|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
vs. Dolphins - Win
@Ravens - Loss
@Vikings - Win
vs. Bengals - Win
vs. Bills - Win
vs. Lions - Loss
@Packers - Loss
@Chiefs - Win
vs. Ravens - Win
BYE
@Bengals - Loss
vs. Steelers - Win
vs. Jaguars - Win
@Patriots - Loss
vs. Bears - Loss
@Jets - Win
@Steelers - Loss
9-7, and playing a meaningful game @ Pittsburgh Week 17. We lose, and it keeps us out of the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Quote:
Quote:
Don Banks
Quote:
Cleveland Browns
I'm convinced better days are ahead for the Browns, but I'll give you the three biggest reasons 2013 probably isn't going to produce the end of their 10-year playoff drought, tied for the second-longest in the league behind Buffalo: Baltimore, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh. Cleveland's division is simply devoid of a soft touch, and even if you view the aging Steelers as being on the descent, the Browns can't count on automatic wins in any of their six AFC North games. Until that dynamic changes, it's hard to find math that adds up to a Cleveland playoff run.
There's the making of something pretty good on defense for the Browns, and with new coordinator Ray Horton, Cleveland won't have to score 30 points to win. But the offense remains a weapon-needy work that's very much in progress, and there's probably too much initial hope being placed in new offensive coordinator Norv Turner's and new head coach Rob Chudzinski's ability to transform Brandon Weeden (or Jason Campbell) into an upper-half-of-the-league quarterback.
2013 playoff chances: If Weeden takes root, you can talk to me in 2014 and I'll have a rosier outlook.
Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130515/last-place-turnarounds/#ixzz2TOfTI4l6
I think that's a pretty fair assessment. The only thing I'd argue with is that our offense is more of a sure thing than our defense right now. That could easily change as soon as the middle of the season, but right now the defense is the huge ????
That may be a popular sentiment around here because we are switching defenses, but I don't agree. I think we have more talent on defense. I think there are more questions on offense and there is a lack of experience at the skill positions which will undoubtably lead to growing pains.
I've been wrong before and will be again, but I bet the offense struggles more than the defense this upcoming year, just like it has for the past several years.
Man, since we got our team back, the offense has been putrid in all but two years. They were okay in the playoff year and pretty darn good in 2007. Other than that....we've stunk the joint out.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,703
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,703 |
Haha, your last part was what I was thinking about when I wrote that response. Our offense can't possibly be a strength for once, can it? :-p
Still, I'm staying with my statement regarding us having more questions on the D. Will D'Qwell revert back to the old 3-4 guy we used to have. Can Sheard play OLB? Can Kruger play like he did with the Ravens without Suggs? Who the heck is going to end up starting at FS? CB2? Is our Dline really going to be dominant enough to make up for the weaknesses or inexperience at these positions?
Too many questions, if you ask me. The O has plenty of work to do, but I just have a higher degree of confidence in that unit right out of the gate. I think that Richardson will have us forget about his rookie season. The Oline will continue to improve. TE is an issue, but I think we've done enough with our receiver corps (adding some nice possession receivers) to mask that weakness as well as getting some blocking TEs. Weeden is a huge question mark, but if he's a ? In Shurmer's O, he should be a :-) in Norv's.
In the long run, I think this coaching staff is going to get it done. We have a very strong coaching staff. The rest of the FO has me suspicious, but I mostly like what they've done so far.
I just think that the system transition going on on both sides of the ball will be rough, and rougher on the defense at first. I'm not sure I agree that we have more talent on the D side, but I guess I can't really argue that either. I'm really hoping that the D will catch on by mid-season, and then we'll have something that other teams will fear.
Sorry for the long post.
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: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
I agree we have questions on defense, but I believe we have even more on offense. In fact, my initial post on this thread was about all the question marks we have.
Look at our offense for a moment.
RB: TRich was okay last year, but certainly not dominant and not worth that high of a pick. People use the injuries as an excuse. I say he ran hard and wasn't afraid of contact. I think his problems were instinctual and that he was not decisive. There are questions about him.
FB: We really don't have one.
WR: Bess will help, but Gordon and Little are young, inexperienced guys who don't put much thought into running routes. Neither make hot reads or sight adjustments. They have talent, but both have character concerns that worry me. I think there are questions about them. They could be good, but that is different than saying they are good.
TE: Huge question mark. Most people around here rave about Jordan or whatever his name is, but he has shown me absolutely nothing. Heckert drafted him and said he would be a big contributor as a rookie. It didn't happen and still hasn't. Big question marks at TE.
QB: Perhaps no player in the entire NFL has more question marks attached to his name than Weeden. I think the guy was awful this year. People claim that Norv and the new offense will work wonders for him. That's not proven. It's a question mark. Do you remember when The Big Show fired Mangini and everyone was saying how Holmgren, Shurmur, and the WCO would drastically improve Colt? I remember it. If you have questions at QB, you have questions about your team.
I am not trying to change your mind, so don't get offended. It's cool to debate.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,181
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,181 |
Quote:
I agree we have questions on defense, but I believe we have even more on offense. In fact, my initial post on this thread was about all the question marks we have.
Vers good points!
I still believe if Weeden does simply average. He should have enough weapons to make this offense at best average. They have way to many first and second rounders to not at least be a .500 team. I keep thinking first rounders: Thomas, Mack, Weeden, and Richardson; second rounders: Gordon, Little, and Schwartz. That is 7 out of 11 how can it not be a .500 team? I don't buy into the theory you have to have a superstar play maker to be successful. You can have a superstar OL and have success. Weeden can't be any worse than Sanchaze was his first two years, and Jets were 9-7 his first year. Compare Browns play makers to what Jets had in that offense...Richardson vs. Green; Gordon and Little vs. Clowney and Cotchery; Keller vs. Cameron. Jets' defense might have been better, but so much better carrying the offense to 9 wins.
One thing for sure, if this team finishes near the bottom again, Banner/Lombardi/Chud/Farmer must gut this offense and start over. My biggest concern is this team wins six or seven games placing them a late top ten in the draft keeping them out of range landing a top rate QB. If Browns are going to suck, at least do it right!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,703
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,703 |
Hey, no offense taken, amigo! I love talking and learning more football.
You actually already said this, but I'll repeat it in a different way. I think Norv and Chud mitigate many of the questions on offense. They have had success in the past under similar conditions. Further, going from Shurmer's system to Norv's is going to improve performance for certain players (mostly Weeden). I say this more as an indictment against Shurmer than as support for Norv.
Your point about TR running hard despite the ribs is a good one. He did seek out contact, which could indicate that his deficiencies were more mental than physical. That is a very logical argument, but man, it's really hard to ignore broken ribs on a running back.
I enjoy reading your posts Vers (even when you're bickering with Django, those are entertaining). It's good for a football newbie like me to be able to hear what more seasoned fans have to say.
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: 50,547
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547 |
They likely shot Trent full of so much stuff that he wouldn't have felt it if he popped a bone through his skin.  He probably got Toradol, which I have had on several occasions for my back. It is as effective as anything I have had for my back, including narcotics. Unfortunately the effects wear off fairly quickly, and my doctor did not recommend more than 2-3 shots of the stuff per year. I read an article that said that some NFL doctors give this stuff weekly to some players. I would consider that dangerous based on what my doctors have told me. (and that's 2 different doctors .... my back doctor, and my podiatrist) I will say that in my case, even if I felt somewhat better, I was still limited in what I could physically do. I would assume that same is true with a rib injury.
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: Oct 2012
Posts: 137
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 137 |
I was looking at MLB standings earlier and was taking notice of the run differential to see what teams were unlucky with their records at the moment vs. the teams that were lucky vs. the teams whose production matched their records and I thought of this thread and an article I read on grantland last year as it pertains to expected wins. http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8284393/breaking-best-nfl-statsCliffs of the article: Teams that under/outperform their win totals compared to their point differential usually regress back towards a mean in the next year. What it means for the Browns: Last year the Browns went 5-11, a .313 winning percentage with a -66 point differential with 302 points for and 368 points against. Using the Pythagorean Theorem in the article, which is Points For ^ 2.37 / (Points For ^ 2.37 + Points Against ^ 2.37) we get 302 ^ 2.37 / (302 ^ 2.37 + 368 ^ 2.37) = Expected winning percentage of .385 A winning percentage of .385 in a 16 game season would be .385 * 16 = 6.16 expected wins So the Browns underperformed their expected win total by 1.16 wins. In the article, the reaction for a team that has underperformed by that amount, shown in the table as teams that were -1 to -1.5, is to average an improvement of 2 wins the next season. That would put us at 7-9, which oddly enough, a lot of us feel is about right. Obviously there are other factors involved, and we don't know how things will shake out, but I think this is good food for thought.
Proud fan of the Pulaski Academy football strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 433
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 433 |
7-9....that's as good as I could expect from a team with no secondary,and a crappy QB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 118
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 118 |
I just had a flash-back to my stats class @ Cleveland State  Perfect, it worked then & it will work now, 7-9 or better 
If I only knew then what I know today...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,229
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,229 |
Teams Browns should beat this season....
Dolphins, Bengals(home), Bills, Lions, @Chiefs, Jaguars, @Jets, Bears.
If they do, that means 8-8.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,341 |
Quote:
Teams Browns should beat this season....
Dolphins, Bengals(home), Bills, Lions, @Chiefs, Jaguars, @Jets, Bears.
If they do, that means 8-8.
Steelers (Home) 9-7 
John 3:16 Jesus said "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum 2013-2014 Season Cleveland Browns
Record Prediction
|
|
