Ask the Insiders: Get the 411

Lane Adkins has been taking a lot of questions in the Ask the Insiders forum over the past couple of weeks, and giving fans information you can't get anywhere else. Here's a sample from yesterday, dealing with questions such as whether Couch and Holcomb can co-exist in 2004, and offensive approach that Terry Robiskie will bring to bear...

Gameface64: Insiders, if Tim Couch is named the 04 starter, do you think it would create problems for team chemistry if KH is retained as the backup? Is there any lingering divisions among the players from last year's controversy?

If you think it would be bad to have both TC and KH in the same locker room, do you know if the FO has given any consideration to the less expensive FA QBs like Volek, Feeley or Bauman?

Lane: Personally they may be able to co-exist, but indications are the front office and coaching staff does not want the distraction of having both of them on the 2004 roster.

Redright: Any interest in free agent QBs, such as Feely, volek, Bauman? any others?

Lane: Too early to tell on interest of players on other teams. Once we get into February, agents begin to talk :-)


MarkTroy: Now that they've hired the right guy, what will our offense become:

1) A tweaked version of the current offense with the same terminology and improved, less predictable play-calling?

2) A more vertical passing offense that Lane said Robiskie coached previously and prefers?

3) A power running offense like Butch prefers that the Cowboys SB teams played with the QB a secondary player?

And most importantly, will Robiskie be in charge of the offense or Davis? I know this will require some surmising on your parts, but in lieu of a front office quote on this, I'll settle for your best guesses.

Lane: Run the football, baby. We are talking about two-back sets, a fullback, a legitimate tight-end, and throwing the ball downfield more often.

Yes, we have heard how great things with the Browns offense would be with other offensive coordinators, so seeing is believing, but Davis is very respectful and trusting of Robiskie's makeup and knowledge, also is doesn't hurt that they share some of the same offensive beliefs.

Gaboon40: If you're talking a 2-back set with a tight end, does that lessen the Browns desire to resign Northcutt? I realize they will still (hopefully) use a 3 sometimes 4 WR set, but if not as much as in the past, does he lose SOME value in the Browns eyes?

Lane: I do not know if that necessarily diminishes the value or need for a wide receiver, as Northcutt is a viable threat in the passing game and especially as a third down receiver.

Getting a true fullback, tight-end, and additional support along the offensive line sounds like a pretty damn good start.

But, presently getting a deal done for Northcutt does not look promising.


Metcalf2K5: I read something on this site saying the Browns aren't visibly excited. I can't remember what else it stated, so I don't know how true as far as maybe "direct from the source" that info was.

Can anyone shed some light? I know the draft is far off, but do you think the Browns aren't interested in Winslow? Do you know why? Is there a certain way the are leaning as far as position? Are they going to treat this as a best player available scenario?

LaneAdkins: I am of the belief it is far too early to become enamored with any specific player due to team need. With free agency, team needs could change in a heartbeat and considering a reasonable percentage of teams draft players and positions by need, you never know what the deal is going to be come April.

On Kellen Winslow Jr.......I have heard his position is not the highest rated positionn of need as established by the Browns, but I also know this organization does not have an issue with Winslow's ability.

Looking at the majority of the Browns drafts since 1999, I see a trend that the organization does not follow the belief of selecting the best player available........or maybe their best player available theory is much different than some other teams with a solid draft track record.

Redright: ? Best player available theory being different than other teams (winning teams)?

Could it be that BD & staff are too intent on finding a gem instead of a player? Chaun Thompson & Crocker were reaches, but had good numbers and looked good. Could this be a problem with believing that good looking players can be developed into great players as a College coach would develop a high school standout? Could BD be failing in recognizing the Pro game and time limit is different than college?

LaneAdkins: Davis and Garcia have been intent on finding guys they believe are athletic players that they can mold into players which fit the mold of a player they like.

The personnel belief here is that they will select talent which they can bring along that will pay dividends to the team in years two, three, four, and five.

For the majority of players that will come in under the watch of Davis, they will learn and play special team. Contributing on this team is almost essential to Davis and does have its advantages.

The Davis approach is to further and continue development of a player, basing much on his and his staff's ability to get some potentially more gifted athlete to a higher level, at times over a kid that was productive as a college player, but does not fit into a high athletic value type selection.

One of the problems under the Davis watch has been the lack of production from high draft selections, when players were available that we much more highly regarded.

This is a critical time for this Browns organization and they cannot afford draft blunders on higher, first-day selections.


The OBR Top Stories