I think Clowney can be just as good--if not better--than Vernon in the run game.
I completely agree with you that Sheldon to Billings is a massive downgrade.
I do think that every other DT we've picked up is a big upgrade to that part of the roster. I was a big Ogunjobi fan, but he disappointed last year. I'd go so far as to say Togiai, right now, is likely a better player--and that's not even counting Malik Jackson, the potential of Marvin Wilson, or the comeback of Malik McDowell.
More importantly, I think our secondary is much more capable--both at CB and S--at defending the run.
I think that's what a modern defense has to do:
- give the passing game fits
- Contain the run game that comes off the passing game (scrambles and whatnot).
- Be effective enough at stopping the run that a team can't completely gash you with it
Point 3 is big--and I think that having corners and safeties who can diagnose a play and make the tackle is a big change from last year to this y ear. I also think that having penetrators like Clowney and Myles can lead to enough run plays getting blown up to stop the chains from continually moving if a team wants to deviate from the pass to focus on the run.
That's not even talking about the linebacker upgrades as well.
I think there's likely some statistical probability models around passing and running that indicate that stopping the short passing game and the RPO game is where you have to begin. I will try to articulate it but I no promises:
It's something like the variability of passing "returns" is "worth it" and it has come a long way from that old mantra that only 3 things can happen when you throw a pass and 2 of them are bad.
There's also some logic like "we have 75 yards to stop these guys - we don't need to prevent yards, we have to stop a first down and we have maybe 6 attempts - if we stop it really quickly, we allow 0 and if it takes us a bit (or we need the help of the 12th defender the end zone) then we likely allow 3"
I think this is why/how the Chiefs get gashed and people think they can't defend. I think they look for 1. opportunities to cause a negative play, which causes a ton of issues for all teams one of which is more predictability (higher propensity to pass). The Chiefs, of course, are often ahead and will tilt toward letting teams cash in runs, even first downs, for the cost of time (and of course they aren't intending to give them these things for nothing - they are essentially playing odds).
There's probably something to be said about getting like, 1 first down on offense, or maybe there's data that says getting a first down when the team has their heavy defense in, and then running the hurry up, is a very favorable outcome. Not sure how this is relevant but it comes to mind.
I think most teams know this, but not all adhere to it as they should for a variety of reasons - personnel, speed of the game, football guys, etc.
That said, I think the Browns staff and front office are one of the best at understanding these dynamics, other ones that I haven't thought of or grasped, and their interplay. Evidence includes:
1. Chubb/Hunt (and the OL): our rushing game, even on like 1st & 10 or any time you are playing us to pass, like we don't get 6 yard runs - we can set up 2nd and short or, if you make a mistake, Chubb is quick but mofo can burn people too! Like a missed tackle or read and dude is gone. He is a bruiser, with damn good quickness, who can also win a sprint. It's amazing really. He isn't replaceable in my eyes.
2. The draft capital spent on Newsome & JOK. Just that emphasis on coverage.
3. Looting the Rams' backfield. More emphasis on coverage.
4. A grown man front 4.
I guess the bird's eye take here is that every defensive scheme has it's weaknesses and I think what the FO & coaches are attempting to is an intelligent/purposeful way of going about it.
brownswire.usatoday.com
