Cleveland Browns (2011 season)

[tsteele316]

with this schedule in 2012 - we should be able to do SOMETHING good
CLEVELAND BROWNS
Home: Kansas City Chiefs, San Diego Chargers, Buffalo Bills, Philadelphia Eagles, Washington Redskins
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh

Away: Denver Broncos, Oakland Raiders, Indianapolis Colts, Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh

that schedule actually looks pretty awful. 12 games against teams that finished .500 or better this year, and indy with peyton manning back (potentially).

 

[jlb1705]

that schedule actually looks pretty awful. 12 games against teams that finished .500 or better this year, and indy with peyton manning back (potentially).

Not blowing their draft position with cheap, meaningless wins - that would be something good for a change.

 

[LitlBuck]

Shurmur to hire OC. I nominate Mike Martz

 

[NJ-Buckeye]

with this schedule in 2012 - we should be able to do SOMETHING good
CLEVELAND BROWNS
Home: Kansas City Chiefs, San Diego Chargers, Buffalo Bills, Philadelphia Eagles, Washington Redskins
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh

Away: Denver Broncos, Oakland Raiders, Indianapolis Colts, Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh

that schedule actually looks pretty awful. 12 games against teams that finished .500 or better this year, and indy with peyton manning back (potentially).

We were the reason one team > 500 and another @ 500... plus I'm not amp'ed on Denver, Cowboys or the Giants... not sure how we stack up against Phila

 

[LitlBuck]

We were the reason one team > 500 and another @ 500... plus I'm not amp'ed on Denver, Cowboys or the Giants... not sure how we stack up against Phila

Agree. Next year's schedule looks a lot better than this year's schedule. The NFC East is no longer the powerhouse division that it has been in past years and the AFC West is pretty feeble. I can't see how someone would say that just because a team has a winning percentage makes them better. I think you have to look at who they played.

 

[tsteele316]

Agree. Next year's schedule looks a lot better than this year's schedule. The NFC East is no longer the powerhouse division that it has been in past years and the AFC West is pretty feeble. I can't see how someone would say that just because a team has a winning percentage makes them better. I think you have to look at who they played.

this year: peytonless indy, miami, rams, jax, kyle boller raiders.
next year: indy, dallas, philly, carson palmer raiders.

the browns out of conference slate was about as easy as it gets this year.

 

[jlb1705]

this year: peytonless indy, miami, rams, jax, kyle boller raiders.
next year: indy, dallas, philly, carson palmer raiders.

the browns out of conference slate was about as easy as it gets this year.

Yep. That's what makes this season disappointing. It's not that I thought the Browns would be good, I just thought that much of their schedule sucked worse than they did. The Bengals had the season I thought the Browns might have.

 

[MUBuck]

with this schedule in 2012 - we should be able to do SOMETHING good
CLEVELAND BROWNS
Home: Kansas City Chiefs, San Diego Chargers, Buffalo Bills, Philadelphia Eagles, Washington Redskins
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh

Away: Denver Broncos, Oakland Raiders, Indianapolis Colts, Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh

Ceiling, IMO, for home schedule: 4-4
Ceiling for away schedule: 2-6

Going to be another long one, folks.

 

[Buckrock]

This years schedule was a cakewalk compared to last years and we lost one more game. What a joke. Mangini is probably chuckling at this mess.

 

[y0yoyoin]

Finally found the article i was referring to earlier in the thread about why its risky taking Trent Richardson at #4 if your the browns...not only because of what this article shows and states, but also because were are the fucking cleveland browns and season ending injuries for us are a way of life...i love richardson and will be happy if we can somehow slip down to get him if we pass on RG3 and Blackmon

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2011-12-27/big-money-backs-are-risky-business

​

​

Adrian Peterson?s season-ending knee injury was a cruel reminder for NFL running backs. They play a hazardous position with a short career span. All of this season?s top 10 rushing leaders are under the age of 30. Five of them are 25 or younger -- LeSean McCoy (23), Ryan Mathews (24) Ray Rice (24), Arian Foster (25) and Marshawn Lynch (25).
Look at this season?s top six rushers. None were drafted among the top 50 picks. McCoy (53rd), Rice (55th), and Maurice Jones-Drew (60th) were all second-round picks. Frank Gore was a third-rounder. Michael Turner was a fifth-rounder. Foster was not drafted at all.
Teams believe there is always depth in the draft at running back. So they are reluctant to sink a significant amount of their payroll into veterans at that position.

Quarterback is the most important position in football, and many of the best ones have their best seasons after age 30. Tom Brady is 34. Drew Brees is 32. Tony Romo is 31. Eli Manning is 30.
It?s a whole different scenario for running backs. By the time he turns 30, if a running back is still in the league, he is usually getting fazed out after years of taking punishment. Clinton Portis could not find work this season at age 31. Among the league?s top 20 rushers this season, only Fred Jackson and Willis McGahee have reached that dreaded age of 30 for running backs. Both are exactly 30 years old.
Thomas Jones (33) and LaDainian Tomlinson (32) are throwbacks for running backs, but both have become role players instead of lead backs. Losing even half a step can be devastating for a runner, the difference between getting through a hole before it closes or not. A running back hears the clock ticking from the time he enters the league. ​

 

[Mike80]

Has an actual scout or other draft observer said that Blackmon can't run routes, or are we just running with BuckinDayton/hatehineygate/king rhabuf's opinion on this?

If Blackmon is there, I'd take him. Dude is a stud and more importantly, he wasn't recruited by Fat Ass at Ntre Ame.

 

[BuckNut65]

Finally found the article i was referring to earlier in the thread about why its risky taking Trent Richardson at #4 if your the browns...not only because of what this article shows and states, but also because were are the [censored]ing cleveland browns and season ending injuries for us are a way of life...i love richardson and will be happy if we can somehow slip down to get him if we pass on RG3 and Blackmon

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2011-12-27/big-money-backs-are-risky-business

​

​

I agree with the article however I think he is the sure thing between The three of them...RG3, Blackmon and Richardson. I'm not sure I would take him at 4 but as I've said before I sure as hell would be willing to play Let's Make a Deal if someone in the top 10 like the Skins or Fins want to trade up.

Hillis isn't coming back and they mine as well change the name on the back of jersey 31 from Hardesty to Fragile. We need a feature back.

 

[chillinvillian]

Hills isn't coming back?

 

[BuckinDayton]

I agree with the article however I think he is the sure thing between The three of them...RG3, Blackmon and Richardson. I'm not sure I would take him at 4 but as I've said before I sure as hell would be willing to play Let's Make a Deal if someone in the top 10 like the Skins or Fins want to trade up.

Hillis isn't coming back and they mine as well change the name on the back of jersey 31 from Hardesty to Fragile. We need a feature back.

If we could trade down and still get Richardson/Blackmon then great, but if no one moves, or if WAS/MIA trades with STL and leaves us to make a pick where we are-I would rather ahve Richardson at that point. I agree with you, he is the surest thing of the RBs and he has been a monster at every level. Moving on we dont have to worry about RB for the next few years.

 

[LitlBuck]

Hills isn't coming back?

That will depend on how much money he wants and his agent is not very owner friendly. I don't think the Browns will put the franchise tag on him because it will cost them a bundle plus they have to deal with Jackson and Dawson. I know that Dawson isn't that valuable but he knows the stadium wind and his leg seemed to get stronger this year. Don't know if Jackson will sign or not. If he doesn't, they will have to tag him.