|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 42
Practice Squad
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 42 |
If a guy is in the top 16 of his position I think that's coming close to being great. I'd say if a guy is in the top 32 at his position that makes him decent - as in a solid starter... He could deffinetly start for somebody, and probably multiple teams because some teams have such good depth that in some cases their backups would be decent starters.
Just because we're not one of those teams doesn't mean we're not competitive... Just that we're nothing special - but it's a far cry from middle of the road and horrible.
Ruckaholics Anonymous: We can help.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
NRTU I expect homerism from most posters, there are some strict pessimists out there as well, and there are some rational evaluators. This exercise didn't include depth which is important but anyone who thinks we have average NFL starting talent on our roster isn't paying attention to other teams in the league. There's a reason we're ranked 32nd by a national reporter and it isn't because we have tons of "+" talent in our starters. One thing I will add is that I did not cover our special teams guys and I would say we have + players at those positions and as a group there's an arguement to be had that we have the best collection in the league. But the 22 starters??? An optimist would say at most 8 or 9. A pessimist could make the case for 3. I'd say it's around 6 or 7. A homer.....as high as 22! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
I have Rogers, Jackson, Thomas and Steinbach on my list as above average players. Who else belongs?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Vickers is a better than average FB for teams that employ one. I think he has a few Pro-Bowls in him if he continues to develop and if they use him more in the passing game. He's a multi-dimensional athlete and could be used better. (No that does not mean throwing the ball, lol)
Tucker is the classic RT that moves to RG when he gets too old to slide to handle the edge. He's a real brute though and a very good inline blocker.
Jackson to me is borderline. For me it's a no but I could see why others consider him a yes.
Pool is in my eyes but I can see with all his mistakes where he would be considered a no. He certainly has the athleticism to be a difference maker and he will be this year because he's not going to be playing back all the time. I hope we give him some freedom this year to be near the LOS. I think having Elam next to him will help him tremendously.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Pick one and I'll name 15 for ya. Don't want to go through all of them though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
If you want to go in depth, I will, but until then, I will just say, that our record will speak for itself.
I also say that we have very good defensive ends. I think Baltimore (depending on whether you call Ngata an end or not) and Pittsburgh both would. Aaron Smith and Brett Keisel are not that good.
You're nuts.
Quote:
One of them would start opposite of Williams, but he is better than them both. Williams would start at end for any 3-4 team other than Pittsburgh (he doesn't fit their scheme) and New England, who far and away has the best 3-4 line in the NFL.
I don't think you could name more than five 3-4 defensive ends in the NFL (not on the Browns) without looking it up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 73,448
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 73,448 |
My only + players on the entire roster:
Thomas, Steinbach, Rogers, Edwards, Cribbs
Players with the potential to be:
Mack, Robiskie, Jackson, Williams, Elam
"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
From his Monday Morning Quarterback
32. Cleveland
Hey, thank me, all you Brownaholics. Two years ago in a column like this one, I wrote that Cleveland was the worst team in the league. The Browns went 10-6. This year I'm saying they're the worst team again -- and I can guarantee you they're not going 10-6, unless Brady Quinn morphs into Tom Brady. Too many holes, too tough a division; write them down for 0-4 against the Steelers and Ravens."
If your Mangini, you thank Peter King for saying the Browns will be the worst team in the NFL.
Great bulletin board material to be used at a later date.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
Quote:
My only + players on the entire roster:
Thomas, Steinbach, Rogers, Edwards, Cribbs
Players with the potential to be:
Mack, Robiskie, Jackson, Williams, Elam
Wright isnt above average??? I think he's done ahelluva good job with the lack of pressure our front 7 has applied.
I would add Mass into the potential category. Give him 2-3 years and he'll be pushing the #1 WR for his spot on whatever team he is on. I dont see him being a star #1, but I do see him being a stud #2. This kid has size, speed, and not afraid to go up for a catch across the middle. Runs well for yac too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,086
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,086 |
The only media dood not good enuff for ESPN and prime time? I think this will not be true. Schedule is less than best (yet again), new coaching regime (again), new attitude and direction (did we use up the old ones already? like 4 or 5?), yadayadayada. I will give away all that freely to the naysayers. Not quite ramped up to "Believeland" frenzy pitch which showed us how cheap talk can be; not entirely willing to put the "new lows" behind us until I am MADE to forget them with less jawbone and more performance. All that said, I like what I have heard. Sounds like more coaching, more demands, more challenges, less tolerance, and immediate consequences, even in minor things is in place. I feel they matter. I am hopeful for improvement based on personal experience and faith. I f we are to make strides, we must take strides!   
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Using your formula ... you'd be suprised how many teams that would not meet your "criteria" ... hell take a look at the Steelers ... On Offense they only have 4 or 5 guys that could start for half the teams using your criteria (your WAY OVERESTIMATING how much of a margin there is between the guys in the middle of the talent pool at most positions) ... they were the SB winners and they prolly have only 14 that could start for over half the teams ... ONLY ONE IN THERE SECONDARY WOULD MEET THAT CRITERIA ... the NFL is VERY VERY WATERED DOWN ...
and then look at the team they played .. NO WAY would 11 of there starters on O or D start for half the teams .... NO WAY ... hell there starting RB's would not have started for ANY OTHER TEAMS until injuries decimated them ....
the key question to me is ..
HAVE U IMPROVED COMPARED TO YOUR COMP ... and how much ... and with our injured guys alone we IMPROVE quite a bit ...
I'm not sure how U can do a guy that hasn't played yet ... but one guy who is a NO BRAINER to start for 15 teams THIS YEAR is BQ .. heres a list ...
1. Bills
2. Jets
3. Fish
4. Jags
5. Texans
6. Titans
7. Donks
8. Faiders
9. Vikes
10. Lions
11. Niners
12. Panthers
13. Bucs
Theres 13 ... and teams he would have at worst a 50/50 shot with ...
Skins, Chiefs, Rats, Falcons, Chargers, Seahags and Iggles ....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Vickers - I agree Jackson -I agree, borderline above average. I didn't want the pessimist tag so I streched it.  Pool- I'd give him a C so far so I don't think he's performed much above average if at all and the multiple concussions scare me. Tucker- I think his age and all the injuries ( missed time) brings his stock down. Didn't he renegotiate and take league min salary. How many really above average players do that? I view him as a bonus if he can play and stay healthy great. Hes played above average no doubt but I wouldn't count on it happening again. So in truth I don't know what to rate him. Borderline? So how many above average players do the Steelers have? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
You clearly do not know me.
Aaron Smith
Brett Keisel
Evander Hood
Haloti Ngata
Trevor Pryce
Tyson Jackson
Cullen Jenkins
Justin Harrell
Ryan Picket (possibly)
B.J. Raji (possibly)
Kentwan Balmer
Phillip Merling
Louis Castillo
Igor Olshanksy
Marcus Spears
Shaun Ellis
Marques Douglas
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I freely admit to being a homer, but I am not nearly as big of one as you might think. Challenge me on any individual plus, and I'll give you my argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
From your list, J. Lewis and Pool are probably the most borderline.
Pool because he hasn't proven he can stay healthy at FS, let alone SS. And we don't know what type of impact he will have with a full season there.
Lewis because we don't truly know how much of last year was the poor blocking and how much was his tired legs.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I wasn't accounting for health when I did my + or -. I think Pool is a good strong safety when healthy. He is a force against the run, and is able to make plays with his athleticism. His main weakness is against the pass, and if he was still a free safety, I would have marked him as a negative.
I think Jamal still has some left in the tank. He put up over 1,000 yards last year behind a not so good offensive line. Mack will be a huge upgrade over Fraley, especially in the run game, and Tucker is definitely a lot better than Hadnot. Heck, even Womack is better than Hadnot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
If your Mangini, you thank Peter King for saying the Browns will be the worst team in the NFL.
Great bulletin board material to be used at a later date.
Not only that but, if you're Mangini, the worse the picture is painted by the media, the more latitude he has in year one and the more every success will be magnified... if they said we would finish 19 and we finish 24, that's a failure, if they say we'll finish 32 and we finish 24, that's a success.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Quote:
I'm not sure how U can do a guy that hasn't played yet ... but one guy who is a NO BRAINER to start for 15 teams THIS YEAR is BQ .. heres a list ...
1. Bills - Agree
2. Jets - Agree
3. Fish - Agree
4. Jags - Disagree I like how Garrard takes care of the ball, is experienced and accurate. Quinn should be better than he was long term though
5. Texans - Agree
6. Titans - Disagree for the same reasons as Garrard. I'd love to have Quinn throw for nearly 40,000 yards in his career though!
7. Donks - Agree
8. Faiders - Agree
9. Vikes - Agree
10. Lions - Agree
11. Niners - Agree
12. Panthers - Disagree, completely. I would much rather have Delhomme at QB this year than Quinn. Surprised at this one.
13. Bucs - Agree
Theres 13 (10) ... and teams he would have at worst a 50/50 shot with ...
Skins - maybe, Chiefs - maybe, Rats - nope, Falcons - nope, Chargers - nope, Seahags - absolutely not and Iggles absolutely not ....
I'm much higher on Quinn than most because of his ability and if you want me to pick QBs to play in 2009 then there you have it. Quinn has Pro Bowl upside but he certainly hasn't proven me right yet.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
I freely admit to being a homer, but I am not nearly as big of one as you might think. Challenge me on any individual plus, and I'll give you my argument.
I hadn't even seen your + - list, I just think that the Steelers 3-4 ends have been great and under appreciated players for a long time. They just don't get the notoriety. Yeah, I'm a huge browns fan, but I'm also a huge NFL fan. Like Aaron Smith for example is getting a bit long in the tooth, but he's a big part of why I can't even remember the last time us Brownies beat the Steelers. I'd love to get hack's opinion on this because I think he'd agree, but I'm not sure he wants to stir up any controversy.
I think the whole + - thing is flawed-- you have issues with player familiarity (take a typical linebacker, how many people that don't work for an NFL team could truly rate how good each player is? What about the differences between varying schemes across the league (not just talking 3-4 v 4-3 here)? Depth isn't being considered, and neither are the extremes (superstars could be like, +++ whereas the Ralph Browns of the world might be ---).
Still though it might be fun and it's a good learning experience.. here is your list though and there are a few that I happen to disagree with:
Quote:
I'm in between both of you.
QB: Quinn +
RB: Jamal +
FB: Vickers +
WR 1: Braylon +
WR 2: Robiskie - (He's a rookie)
WR 3: Furrey +
TE: Rucker (I'd say even or minus for now, but who knows?)
Heiden -
Royal -
LT: Thomas +
LG: Steinbach +
C: Mack +
RG: Tucker +
RT: St. Claire -
RE: Robaire/Coleman +
NT: Rogers +
LE: Williams +
ROLB: Wimbley -
RILB: D'Qwell +
LILB: Barton -
LOLB: Hall/Bowens/Veikune (Even)
CB 1: Wright +
CB 2: McDonald +
CB 3: I don't know, but it's probably a negative.
FS: Elam +
SS: Pool +
K: Dawson +
P: Zastadil +
LS: Pontrbriand +
KR: Cribbs +
PR: Cribbs +
ST: Cribbs +
That's 23 positive, 9 negative and 1 even.
(Quinn -) - 4 games, sub 50% completion rate, 65 QB rating. Flip side of course is that stats are for losers, but with his body of work AS IT RELATES TO 2009, I can't see how this isn't a (-). I think the guy has some good upside though and I'm a Quinn fan. It has to be proven on the field though.
(Jamal -) - It's not a knock on Jamal but there are just so many great RBs in the league that I can't possibly see him starting for half of the teams.
(Furrey -) Becomes even more of a - if we count some of the hybrid TEs as third (or even second) options, but it's a - in my eyes regardless. I like the signing though. But I wouldn't be surprised to see him as our 4th or 5th option by the end of the year.
TE - Another example of how this whole exercise is hard to guage.. we'll have different TE's in different packages in different situations and what not. I'll just put one (-) here. And I'd list Rucker third.
(Mack -) - Rookie Center. I'm putting (-) for rookies by default, unless it's a weird exception like a super prospect at a plug and play position (e.g. Adrian Peterson). This guy has a huge task in front of him, to say the least.
(Tucker/RG -) His ability to stay on the field (and at a high level) is a huge question mark.
We probably have the worst front 7 of any 3-4 team in the league. 4+, 2-, 1= doesn't make much sense to me. Rogers and DQ are clear +'s to me, rest are - and I don't think it's all that close, especially with the linebackers.
To list all that out:
Robaire -
Williams -
Hall -
Secondary I'm not immediately sure how I'd adjust it, but I don't give it a + + + +. I'll think about it a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Remember that everyone thinks they've "improved" after every offseason. And each year only a few truely have really improved. Most stay about the same with some guys stepping up and some guys having off years or getting old.
Rookies rarely contribute their first season. Probably only 30 in the entire NFL are difference makers their first season. And that's about 1 per team or so.
Have we improved??? Maybe....I hope so but certainly we haven't done anything that screams IMPROVED!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
We probably have the worst front 7 of any 3-4 team in the league.
This is simply not true. KC and Denver specifically are switching to the 3-4 this year and do not have the proper personnel for it. They have much worse front 7 as of today.
Let's start with Denver who had a horrible defense in a 4-3 and now are trying to make that into a 3-4.
From: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/teams/depth?team=den&formationId=15
POS STARTER 2nd 3rd 4th
LDE Darrell Reid Tim Crowder Carlton Powell
NT Ronald Fields Marcus Thomas Matthias Askew J'Vonne Parker
RDE Kenny Peterson Nic Clemons Ryan McBean
Look at that hideousness that is their DL. Not one of their guys would start for us. Coleman is a legit starting 3-4 DE who is a good run-stopper. Rogers is a beast. Corey Williams/R. Smith are still better than Peterson or Reid.
LOLB Elvis Dumervil Jarvis Moss
LILB Boss Bailey Mario Haggan
RILB Andra Davis Spencer Larsen Louis Green
ROLB D.J. Williams Wesley Woodyard
Now, they have talent here...but ill-fitting parts. Dumervil and Moss haven't played OLB before and while they fit the profile (smaller speed-rushing DE), you have to be just as skeptical of them as you are of ours.
DJ Williams is a fantastic Mike or Will 4-3 LB. It is an utter shame he will be forced to play 3-4....and I do not see him successful especially as OLB. Hopefully, it only takes him a year to get out of Denver and to a 4-3 team that can utilize him (like Vilma did by getting to the Saints).
Andra Davis and Barton to me is a wash. Obviously, our staff likes Barton better because we let Andra go and signed him. Obviously, Denver's staff likes Andra better because they signed him quickly.
Lastly, I would rather have D'Qwell than Boss Bailey. Bailey has been a 4-3 LB during his career and it'll be a big adjustment to the 3-4. Plus, he's not that good to begin with.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
"They are two of the worst starters at CB in the league."
Sorry held - you lost me right at the get go. Actually for 2nd year starters EW n McD were not bad at all especially when you put into consideration we were one of the worse pass rush D's in the NFL last season.
Usually a difference of opinion really or pretty close with minor differences...but I have no clue what you saw...and I can only guess you to the other way around.
What also bothers me is that you didn't attempt to list one position.
I was very curious to who you thought were better.
Telling me what Heiden is as if to make your opinion right. Fact is I'm assuming there aren't 15 better TEs and that was probably the one I was least sure of.
And now everybody starts coming down on me for nitpicking.
But this was in response to you stating these positions are ( - ) in the negative and you were very descriptive what that meant - 2nd tier 16 better.
"And I rate DQ significantly lower than most here."
Yeah you rate most things lower from what I see. But forget about that...who cares about "HERE" as the litmus test. Fact is Mangini stated - TWO Untouchables on this team Joe Thomas and DQ. I'd say DQ is actually better thought of than Most even rate him here 
Lewis Old...well let me know when he is done. Until he is done he is better than average.
Mack? I know he ain't taken a snap yet...still there aren't 16 quality Centers for you to put ahead of him. And even with respect to your opinion of him being a rookie...I was very "Curious" who the bottom 5 were of the Top 16 to see how long it took for Mack to over take them.
Corey Williams was a Franchised DLman a little over a year ago. There haven't been many better against the run in the 3-4 than Coleman. He's been 4 year solid for 2 downs. But thats one of the border line cases cause he's probably a rotation.
"him as a Top 10 QB in two or three years time."
What do you do, use a sun dial? 2-3 more years...heck he's got to be cracking that top 10 this year - if he's close then maybe year two. 3 years...he might not be here that long then.
"Heiden is a able bodied blocking TE with nice hands that is not a threat to beat average Tampa 2 defenses. That's the key for me"
the key to me for beating a Tampa 2 D is to Beat the crap out of them and run the ball. You're not going to beat the real proficient ones by relying on the TE beating them over the middle while your QB gets killed.
Anyway we are far off. I know I've been called it all...Homer to Polyanna Sychophant, But I can't be that Biased 
JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I too am a huge NFL fan, and am actually a scout, so I watch and know quite a bit about other teams.
Quinn: No one was catching the ball, he was under huge pressure all the time, and you can't expect him to come in for 3 games and be amazing.
Jamal: I'll concede that one. There are many backs better than him out there, but you might be surprised by the numbers he puts up this year.
Furrey: He had 98 catches in 2006, the last time he was really used. He is a very good slot.
Tight End: We agree there.
Center: Mack will surprise people. He will dominate. Watch.
Right Guard: Tucker is still very good and he is actually entering this year healthy. I did also say that I didn't account for injuries. Even Womack can be a good starter.
Defensive End: No way is Williams a -. He was very good last year, playing hurt. He was a force against the run, and he made some plays getting after the passer. Robaire is only a negative if he is unable to come back well from his injury. He was very good in 2007, and if he struggles, Coleman is good too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Center: Mack will surprise people. He will dominate
it will surprise me more if he doesn't. and many others as well as "best center prospect i have ever seen" was thrown around a ton pre-draft.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Tit for tat then.
Name me a worse starting CB pairing in the NFL. That's not asking a lot of time. And if it takes you a lot of time think about that as well.
I'll answer one of your posits in depth: Corey Williams
I saw him play a handful of games in Green Bay and came away pretty impressed. He was a big guy who could get up the field who was very productive when he was in there.
But.......
He was not a starter for GB. He was a rotational guy that was a one gapper who came in fresh against a progressively worn down OL. He was asked to penetrate not take on blocks. Here he's asked to jam things up for the opposing blockers and that takes a certain selfless mentality. I don't know if he has that. He certainly has not produced here but from what I am led to believe that's because of injuries.
Is Williams a fit for the 34. We're still answering that question. Other teams though do have fits and Deepthreat listed a bunch of DEs. And it was an impressive list. No way does Corey Williams fit above half those names.
Now switch to the 4-3 and have Williams at DT and Rogers at NT and there you have a + + situation.
But don't be fooled into thinking that Williams is a player here. He's far from proven. All he proved in Green Bay is that he could come off the bench and get up the field. That franchise tag? That carries two firsts to sign. All that tag was for was to induce some offer. And we made one. We'll see if it was wise over the next few years.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Quote:
Defensive End: No way is Williams a -. He was very good last year, playing hurt. He was a force against the run, and he made some plays getting after the passer.
That's simply false. Williams played terribly and it was worrisome. I'll go with the hurt idea, so I'm open to see what he does this year.
Are you watching the same games? VERY GOOD???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
I'll help EO out here on the CB thing:
Houston has the worst when Dunta is hurt....and that is often: Jacques Reeves and Fred Bennett
Assuming you exclude them....
Detroit: Philip Buchanon and Travis Fisher
St.L: Tye Hill and Ron Bartell
NO: Randall Gay / Jason David
(if Malcolm Jenkins goes Safety...even without it I wouldn't want any of the above as our CB2)
NYG: Aaron Ross and Corey Webster
(their pass rush makes these guys look way better than they are....the times they don't get a push these guys get toasted)
I'm also not a fan of the Allens in Miami (will and jason)...but that's more debateable.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I watched every Browns game multiple times, but I'm starting do doubt that you watched any of them at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
I watched every Browns game multiple times
I'm sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Ahhhh.....the "He doesn't agree with me so he must be a bonehead" defense (or a variation thereof). Agressive but hardly effective. I'm sure Held is watching the games. Just as you are. And frankly, his opinions sound pretty reasonable to me. And honestly, you seem pretty full of yourself lately. BTW, aren't you like, 16? You're not coachb's son are you?......
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
4. Jags - Disagree I like how Garrard takes care of the ball, is experienced and accurate. Quinn should be better than he was long term though
He has started for 2 years ... his 1st year he was accurate and took care of the ball .. last year .. not so much .. he was a BELOW AVERAGE starter and did not take care of the ball very well at all ... he made lots of DUMB ASS DECISIONS ...
he was pretty much the exact opposite of what he was his first year ... we'll know alot more about him in 2 years ..
Will the real D. garrard please stand up ..
6. Titans - Disagree for the same reasons as Garrard. I'd love to have Quinn throw for nearly 40,000 yards in his career though!
Takes care of the ball ... please .... I will take the 40k yards .. but i want a much better TD to pick ratio of 1:1 ... and i definetly want a comp % of better than 55 ... this guys rode the pines the last two years .. sorry man ... your way off on this one ...
12. Panthers - Disagree, completely. I would much rather have Delhomme at QB this year than Quinn. Surprised at this one.
really .... did u watch much of them last year .. HE STUNK at times .. and i mean STUNK ... and this with a GREAT RUNNING GAME and S. Smith ..... they thought about benching him last year and playing C. wienke he was so bad ...
he started out 07 ON FIRE ... then the elbow put him on the IR ... but in 05 and 06 he was OK at best ...
quite frankly it shocked me the panthers did not make a move for a QB this off season ... JAKE STUNK for alot of last year ...
Theres 13 ... and teams he would have at worst a 50/50 shot with ...
Rats - nope, .. Really .... what in the hell did Flacco do that was so outstanding .. he was a below average QB .. he did NOTHING SPECIAL .. not even for a rookie . he had a GREAT SURRONDING CAST ... he handed the ball off well .. *L* ...
Falcons - nope, he had an OK year ... only reason he is given slack is cause he was a rookie .. lets see how he does this year ... I liked Ryan coming out of college .. i liked him ALOT ... smart, accurate ... but i need to see him do it for a few more years ...
but this one .. i can see your point of view .. and wonlt argue about it ..
Chargers - nope, Never been high on Rivers ... I would love to see what BQ could do in that O ... they have LOTS OF WEAPONS all aroun dhim and have a VERY VERY GOOD OL .... and they play against the Donks, faiders and Chefs six times a year ... NOUGH SAID .. *L* ....
he is way OVER RATED IMO ...
Seahags - absolutely not and Iggles absolutely not .... Hassleback nor McNabb are on the downsides of there careers and neither has done much in the last 2 or 3 years ...
with Matt I will back off and leave it be even though I do not agree ... but McScabb .... NO WAY .. they benched him last year and if Beck did not crap the bed he would not have seen the field again ...
Like I said .. i have no clue how u can rank a guy that hasn't been given a chance yet .. but there is no way that 1/2 the teams in the NFL would not take BQ as there starter THIS YEAR ... NO WAY ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
just clicking. John Clayton gives us props... sort of. Got this from today's ESPN. Quote:
Packers, Bills among teams set to shock
By John Clayton
ESPN.com
Archive
U
The Bills, Seahawks and Redskins are among teams that should raise eyebrows in 2009.
Each year around this time, I break out my schedule database and try to project surprise teams. Surprise teams are the ones you least expect to be playoff contenders but, when you think about it, you realize they have a chance. The formula is simple: Give a team better quarterback play and an easy schedule, and it usually has a chance to improve its record.
Here are the main areas I study when coming up with surprise teams.
If a schedule is .020 easier than the previous year, it gives a team a chance to add a win. If the schedule is .020 harder, it usually translates to a loss. The Panthers were coming off a 7-9 season in 2007 after playing a tough .523 schedule. Their projected strength of schedule for the 2008 season was .465, .058 easier. That pointed to a 2.9-game improvement, or about three more victories. In 2008, the Panthers exceeded even that projection: They were five games better than in 2007, finishing at 12-4.
Offense means everything in projecting surprise teams. Usually a one-point increase in scoring can add a win for a team. That's one of the reasons you look for a team to be a surprise if it has a good quarterback who's coming back from a season in which he missed a bunch of games because of injuries. If a team hits on the right quarterback in free agency or the draft, that also works in projecting surprise teams. The Falcons hit on Matt Ryan last season. Their offense improved from 16.2 to 24.2 ppg. Their record went from 4-12 to 11-5, a seven-game improvement.
A new category in my database involves a team's out-of-division schedule. A year ago, I had the idea that most of the teams in the AFC East would improve because they played the AFC West and the NFC East. I thought most of the AFC East teams could end up 7-3 or better in non-division games. Only the New York Jets ruined that prediction with road losses in San Francisco and Oakland.
In 2009, the circuits to look at this season with decent chances to sport multiple teams with at least 7-3 records in non-division games are the NFC North and the AFC North. It's hard to project the Detroit Lions to have that type of success, but there is a chance that five or six of the teams in those two divisions combined could go 7-3 or better in non-division games.
Here are my surprise teams in 2009:
1. Seattle Seahawks: The return of Matt Hasselbeck as a healthy quarterback is the key here. With Hasselbeck hobbled with a back problem and the receiving corps injured from the first week of the season, the Seahawks scored only 18.4 points a game, a 6.2 drop-off from the previous season. The Seahawks added wide receiver T.J. Houshmandzadeh. Plus, tight end John Carlson has developed into a threat in the middle of the field. Houshmandzadeh and Carlson are also taller than the recent vintage of Seahawks pass-catchers; their height could translate into more touchdowns in the red zone. Playing the NFC North and the AFC South won't be easy, but the NFC West's poor records take the Seahawks' projected strength of schedule from a .498 to a .457. The Seahawks could improve by two games. When Hasselbeck is on, he usually leads a team that averages 24.0 ppg. That should project to around a five-game improvement from the 2008 season's miserable 4-12 record.
2. Chicago Bears: It might not be right to place a 9-7 team near the top of any surprise list, but you can't ignore the Bears. They play the league's easiest schedule (.414). They added quarterback Jay Cutler. The Bears played a .475 schedule last season, so the database says there could be a three-game improvement. I'm not sure that the Bears will significantly improve their points scored. They averaged 23.5 ppg last season, but they also benefited with seven touchdowns on returns. Cutler, with the easy schedule, should put up 23 or 24 points a game on his own, so I'm going with a two-game improvement to 11-5.
3. Cincinnati Bengals: For all the Bengals fans who complained in my mailbag about my not including the team in last week's top 10 offseasons, take heart. The Bengals will rise this year because of the return of Carson Palmer. The schedule should work for a four-game improvement. Going from a .553 strength of schedule to a .465 projected SOS helps. The Bengals face the AFC West and NFC North. A Palmer-led offense usually averaged between 23.0 and 26.0 points a game. Last season, Palmer was sidelined most of the season and the Bengals averaged 12.8 points per game. Put me in for at least a four-game improvement based on my formulas. That could put the Bengals, 4-11-1 last season, near .500 in 2009. Their problem is the AFC North. The Pittsburgh Steelers and Baltimore Ravens are better teams at the moment.
4. Green Bay Packers: The NFC North is going to be similar to the AFC East of a year ago. Teams in the NFC North rank among the teams with the easiest schedules in the league. The Packers go from a .504 schedule to a projected .428 SOS, which could potentially lead to a four-game improvement. The NFC North plays the AFC West and the AFC North. Aaron Rodgers established himself as a top NFC quarterbacking talent last year. In his second season as starter, he should improve in performance in the final four minutes of games, enabling him to do better in close games at the finish. The Packers might not be able to make the biggest jump because the team averaged 26.2 points a game in 2008, but it would be surprising if the Packers don't finish 8-8 or better after last year's 6-10 post-Favre clunker.
5. Houston Texans: Yes, this could be the year the Texans get over .500 and make that playoff run. They've been 8-8 the past two seasons. They were 6-4 in non-division games in 2008 and 7-3 the year before. Their downfall has been a 3-9 division record the past two seasons combined. Their key to getting over .500 is winning at least three AFC South games, which is possible. The other key? Their "non-common" out-of-division games are coming off their third-place finish of a year ago. The Texans play Oakland and Cincinnati, potentially winnable games. Overall, their strength of schedule goes from a .518 last season to a .506 projected SOS, which could give them an additional win.
6. Washington Redskins: Thanks in part to two games -- non-common dates against the Lions and St. Louis Rams -- the Redskins' non-division schedule is .406, second-easiest in the league. You also have to figure the offense should improve. It scored only 16.6 ppg last season. Jason Campbell is better than that. Everyone is going to be talking up the New York Giants and Philadelphia Eagles, but don't forget the Redskins.
7. Buffalo Bills: This one might be a surprise because I'm going against the formula. The Bills' .570 schedule is the sixth-hardest in the league. Whether they've played hard schedules or easy schedules, the Bills have finished 7-9 for three straight seasons. Their break is "non-common" non-division games against the Cleveland Browns and Kansas City Chiefs, which are winnable. Plus, Terrell Owens should add scoring punch to their offense. He usually takes an offense to an average of 24.0 ppg or better because of his ability to catch touchdown passes. The Bills averaged 21.0 ppg last year. A two-point improvement could put them at 9-7.
8. Cleveland Browns: I'm adding the Browns solely because of the numbers. Their schedule goes from a .572 to a .449. Their offense averaged only 14.5 ppg, and they have two talented quarterbacks in Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn. Say what you want about new head coach Eric Mangini, but he does some good things. I'm not forecasting the Browns to be a surprise team. I'm just putting them on the radar in case the numbers work out.
Last edited by lampdogg; 05/13/09 07:20 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,341 |
Quote:
Chargers - nope, Never been high on Rivers ...
hindsight is easy, but I've thought for a couple years that SD should have kept Brees.
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044 |
yea, saw that and just rolled my eyes. if we did well, we'll be the "i caught the browns in 2009" pat on the back he did with some of the other teams at the beginning of the article.
that said, mangini has a huge opportunity to turn this team around quickly and given his success with the jets in doing so, i don't doubt him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Quote:
12. Panthers - Disagree, completely. I would much rather have Delhomme at QB this year than Quinn. Surprised at this one.
really .... did u watch much of them last year .. HE STUNK at times .. and i mean STUNK ... and this with a GREAT RUNNING GAME and S. Smith ..... they thought about benching him last year and playing C. wienke he was so bad ...
he started out 07 ON FIRE ... then the elbow put him on the IR ... but in 05 and 06 he was OK at best ...
quite frankly it shocked me the panthers did not make a move for a QB this off season ... JAKE STUNK for alot of last year ...
Jake Delhomme is GARBAGE!
I would take DA any day over Delhomme. If they had DA, he'd have only thrown 4 INTs in the playoffs instead of 6.
Seriously, what the hell were they thinking when the not only didn't find a replacement, but extended him ( i think) 3 more years? He's one of main guys who holds this team back from being dangerously good.
My friend is a Panthers fan. I can let him tell you (not you Diam) what he thinks about Jake.
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
U....and YoUR maN-CruSh on yOUr gOldEN BoY......  Is there a national guy that you respect as far as their opinions that's not connected to the Browns in some way? Like a guy who was in the leauge then got bounced and is now doing analysis in some manner. Because if you come up with a name and he's not too high profile, I can get a response. I'll have him concentrate on the teams where we have differing opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Quote:
12. Panthers - Disagree, completely. I would much rather have Delhomme at QB this year than Quinn. Surprised at this one.
really .... did u watch much of them last year .. HE STUNK at times .. and i mean STUNK ... and this with a GREAT RUNNING GAME and S. Smith ..... they thought about benching him last year and playing C. wienke he was so bad ...
he started out 07 ON FIRE ... then the elbow put him on the IR ... but in 05 and 06 he was OK at best ...
quite frankly it shocked me the panthers did not make a move for a QB this off season ... JAKE STUNK for alot of last year ...
Jake had some clunkers but he also had some very good games. Overall very solid year. Playoff game, basically single handledly cost them that game. AWFUL.
But take a look game by game, year by year and tell me overall he played poorly. I'd hit you with statistics but we both know how that'd turn out.
Bottom line: Carolina was 12-4 last year, Delhomme even on "off" years is always an efficient passer. He can throw in a clunker but so can most QBs. I'm not making him out to be a Top 10 guy but he's a guy I like.
Carolina is lucky to have him IMO. It may not be the most popular position but it's mine and I can defend it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Like you said, he can throw a clunker, and he just so happened to do it in the most important game of the season.
And the guy is getting up there in age. IMO he's holding that team back from being great. I'm shocked they didn't make a move to get a QB, and even more so that he was given an extension. Like I said above.
This team is on the verge of being pretty darn good- not sure why you wouldn't want to try an upgrade your QB who IMO needs replaced.
"The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
To be fair, he did it first. And if I have been full of myself lately, I apologize. I don't think I have been, but it is possible that what I say gets misinterpreted. I never mean to belittle anyone's opinion, or think mine is almighty.
And no, I am not CoachB's son, though one poster did think I was Vers's.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
To be fair, he did it first. And if I have been full of myself lately, I apologize. I don't think I have been,
I'd stay away from saying things like "you must not know who I am" then.
And no matter how long you have been doing scouting in whatever capacity it is that you do it, you are still a young kid who lacks experience and still has a ton to learn. But you come off as an all-knowing. I actually liked reading you much better before you got your job.
I think it's really cool that you do what you do and have started at a young age. Seems like you are paving the way toward doing something that you really enjoy. Most of us would probably be envious of that. But I'd deflate that head just a bit and show some humility. Just because you're a scout doesn't make you right.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Peter King's Prediction: Browns
last place...
|
|
