, being out here in San Diego. I think you're spot on with your arguments regarding the condition of his legs (he has a couple more years in him) and the condition of SD's line (good pass protection, not so good run-blocking).
I question your leadership argument, though. The reason I say that is I don't know how many times I've seen the LT-slouching-on-the-bench pouty-face at the end of yet another Chargers playoff loss. If we're bringing him in as a veteran presence to transition in our young legs, I say go for it. If we're bringing him in to be some sort of mentor/leader for our running back... no thank you.
To be honest, I'm pretty excited with the stable of RB's we have right now. We have Davis, who looks to be a huge stud. We have Harrison, who seems to be extremely effective when used correctly (translation: when he's used, period), and we have Jennings, the scrappy, bruising RB who's making his case that he belongs in the NFL.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
the only problem I would have is that how many 30+ RBs who have carried a heavy load have been able to go to a new team and give them a boost?
the odds are heavily in favor of Tomlinson on the Browns = Emmitt on the Cardinals.
but, if we could get Tomlinson to wear Gerard Warren's old number....and then trade for McNabb and get him to wear Couch's....
Jamal Lewis came here and gave us a big boost.
I could list numerous examples of RB's who have gone to other teams at the age of 30 and contributed.
You have to remember that "contributing" isn't the same as being asked to carry the ball 300 times.
Consider how many RB's have been work-horses but went to new teams as 3rd down backs, as short-yardage backs, and as part-time backs. In that role, Tomlinson would make a dynamite 3rd down back, and a guy that could split carries and even be a great insurance policy for an unknown like Harrison.
Great backs can lose a step and still be good. A perfect example who equates ideally to LT is Marshall Faulk. During his last couple of years in the league, he took a reduced role, having his carries cut from the 250 carries and 80 catches down to 200 carries and 40 catches, but that was still good for 900 yards rushing and 300 yards receiving.
Another guy was Warrick Dunn. He was signed to be a role-player during his last swan-song with the Bucs. Only problem was that he was forced back into a prominent role. All he did was muster 782 yards rushing and 42 catches.
Asking someone like LT to be the 300-carry guy isn't wise, but asking him to be a contributor is an entirely different ball-game.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 512
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 512 |
Quote:
Consider how many RB's have been work-horses but went to new teams as 3rd down backs, as short-yardage backs, and as part-time backs. In that role, Tomlinson would make a dynamite 3rd down back, and a guy that could split carries and even be a great insurance policy for an unknown like Harrison.
Just going from what I heard from Clayton, one reason the Chargers might not want him is because he won't want to just be a "role-player". My question would be why would he want to come here to do that, when he could possibly be something else on a diff team. Or if he finds that a role-playing back is his only option then why wouldn't he try and stay in sunny, oft-playoff bound SD?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
That's a good question.
The answer is found in the historical archives.
As I'd noted earlier, former work-horse backs often can't handle being "demoted" on their original teams, so they go to other teams even though it's the exact same role they were offered on their original team.
It's hard for stars to take a demotion in the place they became huge hero's, so they often seek out new starts. Sometimes the old team doesn't want to keep the old guy on and wants a new guy completely. Then there's money, where the player still cannot accept he isn't worth huge dollars, while the team wants a severely reduced paycheck for marginally reduced touches.
Many of these players simply can't accept swallowing their pride. They find it easier making a fresh-start somewhere else, where the media and fans are excited about them again, while in their original city they are talked about as a fading player who needs replacing and has lost a step. It's much about positive versus negative energy. The Jeff Garcia situation in San Francisco revolved around much of this.
lastly, we need to remember he agreed to renegotiate his contract last year. Many players don't go for that a second season in a row. Also, LT and the Chargers haven't exactly been all hugs-and-kisses over the last couple of seasons. He may be interested in washing his hands with them and moving on.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,698
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,698 |
I have seen a fair share of LT,  I agree with the assessment of the charger line this year. McNeil and Dielman were the only starters of note, the rest was patchwork and rookies. I don't see LT coming to Cleveland unless its via a trade. He is iconic in SD.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102 |
Any reason not to toss Willie Parker's name into the mix of possibilities?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I'm not sure I understand how your #4 to acquire and draft speed fits with a smash mouth ball control team... I mean speed is ALWAYS a good thing, don't get me wrong but unless you are going with the high powered vertical offense, then speed is less important. If you want ball control and running game then you want quality control receivers who run great routes and have great hands, not 4.3 guys that run by people but drop more balls... (Obviously if you can get a guy that's both, you do it)... and you need a running back that can get you 4 or 5 yards and occassionally break one, not a guy that gets you -2, -3, but breaks one more often... We definitely need to upgrade the right side of the OL.. we need a good possession receiving TE, hopefully they have the confidence in Moore to be that guy because that makes that less of a need. As for the RB, I'm inclined to go with Harrison/Davis/Jennings next year and see what happens. I don't think we need to draft a RB real high this year. And I've made my opinions on the QB spot well known.. don't draft one high, use those picks to build up as much as possible around him.. don't draft one low because we don't need another "project".. in short, don't draft one. On offense I would like to see us use a high draft pick on the right side of the line and maybe a mid round pick on a good posssession type receiver (ie. Jordan Shipley)... beyond that I'd like to go defense defense defense... **Disclaimer - this is all open to change based on what happens in free agency.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,117
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,117 |
How 'bout "Score enough points to win in spite of the secondary?"
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 468
All Pro
|
|
OP
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 468 |
....True !....I would like to mention that IMO having speed & playing Smash Mouth Football on both sides of the ball is not a contradiction....That added Speed/Quickness should put our players in a better position to make plays on both sides of the ball....IF we do that , upgrade the rightside of our OL and it goes without saying Pay Cribbs...We should be headed in the right direction....
The Mammal
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
Offensive philosophy..............one that doesn't go three and out.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 |
I think QB-wise we have what we have. I would not want to go shopping for pricey has beens and/or draft high on a rook.
That being said, I would grab a couple of fundamentally sound olineman. Then, I would run a zone blocking scheme.
I would look at grabbing some big targets to throw to in the middle rounds/free agency. Guys that can go over the middle, catch for God sakes, and run after the catch.
I would love to see in short, a WCO based, play action, zone blocking offense . . . .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850 |
Quote:
I would look at grabbing some big targets to throw to in the middle rounds/free agency. Guys that can go over the middle, catch for God sakes, and run after the catch.
1) Stephen Williams - Toledo WR 6'5 - 199 lbs. 7th round - FA
2) Carlton Mitchell - South Florida WR 6'4 - 210 lbs. 5th-6th round
Check out their highlights on youtube.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,528
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,528 |
I've never been one to believe in this whole "identity" bullcrap,but if we must,we must.
This team has shown it's identity in the last 5-6 games.That is,playing sound fundemental,team football.
There are many pieces missing from this being a championship caliber team,but year in and year out,playing sound team-first football will carry you farther than any array of playmakers will.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum What Should Are Offensive
Philosophy / Identity Be ?....
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
