How will the Browns maximize all their talent at RB?

Why does Kevin seem to be reticent to get Chubb and Hunt on the field at the same time, on a routine basis. Notice that I didn’t go where others ‘thought’ I would go, implying that they be in the backfield at the same time. Although that would be nice, what I’m actually suggesting is that they put Kareem Hunt in the slot, as opposed to Felton. – Chris B., Bedford

Should the time be now to use multi RBs in the back at the same time, and use different QBs with different options for the offense during the same game? – Ken P, Dorset, Ohio

We’re keeping the RB conversations going and answering these two questions together.

It’s certainly possible that we’ll see Chubb and Hunt on the field together more this year than we’ve seen in previous years — which has been very little. Hunt was used a few times as a slot receiver as well as on the outside in training camp, so the Browns are definitely looking to use him efficiently again in the pass game.

Here’s what Van Pelt said Thursday when asked if Hunt will be used more as a WR:

“I think we always as an offense try to put our players in the best position, put our best players on the field and find ways to have them contribute. We love him as a runner. 1 and 1A really in the backfield. Both (Chubb and Hunt) are great, great runners in the backfield, but he brings a skillset that you can use elsewhere, as well. We will find a way to put the best 11 guys on the field each time. It may not be all the time and it may not be at all this week, but we will find ways to get those guys involved.”

So what about using them together in the backfield? The Browns notably used that setup at times in practices in the spring and on occasion in training camp, and there were several times where Hunt would initially line up as a receiver and then be flexed into the backfield with Chubb.

Perhaps we’ll see more of that on game days this year. There aren’t many defenses who could consistently shut that package down.

It’s worth noting, however, that…