DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Coulda, woulda, should

A bit premature, but I will play anyway.

The Browns "shoulda" hired Schwartz as head coach, "woulda" promoted Tarver to DC, and "coulda" looked to hire an OC.

Again, a bit premature, but I think that "woulda" been a better option.

Schwartz failed as a HC already . Some coordinators just aren't cut to be HCs.
This reminds me when Gregg Williams was getting hyped up by the fan base to be a HC.
Well 10 years later hes still not a HC.

I don't really think so bone.

Next season we'll be hearing "It's hard for Monken to win with a rookie QB". I believe you yourself have already alluded to the fact you believe the Browns won't be competitive until the rookie QB's second season.

I understand there is going to be a percentage of the fan base that will always search for a reason to believe. And hey I'm fine with that. But you realize that most think this is an improved roster. That the past two drafts have been better and made the roster stronger. So according to what many claim the talent on this roster is better than it's been in years.

I suppose the difference is that we do agree on at least one thing. I haven't written off Monken based on a single game. He can help develop the systems on both sides of the ball and show steady improvement over the curse of this season. I'm sure we're both hoping that's the case.

Because if he doesn't, the only excuse left is the QB. And if that wasn't a legitimate excuse for the prior HC why should it be for this one?

Bill Belichick, Pete Carroll, Tony Dungy and Mike Shanahan.

You know, "coulda, woulda, shoulda" is basically a hindsight type proposition. But here's the thing: you would think an NFL front office would have better foresight.

If the plan was to forge ahead and give Watson a fighting chance... knowing full well there was no way in hell you're re-signing him... your scenario makes waaay more sense as far as moving forward. Because obviously, there's no confidence that a fQB is on the roster.


Let Schwartz continue to do what he does best, draft your QB in 2027, if the current OC isn't a fit, custom fit the new OC to the QB.

Now you've given Monken a soft seat in the QB draft talks; which will either appease him or piss him off. Next stop: start all over and leave a new QB in a two-year state of flux.

Browns coulda dropped DW and eaten the loss. Keeping him now for the money considerations, and I see no way forward that includes him. We shoulda kept Schwartz; last game was a larger step backward than I anticipated. We woulda been ahead with a few more veterans, because MG's loss has more impact than we have seen yet.
Cute mental exercise to show common ground in Browns fans. But we have managed two things: First, we failed to address QB even in our own room, and we wasted time and reps doing so. Second, our basic fundamentals, especially tackling, blocking, pass rushing, and play mix are not going resemble how we see winning teams demonstrate. Cringe-worthy it is.

There is no way the Browns could have dropped Watson this season. The cap hit would have just destroyed their ability to field a team. They had to play out this team, and then designate him as a post June release so they can split the total left at that point between 2027 and 2028. If we had just dumped him this year, the dead cap was something like $128 million.

As sad as it is to say or admit, you are 100% correct. Restructuring these contracts can sometimes end up with unintended and drastic consequences no matter how brilliant some make them out to be.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. We've all been saying those words since 1999!!!