Who will start: Suggs or Droughns? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Who will start: Suggs or Droughns?

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby bigGAME101 » Sun Jul 10, 2005 9:28 pm

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:
maddog60 wrote:I dont think there will RBBC. I think Crennel brought in Droughns to make sure he had depth in the backfield and could establish a running game so he can bring in a young QB and have a strong running game for the kid to fall back on while developing. I think Suggs will turn out to be a surprise #3 RB for teams in a lot of leagues. I think he wins the full-time starting job, with Droughns spelling him, and pushing him, while William Green makes it more obvious why just about everything from the prevoious era of the team needs to go.


He brought Reuben in to add power to the run game. They needed a bull to get short yardage so they got him. Suggs will see first and 10s, 2nd and longs and passing downs. Droughns will get the 2nd, 3rd and shorts and the goal line carries.


I like this analysis, and believe that you are correct given the situation that has come about in CLE. Unfortunately for the Browns, I dont think Droughns will be the 'bull" they expected, and thus Suggs will see more opportunities as the season goes on.
Image

North Ancaster Astros - Crusaders Treasure Chest represent
bigGAME101
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

User avatar

Posts: 544
Joined: 4 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Who gives a shi...

Postby maddog60 » Sun Jul 10, 2005 9:45 pm

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:
maddog60 wrote:I dont think there will RBBC. I think Crennel brought in Droughns to make sure he had depth in the backfield and could establish a running game so he can bring in a young QB and have a strong running game for the kid to fall back on while developing. I think Suggs will turn out to be a surprise #3 RB for teams in a lot of leagues. I think he wins the full-time starting job, with Droughns spelling him, and pushing him, while William Green makes it more obvious why just about everything from the prevoious era of the team needs to go.


He brought Reuben in to add power to the run game. They needed a bull to get short yardage so they got him. Suggs will see first and 10s, 2nd and longs and passing downs. Droughns will get the 2nd, 3rd and shorts and the goal line carries.


At 5-11 207 lb bull? I'm sorry, I just don't see that as Droughns is shorter and lighter than Suggs. And Chester Taylor, who they went after first, was 5-11 213 lbs. If they wanted a short yardage bull, they could've gone after Ron Dayne, Anthony Thomas, or Jesse Chatman. Their were plenty short yardage RBs in FA and RFA, but they didn't pursue a single one.

Also, Droughns was significantly weaker on 3rd down behind denver's line than any other time. Droughns had 4.7 ypc averages on 1st and 2nd down, but only 3.4 on 3rd down.

So what're you're saying is that the Browns are planning on having a smaller RB than Suggs who has proven to be worse in 3rd down situations to become their 3rd down short yardage RB? I just don't see any logical reason why.
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby GreatestShowOnEarth » Sun Jul 10, 2005 10:31 pm

Im tellin you guys its gonna be an RBBC. I cant remember where i say it but i saw a report about it. Will try and look for the link.
Image
GreatestShowOnEarth
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

Cafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 6525
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: South Stadium

Postby ROYALWITCHEESE » Sun Jul 10, 2005 10:34 pm

maddog60 wrote:
ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:
maddog60 wrote:I dont think there will RBBC. I think Crennel brought in Droughns to make sure he had depth in the backfield and could establish a running game so he can bring in a young QB and have a strong running game for the kid to fall back on while developing. I think Suggs will turn out to be a surprise #3 RB for teams in a lot of leagues. I think he wins the full-time starting job, with Droughns spelling him, and pushing him, while William Green makes it more obvious why just about everything from the prevoious era of the team needs to go.


He brought Reuben in to add power to the run game. They needed a bull to get short yardage so they got him. Suggs will see first and 10s, 2nd and longs and passing downs. Droughns will get the 2nd, 3rd and shorts and the goal line carries.


At 5-11 207 lb bull? I'm sorry, I just don't see that as Droughns is shorter and lighter than Suggs. And Chester Taylor, who they went after first, was 5-11 213 lbs. If they wanted a short yardage bull, they could've gone after Ron Dayne, Anthony Thomas, or Jesse Chatman. Their were plenty short yardage RBs in FA and RFA, but they didn't pursue a single one.

Also, Droughns was significantly weaker on 3rd down behind denver's line than any other time. Droughns had 4.7 ypc averages on 1st and 2nd down, but only 3.4 on 3rd down.

So what're you're saying is that the Browns are planning on having a smaller RB than Suggs who has proven to be worse in 3rd down situations to become their 3rd down short yardage RB? I just don't see any logical reason why.


Yet another misguided 'look at the numbers' soul. Of course you are going to get less yards on 3rd and short. That's when the most defenders are in the box. And if you want to talk numbers, Suggs averaged 3.7 FOR THE SEASON.

And if Suggs is so good, why are they going after Taylor and Droughns? In fact they TRADED for Droughns. How many other teams have been willing to give up a mere 3rd rounder for Henry and Alexander? They must have wanted Droughns for some purpose.

And bull doesn't refer to size, son. It refers to running style. Suggs is a shifty avoid contact runner. Not good around the goal line. Droughns LOOKS for contact and runs people over, no matter what you think about his frame. And 5'11 = 5'11. How is Suggs taller if he is the same height? And I'm sure that whopping 6 pounds doesn't make a huge difference to Reuben. Maybe your confidence come from the 2 TDs Suggs piled up.

And while you are on the subject, I noticed that you didn't post Suggs numbers in the same situation. Nice try though. :-t
ROYALWITCHEESE
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 849
Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby pangbones » Sun Jul 10, 2005 10:46 pm

He brought Reuben in to add power to the run game. They needed a bull to get short yardage so they got him. Suggs will see first and 10s, 2nd and longs and passing downs. Droughns will get the 2nd, 3rd and shorts and the goal line carries.[/quote]

Agreed. Suggs will get the yards, and Droughns will get the TD's.
pangbones
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1178
Joined: 8 May 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby maddog60 » Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:19 pm

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:Yet another misguided 'look at the numbers' soul. Of course you are going to get less yards on 3rd and short.


Except that Suggs got just as high a ypc on 3rd down running behind a lesser line, with less passing threats as well.

That's when the most defenders are in the box. And if you want to talk numbers, Suggs averaged 3.7 FOR THE SEASON.


And other teams go into feeding frenzies when Cleveland doesn't resign a starting lineman. No, they don't. Cleveland is known for having one of the worst overall lines in all of football. Let's not even get into the divisional opponents (Baltimore and Pitt).

And if Suggs is so good, why are they going after Taylor and Droughns? In fact they TRADED for Droughns.


They traded an aging defensive tackle who doesn't do squat for them, and former first round DE that never lived up to billing. I assure you Tomlinson, Holmes and Jordan aren't shuddering at the prospect of possibly facing either of those guys when they play Denver. More likely they're licking their chops.

And bull doesn't refer to size, son. It refers to running style. Suggs is a shifty avoid contact runner. Not good around the goal line. Droughns LOOKS for contact and runs people over, no matter what you think about his frame is.
[/quote]

I don't get to see many Denver or Cleveland games, but I'm unable to find even one photo of Droughns making contact (though quite a few of him shying away from contact). I do however know that Denver's running game is based off of chop blocking and cut blocks, not the kind of scheme where a RB bulls through defensivemen.


And 5'11 = 5'11. How is Suggs taller if he is the same height? And I'm sure that whopping 6 pounds doesn't make a huge difference to Reuben.


Read before you respond. You're referring to Chest Taylor's height and weight, which I posted to show that both RBs the Browns pursued were not big RBs. If size is not a problem for the 5-11 207 lbs Droughns, then I suppose Brian Westbrook at 5-10 and 205 lbs should have no trouble being an up the gut rusher either. Oh wait, I think just about everyone, myself included, thinks he's too small to play RB Jerome Bettis style.

And while you are on the subject, I noticed that you didn't post Suggs numbers in the same situation. Nice try though. :-t


3.4 ypc on 3rd down, the same as Droughns. Perhaps you should do the research you insinuate I'm skewing the stats. Oh, did I mention Suggs got that 3.4 ypc behind Cleveland's O-line, when Droughns only managed the same behind Denver's. If you'd like to argue that Cleveland had a better offensive line, or that Garcia/McCown scared off more defenses than Plummer, by all means I'd love to see that.
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby ROYALWITCHEESE » Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:15 am

maddog60 wrote:
ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:Yet another misguided 'look at the numbers' soul. Of course you are going to get less yards on 3rd and short.


Except that Suggs got just as high a ypc on 3rd down running behind a lesser line, with less passing threats as well.

That's when the most defenders are in the box. And if you want to talk numbers, Suggs averaged 3.7 FOR THE SEASON.


And other teams go into feeding frenzies when Cleveland doesn't resign a starting lineman. No, they don't. Cleveland is known for having one of the worst overall lines in all of football. Let's not even get into the divisional opponents (Baltimore and Pitt).

And if Suggs is so good, why are they going after Taylor and Droughns? In fact they TRADED for Droughns.


They traded an aging defensive tackle who doesn't do squat for them, and former first round DE that never lived up to billing. I assure you Tomlinson, Holmes and Jordan aren't shuddering at the prospect of possibly facing either of those guys when they play Denver. More likely they're licking their chops.

And bull doesn't refer to size, son. It refers to running style. Suggs is a shifty avoid contact runner. Not good around the goal line. Droughns LOOKS for contact and runs people over, no matter what you think about his frame is.


I don't get to see many Denver or Cleveland games, but I'm unable to find even one photo of Droughns making contact (though quite a few of him shying away from contact). I do however know that Denver's running game is based off of chop blocking and cut blocks, not the kind of scheme where a RB bulls through defensivemen.


And 5'11 = 5'11. How is Suggs taller if he is the same height? And I'm sure that whopping 6 pounds doesn't make a huge difference to Reuben.


Read before you respond. You're referring to Chest Taylor's height and weight, which I posted to show that both RBs the Browns pursued were not big RBs. If size is not a problem for the 5-11 207 lbs Droughns, then I suppose Brian Westbrook at 5-10 and 205 lbs should have no trouble being an up the gut rusher either. Oh wait, I think just about everyone, myself included, thinks he's too small to play RB Jerome Bettis style.

And while you are on the subject, I noticed that you didn't post Suggs numbers in the same situation. Nice try though. :-t


3.4 ypc on 3rd down, the same as Droughns. Perhaps you should do the research you insinuate I'm skewing the stats. Oh, did I mention Suggs got that 3.4 ypc behind Cleveland's O-line, when Droughns only managed the same behind Denver's. If you'd like to argue that Cleveland had a better offensive line, or that Garcia/McCown scared off more defenses than Plummer, by all means I'd love to see that.[/quote]

You didn't mention Suggs ypc until now. And I watched most every game all season so I know how Droughns runs. He was criticized for not being the usual cut-back runner that Shannahan likes.

And either way, Suggs is only 210. And NO RB bulls defensive lineman. Learn football. RBs make their contact with LBs and DBs. There's not an RB in the league who can bull a D lineman who is twice their size.

This is where your lack of knowledge shows. You're claiming to know Droughns style through internet photos? Which are designed to give you a clear shot of the target? You haven't watched a Denver game, yet feel the need to argue Droughns running style?

Please read. Don't compare Westbrook to Droughns. They have completely different styles. Preist Holmes is only 210 but is strong as hell. The fact that Droughns was converted from FB shows his style of running and strength when taking on LBs and DBs. Much like Stephen Davis.

I'm afraid I can't argue with someone with no knowledge of one of the key elemenst in the equation. You have to actually have seen the man play to comment on how he plays.
ROYALWITCHEESE
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 849
Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby maddog60 » Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:38 am

ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:You didn't mention Suggs ypc until now.


You didn't bother to find out on your own before assuming it would be worse. Sometimes people exclude unnecessary data for clarity. The fact that I didn't mention it doesn't make your point or your insinuations any more correct, because you clearly had no idea how Suggs performed on 3rd down.

And either way, Suggs is only 210. And NO RB bulls defensive lineman. Learn football.


Learn English. Read the post before you respond:

maddog60 wrote:not the kind of scheme where a RB bulls through defensivemen.


Defensivemen does not mean defensive linemen. This is the second post in a row, where you've criticized my post because you failed to read it. And then you claim I have no knowledge of the game.

This is where your lack of knowledge shows. You're claiming to know Droughns style through internet photos? Which are designed to give you a clear shot of the target? You haven't watched a Denver game, yet feel the need to argue Droughns running style?


Yet again you fail to read the post you're criticizing. I said, and you can actually read my original post to verify this, that I don't get to see many Cleveland or Denver games. I'm a huge football fan, so I watch as many games as I can during the season, but not living near either team, they're not always available, or I might feel a better game is on. I have seen both teams play, just not often. And I made it clear that I didn't have knowledge from watching games to base my evaluation of Droughns on. I went looking for photos of Droughns running (on NFL.com) because statistics don't show running styles, so it was the only possible source of that information left. What part of this demonstrates a lack of football knowledge?

Please read. Don't compare Westbrook to Droughns. They have completely different styles. Preist Holmes is only 210 but is strong as hell. The fact that Droughns was converted from FB shows his style of running and strength when taking on LBs and DBs. Much like Stephen Davis.


So, you're arguing that size has no bearing whatsoever on a RBs style of running? I think Jim Brown and Jerome Bettis would argue differently. I'd love a rational explanation on that too. Otherwise, Droughns' size (comparable to that of Westbrook's) is a huge concern if he's going to be a short-yardage RB.

I'm afraid I can't argue with someone with no knowledge of one of the key elemenst in the equation.


That would be what? You're going to claim because you've seen Droughns play more than I have, that my opinion is automatically inferior?
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby ROYALWITCHEESE » Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:57 am

maddog60 wrote:
ROYALWITCHEESE wrote:You didn't mention Suggs ypc until now.


You didn't bother to find out on your own before assuming it would be worse. Sometimes people exclude unnecessary data for clarity. The fact that I didn't mention it doesn't make your point or your insinuations any more correct, because you clearly had no idea how Suggs performed on 3rd down.

And either way, Suggs is only 210. And NO RB bulls defensive lineman. Learn football.


Learn English. Read the post before you respond:

maddog60 wrote:not the kind of scheme where a RB bulls through defensivemen.


Defensivemen does not mean defensive linemen. This is the second post in a row, where you've criticized my post because you failed to read it. And then you claim I have no knowledge of the game.

This is where your lack of knowledge shows. You're claiming to know Droughns style through internet photos? Which are designed to give you a clear shot of the target? You haven't watched a Denver game, yet feel the need to argue Droughns running style?


Yet again you fail to read the post you're criticizing. I said, and you can actually read my original post to verify this, that I don't get to see many Cleveland or Denver games. I'm a huge football fan, so I watch as many games as I can during the season, but not living near either team, they're not always available, or I might feel a better game is on. I have seen both teams play, just not often. And I made it clear that I didn't have knowledge from watching games to base my evaluation of Droughns on. I went looking for photos of Droughns running (on NFL.com) because statistics don't show running styles, so it was the only possible source of that information left. What part of this demonstrates a lack of football knowledge?

Please read. Don't compare Westbrook to Droughns. They have completely different styles. Preist Holmes is only 210 but is strong as hell. The fact that Droughns was converted from FB shows his style of running and strength when taking on LBs and DBs. Much like Stephen Davis.


So, you're arguing that size has no bearing whatsoever on a RBs style of running? I think Jim Brown and Jerome Bettis would argue differently. I'd love a rational explanation on that too. Otherwise, Droughns' size (comparable to that of Westbrook's) is a huge concern if he's going to be a short-yardage RB.

I'm afraid I can't argue with someone with no knowledge of one of the key elemenst in the equation.


That would be what? You're going to claim because you've seen Droughns play more than I have, that my opinion is automatically inferior?


Misread the 'defensivemen'. Don't think that is a word so I sped right through.

Suggs ypc IS worse. And I DID look it up. Droughns 4.5 Suggs 3.7. I don't come into a debate without ammo. You should try it.

I didn't say no knowledge of the game. I said no knowledge of the elements in the equation. And if you admit to not having the necessary knowledge, why feel the need to speak on it as if you do?

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said size had nothing to do with style. Strength does however, and you'll notice I mentioned that, or perhaps not--you ignored it.

If you are say 178 obviously you can't be a power back. But over 200 pounds there are variants in styles. Holmes is elusive but can still bowl you over at 210 as can Droughns. Suggs is an elusive runner and always has been. Droughns is a straigh line runner in the mold of a Stephen Davis as I have already illustrated, but you ignored that ever so crucial detail to the argument. Droughns size definitely wasn't a concern for 1300 yards and 6 TDs in 13 games now was it. And to figure he will split the carries decreases his chance of injury wouldn't you say?

Not inferior because I have seen more, although that is the logical conclusion. But inferior because you admit to not knowing Droughns' style other than from internet photos. See a player play is very crucial when discussing style of play.
ROYALWITCHEESE
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 849
Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Postby moochman » Mon Jul 11, 2005 2:29 am

Maddog brings up a good point in the change in both O-line talent and blocking schemes that Droughns will have to adjust to. There is a chance that Rueben will be shown to be lacking behind the Brown's O-line.
Suggs needs to stay healthy and he will be able to beat out Droughns for the majority of PT, IMO. Droughns has system back written all over him.
Image


I think, therefore I am. I think fantasy, therefore I am unreal?
moochman
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterSurvival Of The Fittest WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 16300
(Past Year: 80)
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Living in the shame only a Lions fan knows

PreviousNext

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 18:37 hours
(and 42 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact