2025 Offseason Thread

[JoeyFlex5]

Browns are releasing Tyler Huntley... can we cut Cooper and bring Huntley back?

Not without Greg Roman’s offense. That was the sole reason we competed with Huntley, and that was the sole redeeming quality about Roman, very high floor regardless of who’s on the offensive roster because the run scheme carries games against weaker competition

 

[rossihunter2]

I don't know... I feel like he's a guy I didn't really recognize what impact he had until he was gone. I don't think he's some starter level player or anything, but I do think he's always been effective in moving the ball down the field and giving us a chance at points.

I think we could do a lot worse as a PS QB3 - especially when that option currently is Leary.

I havent been paying attention to huntley much - but as long as he's still a good option runner, then he has value as a backup QB

 

[rossihunter2]

I think you'd struggle to find someone worse than Leary. Not sure what the point is investing any further in him.

2 offseasons and he looks no better with his decision making or his accuracy
bin him off

 

[rossihunter2]

I'm not a Sam Howell guy, but I do like what the Eagles are doing right now. Acquiring depth players that are falling out of favor for minimal returns.

getting them into your system and seeing if you can't find a diamond in the rough

they take a lot of those shots at guys like that and a fair few miss, but because they take so many shots, they get some that hit and recoup their value (and more) which allows them to keep going

the cowboys also like going after retreads, the difference is, they're not getting any hits from it

ravens do it too to a lesser extent where we bring in vets who've fallen out of favour and see if we can resurrect their career or add value e.g. ronald darby, john simpson

the difference is that the eagles go after younger failures too (see Mekhi Becton)

 

[rossihunter2]

There aren't even 31 starting NFL QBs that could give us a chance to win if Lamar went down. The expectations of QB2 and QB3 have always surprised me. If it was that easy to find a competent QB, teams wouldn't be drafting guys like Anthony Richardson in the top 5. Teams can't find good starters let alone good backups.

in some ways, finding a decent backup is easier - because you're just looking for someone who can give you some conservative, mistake-free football

the problem with finding backups, is that teams often have to create them out of former starters who have a different remit to that of a backup

someone like anthony richardson will be a lottery as a backup because he needs gametime to improve (something backups hopefully don't get much of) and because while he does some difficult things really well, he also does some easy things really poorly, and you need your backup to be decent at the easy stuff, the stuff that keeps your offence in rhythm

tyrod is a perfect example of a great backup QB - conservative in his play, mobile, consistent - that's the guy you're chasing

which is why the ravens liked cooper rush, he's gone 9-5 as a starter:
he doesn't take many risks, low yards per attempt
he's normally around 60% completion percentage
he's lost 1 game where he didn't turn the ball over - he keeps the offence ticking and on schedule even though it's not exciting

for a team with talent, especially on defence, that'll work fine

 

[rossihunter2]

cole jackson really going for it saying higgins is the 3rd best LB on the team but not going to make the roster because of special teams
if he was really the 3rd best LB on the team, he'd make the team
if he was really the 3rd best LB on the team, he'd be playing with the Simpson ahead of Hummel and Buchanan in preseason

i still think the only reason anyone cares about Higgins is not taking into account the level of competition because he looks good in preseason tape against 3s and is being too hopeful because the position is overall weaker

 

[rmcjacket23]

I think the conversation has steered too much to Huntley specifically. If you give me the choice between Huntley and Leary, I'll take Huntley 10 times out of 10. If it's someone else that's not Huntley, that's cool too. I think the point is that there are going to be QB3 upgrades out there and Huntley would be one of those options if we want to go that route. Doesn't mean it's Huntley and only Huntley.

I'd also prefer a developmental QB on the PS rather than a veteran. If QB3 is playing, you're fucked anyway. I'm less interested in an established vet for that role. Especially one that could easily be poached mid-season by a team with a QB injury.

 

[Simba]

cole jackson really going for it saying higgins is the 3rd best LB on the team but not going to make the roster because of special teams
if he was really the 3rd best LB on the team, he'd make the team
if he was really the 3rd best LB on the team, he'd be playing with the Simpson ahead of Hummel and Buchanan in preseason

i still think the only reason anyone cares about Higgins is not taking into account the level of competition because he looks good in preseason tape against 3s and is being too hopeful because the position is overall weaker

Also ignores that Buchanan’s skill set is much more impressive in the long term, and that’s already started to show. He’s been beating this drum since game 1 where Buchanan did not look so great. And he’s gone out and done much better since then.

Higgins may be the 4th best LB (I’m still not convinced he’s better than Martin) but that’s not why Hummel is here. I know he added the ST caveat but you also just can’t ignore that for the sake of bettering your argument.

 

[rossihunter2]

I'd also prefer a developmental QB on the PS rather than a veteran. If QB3 is playing, you're fucked anyway. I'm less interested in an established vet for that role. Especially one that could easily be poached mid-season by a team with a QB injury.

these things have levels though

if a guy's not developing, i'd much rather have a veteran so that at least the scout team runs well

obviously i'd much rather have a developmental guy at QB3 but to me Leary's not worth developing anymore
personally i'd want us to draft a day 3 QB basically every other year until we find a guy we like

 

[Simba]

I'd also prefer a developmental QB on the PS rather than a veteran. If QB3 is playing, you're fucked anyway. I'm less interested in an established vet for that role. Especially one that could easily be poached mid-season by a team with a QB injury.

I have no problems with that either. And certainly don’t disagree. If the goal is to improve QB3, I think you can do that in either direction - a vet or a developmental guy.

 

[rossihunter2]

Also ignores that Buchanan’s skill set is much more impressive in the long term, and that’s already started to show. He’s been beating this drum since game 1 where Buchanan did not look so great. And he’s gone out and done much better since then.

Higgins may be the 4th best LB (I’m still not convinced he’s better than Martin) but that’s not why Hummel is here. I know he added the ST caveat but you also just can’t ignore that for the sake of bettering your argument.

like that's the key part of it with Hummel
that's why Hummel's here, he's going to be a special teams captain on a team that just lost Chris Board, Malik Harrison and Kristian Welch

and the buchanan thing seems weird to me, he didn't play amazing in preseason 1, but was excellent in game 2 - flashed some play recognition, range and coverage skill, and that extended into game 3 as well - still inconsistent and struggled with some RPO/play-action stuff

buchanan's a bit younger, got more natural athletic talent, went to a much smaller school - so he's got much more obvious room to develop both physically and mentally

the only way higgins makes this roster is if they genuinely believe he can step in and play LB this year... and i'll be honest, that would really surprise me given his usage in preseason - i would not be surprised if we add a vet LB to the PS who might fulfil that role better than Higgins (not to say that we shouldn't try and bring higgins back on the PS)

 

[rossihunter2]

i do feel like Cole's gone the way of Ken McKusick in some ways regarding roster depth analysis - focusing too much on play contributions in moments in preseason rather than the things that actually matter for teasing some of this stuff out:

Special Teams usage
Order of entry
Level of competition

almost no (real) acknowledgement from either of these guys about the realities of those 3 things

it's the reason that i've got very little doubt about Rasheen Ali making this roster, but Cole finds it perplexing and Ken thinks he's a trade candidate - Ali's featuring on basically every special teams unit and might even be the team's kickoff returner (either him or Mitchell)

it's the reason Brade might still make the team despite tumbling down the DB depth chart

it's why kirkwood may well be next man up at WR

 

[Simba]

like that's the key part of it with Hummel
that's why Hummel's here, he's going to be a special teams captain on a team that just lost Chris Board, Malik Harrison and Kristian Welch

and the buchanan thing seems weird to me, he didn't play amazing in preseason 1, but was excellent in game 2 - flashed some play recognition, range and coverage skill, and that extended into game 3 as well - still inconsistent and struggled with some RPO/play-action stuff

buchanan's a bit younger, got more natural athletic talent, went to a much smaller school - so he's got much more obvious room to develop both physically and mentally

the only way higgins makes this roster is if they genuinely believe he can step in and play LB this year... and i'll be honest, that would really surprise me given his usage in preseason - i would not be surprised if we add a vet LB to the PS who might fulfil that role better than Higgins (not to say that we shouldn't try and bring higgins back on the PS)

Yeah it's a weird one. Like, I respect the film efforts. I think if you're looking purely at the film, Cole does some good work. It's the analysis (and existing biases) of that film where I tend to find myself having problems with the work.

I think Higgins has played well and he's taken advantage of the play time he's been given, but at the same time, how does it translate? It sounds weird to say for a rookie, but he's almost and is what he is guy at this stage. He's already pretty sound mentally, but the physical simply is not going to get better, and that's why I just don't see it with him.

He's not too different from Josh Ross (as a LBer) in my eyes. Of course, Ross made the team, but what has his career been? He started in almost the same boat - smart, instinctive leader from a bigger program that has athletic limitations. He's still kicking around the league but Ross has played exactly 0 defensive snaps in his career.

I think Higgins is going to play some games in his career, whether here or elsewhere. But the long term prospects are not great for a guy with his profile. I hope for his sake he bucks the trend, but there's a mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise.

 

[Simba]

Back on the Leary front, I genuinely do think they're going to look to upgrade. It doesn't mean they will, but they're going to cast the net.

Part of the problem is that he does run practice well. They like what he does on the scout team and it sounds like his practice performance is significantly better than in-game performance. They very well could opt for the guy that knows the system and knows his role.

On the other side, they are 1 Cooper Rush twisted ankle (not putting any bad juju elsewhere) away from Leary dressing on Sundays, and I do not think they are comfortable with that at all. There was a time where Brett Hundley and Kenji Bahar were active backups, so I guess there's some level of risk they're willing to take. If it came down to a situation like that though, I think they'd do everything in their power to make sure Leary doesn't take a snap. So if they feel that way, why not try to upgrade now?

 

[Simba]

i do feel like Cole's gone the way of Ken McKusick in some ways regarding roster depth analysis - focusing too much on play contributions in moments in preseason rather than the things that actually matter for teasing some of this stuff out:

Special Teams usage
Order of entry
Level of competition

almost no (real) acknowledgement from either of these guys about the realities of those 3 things

it's the reason that i've got very little doubt about Rasheen Ali making this roster, but Cole finds it perplexing and Ken thinks he's a trade candidate - Ali's featuring on basically every special teams unit and might even be the team's kickoff returner (either him or Mitchell)

it's the reason Brade might still make the team despite tumbling down the DB depth chart

it's why kirkwood may well be next man up at WR

If I hear about god damn "option value" one more time...

 

[rossihunter2]

Yeah it's a weird one. Like, I respect the film efforts. I think if you're looking purely at the film, Cole does some good work. It's the analysis (and existing biases) of that film where I tend to find myself having problems with the work.

I think Higgins has played well and he's taken advantage of the play time he's been given, but at the same time, how does it translate? It sounds weird to say for a rookie, but he's almost and is what he is guy at this stage. He's already pretty sound mentally, but the physical simply is not going to get better, and that's why I just don't see it with him.

He's not too different from Josh Ross (as a LBer) in my eyes. Of course, Ross made the team, but what has his career been? He started in almost the same boat - smart, instinctive leader from a bigger program that has athletic limitations. He's still kicking around the league but Ross has played exactly 0 defensive snaps in his career.

I think Higgins is going to play some games in his career, whether here or elsewhere. But the long term prospects are not great for a guy with his profile. I hope for his sake he bucks the trend, but there's a mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise.

the difference being that josh ross played special teams
but you're right that they're similar types of prospects

 

[Simba]

the difference being that josh ross played special teams
but you're right that they're similar types of prospects

Exactly.

And I think the frustrating thing with Higgins is that he has the profile that suggests he could be a quality STer but the high-end reps (or lack thereof) suggest he's unable to do that currently. He just got his first core ST reps on Saturday but that's also with guys like Hummel and Wallace taking the day off.

 

[rossihunter2]

If I hear about god damn "option value" one more time...

omg yes haha
the constant overrating of contractual control

it definitely factors, but he makes entire predictions and bases a ton of analysis around contractual control

 

[rmcjacket23]

these things have levels though

if a guy's not developing, i'd much rather have a veteran so that at least the scout team runs well

obviously i'd much rather have a developmental guy at QB3 but to me Leary's not worth developing anymore
personally i'd want us to draft a day 3 QB basically every other year until we find a guy we like

I'm good if they don't think Leary is worth developing. But if that's the case, I want a different developmental guy, not a 6 year veteran.

 

[rossihunter2]

Exactly.

And I think the frustrating thing with Higgins is that he has the profile that suggests he could be a quality STer but the high-end reps (or lack thereof) suggest he's unable to do that currently. He just got his first core ST reps on Saturday but that's also with guys like Hummel and Wallace taking the day off.

also that apparently higgins hasn't even been doing much ST work in training camp either (according to jeff zrebiec) so it's not even like he's just down the special teams depth chart, just didnt factor much at all in their special teams opinions