Theory of Defense

Trick question. It’s the offseason, they should focus on everything including the defense. In the draft they need to prioritize offense, but if they can make the defense better they should focus on it during free agency.

i would like to see the Browns go after an offensive “playmaker” this offseason as well as continue to build this young, tough defense…needing to stop the run is a focus.

Having an offense that can actually stay on the field and score points is the best defense.

Having a good defense is important. As good as the Saints and Packers were this year, their defenses didn’t do a very good job. Both of those teams rely on big plays from their defense: sacks, interceptions, fumbles, and scoring. They are high risk/high reward, aggressive styles of defense that blitz a lot and will give up a few scores if they can get turnovers. They rely on their offenses to score and turn games into more of an NBA pace than a pitcher’s duel where one double can put the entire game in jeopardy.

The interesting thing to me is that the Patriots—who have an equally bad defense—are still alive. Part of that is matchup, but I think part of it is a more complimentary style with their offense (and ST). If you had a nickel for every time you heard Tom Brady talk about taking what a defense gives you, you’d be rich. The Pats’ D is similarly patient. The offense chips away and eventually figures you out while the defense makes people grind down a long field and chip away slowly to score. Once the offense finds your weakness, they score in bunches. Once the defense has a lead, they make you chip away even more and you panic because you don’t get the big play.

Green Bay and NO dare you to take chances on big plays, New England gives you easy but unattractive options.

And I think that what we are seeing in the playoffs is that your defense just needs to do its job. It doesn’t necessarily have to be great, it just needs to work according to the blueprint of your franchise. When the Saints won, their defense got those turnovers. Same with Green Bay. When they Giants won, they pressured the hell out of the QB and let Eli be steady but unspectacular with a pretty good run game. It all needs to work together.

Nice post, by the way! I enjoyed it a lot- Just work on not apologizing so much :) You’ve got good things to say, so say them with confidence. There’s only one rufio and you’re not him, but you have good things to say and at least in this post you’ve said them well. I’ll look forward to reading more of your stuff, so keep posting it :)

As of right now (this may change depending on which side of the McCoy fence in my brain I wind up on), I think this is the first draft we’ve had since expansion where I think a virtually pure Best Player Available is the best strategy. My only caveat is that if the Browns’ personnel department grades a defensive player a slim point above an offensive player on their board I’d agree with taking the offensive player but it would have to be a near toss up. We’ve got a bunch of picks in the first couple rounds and with a max value strategy, needs can be filled while also adding depth across the roster.

So, there might be a wide receiver a little further down the list than say a linebacker. But, if that linebacker is the better football player and can penetrate those zone run plays like the ones Houston annihilated us with, more often, our defense can get ahead of the downs. A guy like Sheard can get aggressive and get that sack, or let our secondary play pure pass and get that INT that changes field position and helps our offense generate points in a way that filling a “need” at WR with a lesser prospect won’t as easily achieve. A similar hypothetical could be made for taking an offensive player over a defensive one that fills a need but isn’t as highly graded.

Focusing on either side of the ball is a hard sell for me in this draft, well… at least for the next five minutes.