This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Is it a given that he runs the 3-4? Thought I read that he was open to running whatever.I have no reason to dislike anything about Horton, but the move from a successful 4-3 to a 3-4 in which we do not have the personnel to run is still a ####### trainwreck.Really liking the coordinators, don't know about Chudz but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, have no faith in Banner/Lombardi. So far a solid C
I don't understand the switch? I thought the D was coming around?'MAC_32 said:I have no reason to dislike anything about Horton, but the move from a successful 4-3 to a 3-4 in which we do not have the personnel to run is still a ####### trainwreck.'beer 302 said:Really liking the coordinators, don't know about Chudz but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, have no faith in Banner/Lombardi. So far a solid C'PlasmaDogPlasma said:
Funny how Belichick never hired Lombardi to work with him again after working with him in Cleveland.'MAC_32 said:
Not a battle I will pick, nor will I disect his player evaluations either - like anyone in the business he has his series of hits and misses. He also won't have final say here, that's Banner - for better or worse. I will battle with people that say 'look at his drafts though.' Those aren't his drafts.
All good DC's run a variety of defenses, but they usually have a base. Unless I'm mistaken I believe Horton's history strongly indicates we're building a base from a 3-4, especially when you link it with the news leak last week when Chud was hired and Horton wasn't even in the conversation to be our DC.Much like when we took the one strong piece from the team post Mangini (special teams) and kicked that braintrust to the curb I expect this to be a painfully unnecessary transition too.'Bigboy10182000 said:Is it a given that he runs the 3-4? Thought I read that he was open to running whatever.'MAC_32 said:I have no reason to dislike anything about Horton, but the move from a successful 4-3 to a 3-4 in which we do not have the personnel to run is still a ####### trainwreck.'beer 302 said:Really liking the coordinators, don't know about Chudz but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, have no faith in Banner/Lombardi. So far a solid C'PlasmaDogPlasma said:
Well he is a personal friend but I tend to agree that Tony Grossi has had a personal vendetta for Lombardi ever since his name surfaced months ago. Don't understand all of it, don't necessarily disagree with all of it either but Grossi took some serious shots at this guy. Nantz fell just short of calling out his name followed by #######. Good listen if you have the time
Thanks for posting..good listen. People need to chill the #### out in this town.
This was a nice interview.I am not really a fan of Lombardi and I have heard him make some seemingly very uninformed statements as a NFL commentator. Despite this however he does have very good connections with some of the better minds in the league. I think that changes now as those connections are less likely to be honest with him because of the competition. They may feed him misinformation now more than they have in the past, he may not be able to lean on some of his contacts the way he has in the past.Keeping that in mind however he does have a good network of connections to draw on and should improve the Browns scouting because of that.I also liked Bobcat's quote from Horton. Horton is going to form the defense around what the players do best. Regardless of if the Browns end up playing primarily from a 3-4 or 4-3 alignment (and perhaps a combination of both) it will be a scheme best suited to the personel.Just out of curiosity how did Jackson play as a inside LB in the 3-4 compared to the 4-3? IIRC he played fine but not as well as he did as a MLB in the 4-3 where he does not have to take on blockers as often. The Browns have quality DT that should afford some flexibility to play both schemes as the DT can kick out to DE in the 3-4.The Browns need an outside pass rushing player and being open to both schemes allows the Browns to be more flexibile and draft the best player available instead of being restricted to BPA that fits their scheme. Where I see this flexibility helping for example is if Jarvis Jones drops to the Browns they won't pass on him because of scheme like some teams might and vice versa for DE prospects that might not fit as a 3-4 OLB.I think it is an advantage schematically to be able to run both defenses because a pre snap shift can change what the QB sees and keeps the offense guessing more about what the defense may actually be doing.
Didn't their run defense improve by like 30/yds per game with Taylor and Rubin both in the lineup?
And Lombardi was horrible in Cleveland.You can say Belichek made the picks all you want to but, when your title is Director of Player Personnel you are part of the input and at least partially responsible for the draft results.I hope I'm horribly wrong and the Bowns draft well, but hiring back stabber Lombardi sucks.
In the 4-3, yes. 3-4 leans on lbs more. We don't have those, and Jarvis Jones (option at six) has issues vs the run.
Gotcha. I think Taylor could slide to end on 1st/2nd downs though.
The jury is certainly out, but I don't really care what happened 20 years ago. Belicheat wasn't a Super Bowl coach 20 years ago either.This is a comment on an article on cle.scout.com about the Lombardi hire.
I love the quote, but I don't think he's saying he'll adjust the scheme to the players, as some suggest. He's saying that coaching is about poeple, not Xs & Os.
I didn't post it suggesting the Browns will be in the 4-3 next year.However, I'm pretty convinced he's not a square peg/round hole guy, nor the guy (or the staff) that wants to blow the entire defense apart and start over.
I like Horton, but this seems like a waste of Phil Taylor. I assume they're going to move him to end, but he's best suited to be a 4-3 tackle.
Lol, what a joke.
I agree the question of the year
Manziel can come out next year because he redshirted. Of course I don't know if either guy will be available at the end of the first when the Browns pick.
Who in the HELL is Teddy Bridgewater?
Louisville QB that will probably be in the 2014 draft.
Thank you
There is no overreacting when that statement is involved. Most people thought the defense was 1 or 2 players away from being a legit top 10 defense. And it was already young as hell.
Yep, if it isn't broke don't fix it. No good way to defend the transition.
I honestly might not understand the nuances of the transition as well as you guys, but I don't see why they can't be a top 10 D as a 3-4 unit. I don't see it as some huge overhaul and with Horton at the helm I don't expect the defense to regress at all while they make some roster tweaks over the next couple offseasons. I could be wrong, but I'm not worried about it.
DQ and JMJ are much better suited for the 4-3. Similar story with our backup LB's.Sheard is the only realistic option at OLB.
Rubin was capable under Mangini.
Capable was a poor choice of words. I think Rubin is a great 4-3 DT, is he a great 3-4 NT? I don't know, average, sure, but great? I lean towards no. So, we've downgraded that position. Similar story at 3-4 DE. Can Taylor, Rucker, Winn, etc. play DE? Sure. But I think they are tailor made to play 4-3, 3-4? Probably average.If they wanted to start drafting guys with the plan to switch to the 3-4 in a year or 2 it'd be one thing, but everything being reported indicates they plan to open 2013 with this square peg in a round hole plan.'PlasmaDogPlasma said:
Interesting that the players are concerned about the change.The Browns need another pass rusher regardless of the scheme. Having a multiple look defense means the Browns can look at more players to fill that role than they would in a straight up 4-3. The players who expressed concern about the scheme may know it could limit the effectiveness of their roles in the overall defense. Horton puts the onus on them to tell him how they fit in each package and how they can help the team win.
Yeah, weird. The case he lays out is valid, but no Browns fan wants to hear it.
Well, valid til you get towards the end. "But Cleveland got its new stadium shortly after and the Browns still exist today and they play in a beautiful home. Why that couldn't be done for Art's Browns, some of us will never understand."He pissed on everything he wrote with that.
Warmack seems like a special player who could complete the Browns offensive line and make the running game with Richardson that much better. The Browns might get more impact from a pass rusher or defensive back, but Warmack is a sure thing. If the Browns could trade down for picks and still get Warmack or pass rusher I think that would be a good move for them.'amnesiac said:
100% on board with this plan.
In my option the team should trade the pick, top ten pick could easy get us a 14-18 pick with a 2nd round pick for this year as well a later (5-7).
