Cleveland Browns Regressed?

John Clayton listed the Cleveland Browns among the five NFL teams which have regressed in 2016 (thanks Mike Bode WFNY).

At first glance, he's right.  That's the problem with first glances.

John says there's no way the new talent can offset the free agents they lost.

That's got to be true on the offensive line.  John could have added that the current starters aren't familiar with the new starters at their positions, and there's a chemistry issue here.

But Clayton was making a general statement.  That's the problem with general statements.

First, like most pundits, he's writing RG3 off as a bridge quarterback.  That's a huge assumption.  So far, Josh McCown is sticking around, and that means that quarterback may have been upgraded.

To say that the four wide receivers drafted don't offset the loss of Travis Benjamin would be idiotic.  Happily, Clayton would never have said this.  But he implied it by omission.

Wide receiver has been unmistakably upgraded.  Depth at tight end was upgraded.  Defensive line and outside linebacker has been upgraded.

Gipson, when healthy, is a big play guy.  He shouldn't have been playing in the box last season (wtf?).  But he does get hurt too much.  Donte Whitner was fading.

Campbell is massively underrated, and a free agent and drafted safety were added.  While Gipson is a special player, the safety position in general hasn't taken a step back at all.

Karlos Dansby was amazing, but two free agents and two draft picks will indeed offset his loss.  None of the new players are likely to match his total package, but collectively, inside linebacker will be better; notably in the pass rush and vs the run.

Clayton, like most pundits, is star-struck.  I believe he'd argue with my safety and inside linebacker statements:

"You can't replace playmakers like Dansby and Gipson by committee".

Yes, you can.  When one will probably miss four games, and father time will take a chunk off the other.  When Campbell might be as good or even better.  When two of the new linebackers make plays in the opposing backfield, yes you can.

Like most pundits, Clayton also assumes a lot.  For decades, it's been safe to assume the worst about the Cleveland Browns.  It's become a habit.

The RG3 assumption isn't dumb, considering his irrefutable step back from his rookie season.  I just think it's wrong, and explained why in my preceding post.

The assumption that the replacements for Mack and Schwartz won't be as good, or even that no new ILB can do everything the ageless Dansby did, are common sense.

But Whitner?  Benjamin vs Coleman?  

I expected a step back myself, until after the draft.  The worst an objective analyst can see here now is a 3-13 team that can win more than three games this season.