Things look pretty dire for the Browns, who averaged a league-low 15.2 points last year. They have four different lesser options competing for the quarterback job – two rookies and two veterans who were backups with other teams last year.
Cleveland, however, does have one considerable advantage in its corner: low expectations. If there’s one thing we’ve learned over the years, it’s that we never know as much as we think we do. Bad teams are more often better than expected, while good teams are more likely to fall a little flat.
With Cleveland’s offense having scored only 27 touchdowns last year, after all, it’s got nowhere to go but up. This is a team that’s only a year removed from going 11-6.
Let’s not be too quick, in other words, to dismiss the potential of some of Cleveland’s notable players. David Njoku, for one, looks like a possibility for top-10 numbers at tight end. Jerry Jeudy and Cedric Tillman will certainly be getting picked in most drafts. And considering Kevin Stefanski’s history of putting together good running games, Quinshon Judkins (pictured) looks like a decent possibility to be a top-20 rusher as a rookie.
I don’t think Harold Fannin is quite promising enough to roster in a 2025 league, but I’ll sure be interested in getting a peek at him in the preseason, considering the kind of numbers he put up at Bowling Green. If Njoku gets hurt or traded, Fannin would look worth loading onto a roster at that point.
The team finished last in scoring last year, of course, but of the last 20 teams finishing last in scoring, half of them made it out of the bottom 10 the next year. Four finished in the top 10 (double dots), while two others finished above average (single dot).
| OFFENSES RANKING LAST IN SCORING | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Team | Avg | Next | Rk |
| 2002 | Houston | 13.3 | 15.9 | 28 |
| 2003 | Arizona | 14.1 | 17.8 | 26 |
| 2004 | Chicago | 14.4 | 16.3 | 26t |
| 2005 | Cleveland | 14.5 | 14.9 | 30 |
| 2006 | Oakland | 10.5 | 17.7 | 23 |
| 2007 | San Francisco | 13.7 | 21.2 | 22 |
| 2008 | Cincinnati | 12.8 | 19.1 | 22 |
| 2009 | St. Louis | 10.9 | 18.1 | 26t |
| 2010 | •• Carolina | 12.3 | 25.4 | 5t |
| 2011 | St. Louis | 12.1 | 18.7 | 25 |
| 2012 | •• Kansas City | 13.2 | 26.9 | 6t |
| 2013 | Jacksonville | 15.4 | 15.6 | 32 |
| 2014 | • Jacksonville | 15.6 | 23.5 | 14 |
| 2015 | San Francisco | 14.9 | 19.3 | 27 |
| 2016 | •• LA Rams | 14.0 | 29.9 | 1 |
| 2017 | Cleveland | 14.6 | 22.4 | 20 |
| 2018 | • Arizona | 14.1 | 22.6 | 16t |
| 2019 | Washington | 16.6 | 20.9 | 25 |
| 2020 | NY Jets | 15.2 | 18.2 | 28 |
| 2021 | ••Jacksonville | 14.9 | 23.8 | 10 |
| 2022 | Denver | 16.9 | 21.0 | 19 |
| 2023 | Carolina (tie) | 13.9 | 20.1 | 23 |
| 2023 | New England (tie) | 13.9 | 17.0 | 30 |
| 2024 | Cleveland | 15.2 | ? | ? |
If we take a bigger picture approach, looking at all offenses since the league moved to 32 teams in 2002, they suggest that when a team ranks in the top 9 in scoring, that’s a good indication that it probably will be average a couple fewer points the next year.
When a team ranks in the bottom 25 percent in scoring, on the other hand, that means it’s more likely to probably improve by over 2 points per game.
Teams ranking 1st or 2nd in scoring, on average, tend to average over 4 fewer points per week – about a half a touchdown per game. While the opposite is true for teams ranking last or next-to-last in scoring.
| TEAM SCORING BY RANK | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Slot | Points | Next Yr | Diff |
| 1st | 32.0 | 26.7 | -5.3 |
| 2nd | 29.4 | 25.2 | -4.1 |
| 3rd | 28.5 | 25.7 | -2.8 |
| 4th | 27.7 | 25.9 | -1.8 |
| 5th | 26.8 | 24.2 | -2.6 |
| 6th | 26.4 | 23.8 | -2.6 |
| 7th | 25.9 | 23.0 | -2.9 |
| 8th | 25.3 | 22.6 | -2.8 |
| 9th | 25.0 | 22.7 | -2.3 |
| 10th | 24.5 | 23.7 | -.8 |
| 11th | 24.1 | 22.5 | -1.6 |
| 12th | 23.7 | 24.3 | .6 |
| 13th | 23.4 | 23.5 | .1 |
| 14th | 23.0 | 21.7 | -1.4 |
| 15th | 22.7 | 22.7 | .1 |
| 16th | 22.2 | 22.1 | -.1 |
| 17th | 21.9 | 22.3 | .4 |
| 18th | 21.5 | 21.5 | .1 |
| 19th | 21.3 | 21.4 | .1 |
| 20th | 20.8 | 21.0 | .2 |
| 21st | 20.5 | 21.6 | 1.1 |
| 22nd | 20.1 | 21.9 | 1.8 |
| 23rd | 19.7 | 20.0 | .3 |
| 24th | 19.2 | 20.2 | 1.0 |
| 25th | 18.8 | 21.3 | 2.5 |
| 26th | 18.4 | 20.6 | 2.2 |
| 27th | 18.0 | 21.0 | 3.0 |
| 28th | 17.4 | 20.1 | 2.7 |
| 29th | 16.8 | 19.7 | 2.8 |
| 30th | 16.2 | 18.8 | 2.6 |
| 31st | 15.3 | 20.0 | 4.7 |
| 32nd | 14.0 | 20.4 | 6.4 |
The Lions led the league in scoring last year. They certainly look ripe to take a step back. Other teams in the top 5 last year: Bills, Ravens, Bucs, Commanders.
The Giants, Patriots, Raiders and Bears were the other teams finishing in the bottom 5 in scoring last year. Like the Browns, those offenses are more set up to take a step forward. That’s the way things tend to play out in the Not For Long NFL.
—Ian Allan