Cleveland Browns two-tight-end formation underperforming
Deep dive into Cleveland Browns base formation numbers
Let’s take a minute to study what the Browns’ base formation actually was last season. This writer had the opportunity to chitchat a few years ago at a charity event with former Browns head coach Gregg Williams. I’ve always been a big fan of his. I like the fact that he’s a bit wild, in a good way, because I think that is the attitude that defenses need, and on top of that he is very, very intellectual.
At the time Williams was defensive coordinator, and one of his points was that there was no such thing as a 4-3 defense or 3-4 defense per se. There are only formations for one play at a time. The team can line up 4-3 on one play, and 3-4 on the next play, and if it’s a zone blitz, the guy you think is a linebacker may actually be assigned the role of free safety on that particular play.
The same holds true for the offense. We are looking for a tendency or trend as opposed to a brand identity. So let’s look at the data for who was actually on the field last season. The first table is a summary of who was on the field.
Cleveland had 1,063 offensive plays including the special team fakes. There are nominally five skill position players credited with a snap on each play. The second column summarizes all the snaps taken by players categorized by positions identified by Pro Football Reference.
There were also 19 tackle-eligible plays (they are considered tight ends) and a special teams play in which Jamie Gillan became a running back instead of a punter, thus throwing off the accounting somewhat. Those minor points notwithstanding, the snaps are broken down by position as follows:
BROWNS 2020 SNAPS AT EACH POSITION
POS SNAPS AVG PER PLAY
- RB 1062 1.00
- FB 183 0.17
- WR 2276 2.14
- TE 1794 1.69
- TTL 1063*5 5.00
What this tells us is that the Browns were not in a two-tight-end formation all the time, but on average, there were 1.7 tight ends on the field. Usually, the Browns had only two wide receivers (2.17) on the field. Sometimes multiple wide receiver sets were used to push the average a little higher.
The Browns have a very good fullback in Andy Janovich (or Johnny Stanton), but this formation was really a change of pace for the Browns rather than their bread and butter.
Their most common formation was one running back, two wide receivers, and two tight ends.
The table below lists the total yards from scrimmage (rushing yards plus receiving yards) divided by the total snaps that the player was on the field. This stat is useful because it combines how good the player is at advancing the ball, either via pass reception or by run, and also factors in the degree to which the team depends on the player.
If, hypothetically, your guy gets good yards per touch but the team doesn’t put the ball in his hands when he is on the field, it begs the question, why not? The only valid excuse is that the play may have a viable role as a blocker. More about that later.
BROWNS TOTAL YARDS FROM SCRIMMAGE PER SNAP
Player TYFS SNAPS TYFS/SNAP
- Nick Chubb 1217 410 2.97
- Dontrell Hilliard 50 27 2.27
- D’Ernest Johnson 180 81 2.22
- Kareem Hunt 1145 548 2.09
- Odell Beckham Jr. 391 316 1.24
- Jarvis Landry 850 699 1.22
- Rashard Higgins 599 502 1.19
- Donovan Peoples-Jones 304 268 1.13
- Ja’Marcus Bradley 60 92 0.65
- Austin Hooper 435 684 0.64
- KhaDarel Hodge 180 291 0.62
- David Njoku 213 410 0.52
- Harrison Bryant 238 591 0.40
- Marvin Hall 12 74 0.16
- Stephen Carlson 11 90 0.12
- Andy Janovich 17 171 0.10
To calibrate the scale, NFL receiving yardage leader Stefon Diggs registers 1.59 yards/snap (1,536 TYFS and 965 snaps), and rushing yardage leader Derrick Henry registers 3.04 yards/snap (2,141 TYFS and 705 snaps). Someone is going to have to explain to me why wide receivers are worth more money than running backs, because I don’t get it. I understand why receivers’ contracts can be longer, but running backs just get more yardage for their team.
The main point that is being made is the very low productivity of the Browns tight ends. The three tight ends were all half as productive as the wide receivers. We can not just excuse them because tight ends are not as productive as wide receivers, recalling that Hooper’s contract was the largest in tight end history at the time it was signed. Travis Kelce compiled 1,416 TYFS in 899 snaps for the Chiefs, or 1.58 yards/snap. George Kittle produced 651 TYFS in 443 snaps or 1.47 yards/snap.
These numbers are just way, way beyond anything that Browns tight ends produced last season. The premier NFL tight ends produced more than twice as much per snap compared to Cleveland’s tight ends.
What worked last season was OBJ, Juice Landry, Hollywood Higgins, and DPJ. What did not work was any of the tight ends. The drop-off to the tight ends was shocking. Both Hooper and Njoku are in the range of 0.60 yards per snap, or about half of what the wide receivers achieve.
Maybe coach Stefanski and offensive coordinator Van Pelt can get the tight end room turned around. The talent exists. Hooper was a Pro Bowler two years in a row, so he should be able to do it again. Likewise, Njoku was brilliant in 2018, accumulating 639 yards.
If the Browns could combine that performance with Hoopers 2019 season, in which he hauled in 75 balls for 787 yards, that would represent 1,426 yards, which is actually respectable. Compare that to their combined total for 2020 of only 648 yards.
However, if they cannot improve — a lot — they should be used less because they have wide receiving talent that can do a good job for them. If Odell Beckham, Jr. and Jarvis Landry are the Big Dawgs, they might get help from Rashard Higgins, Donovan Peoples-Jones, and Anthony Schwartz rather than a second tight end.