'AwesomeAuger said:
On the other hand, if Geno Smith is a star, that's one of my favorite teams.
It's interesting because the Browns have spent the most picks overall and the most early picks on offense. However, despite spending so much more than the other teams, I wouldn't consider them in my top 3 offenses. I consider the the Saints, Steelers, and Cowboys to each be better in terms of ceiling to floor ratio. Those 3 teams also have a better defensive core in my opinion.
I think comparing the Saints, Steelers, Cowboys, and Browns really shows the advantage of having an early pick/established franchise QB. (Freeman isn't one necessarily but I'd rather roll the dice on Freeman than Geno at this point.)
I agree with the bolded. Obviously a lot is riding on Geno Smith, but I don't think any rookie QB has ever inherited such a great offense. Most teams bad enough to draft the top QB don't have this kind of talent. Geno was extremely productive and accurate in college, he doesn't rely on his legs to make plays, and he doesn't turn the ball over.As for the other offensive squads I think the Browns are better, but obviously I'm biased.
Cowboys - Similar QB at best (Freeman has been just OK), much worse RB, much worse FB, WRs may be a tad bit better, TE is much worse, C, RG, and RT are much worse. So basically they might have a little bit better WRs. Browns win.
Saints - Better QB, much worse RB, much worse FB, WRs are worse, TE is much worse, o-line is much worse across the board. Only way this is a better offense is if Geno is a total bust.
Steelers - Better QB, much worse RB, much worse FB, WRs are probably a little worse, TE is much worse, left o-line may be slightly better but right side is much worse. Again the only way this is a better offense is if Geno is a total bust.