|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Here are the rules:
Pick a subject then explain why you feel the way you do. Here we go..............
Truth or fallacy: The 2009 Browns are a not rebuilding team?
Fallacy.
If anyone cares to argue with me about whether or not we're rebuilding, feel free, but you've very little ammunition to use now.
Now that we're four pre-season games and two regular season games into the year, all the dumb Homeristic optimism should have worn off, and reality should have set in. We didn't replace bums with good players, we didn't sign any impact free agents, and we didn't draft for the present. We drafted for the future while setting ourselves up for salary-cap room moving forward. Don't believe it? Prove me wrong.
Truth or fallacy: Brady Quinn was an NFL-ready QB coming out, and was a clear upgrade over Anderson.
Fallacy.
Well, we've clearly been sold a bill of goods on Quinn. He wasn't nearly NFL-ready, and isn't nearly as good as some first-year or second-year QB's. After numerous pre-season games and several NFL games, he's shown that he's a serious work in progress. He's playing afraid and his accuracy is in serious question right now. We're seeing why the rest of the NFL let him fall, and why all the scouting reports said he wasn't what all the Homers claimed him to be.
It's too early to call Quinn a failure. That would be rediculous. However, nobody can tell me right now that he's a clear upgrade over Anderson. I see a guy in Quinn who is more accurate than Anderson short, but outside of that, I think he's actually taken our offense a little backwards. Hey, that's the price you pay for rebuilding. It'll be up to Quinn to prove that he's been worth all the hype. For me, he's got just a handful of games left to quell my doubts. It's too early to call for his benching because we aren't a winning team anyway, so it makes sense to stick with him a little longer. However, if the ultimate goal was to win a game tomorrow, Anderson's ability to get the ball downfield combined with his experience makes him the better choice. That isn't a slam on Quinn, but a testament to the fact he isn't nearly as ready as many thought he was.
Fact or fallacy: The Ryan defensive scheme can help guys like Wimbley play better.
Fallacy.
Without the scheme, we saw just how little pass rush our OLB's get on opposing QB's. Several years ago, I used to argue with certain posters about whether or not Chaun Thompson had it in him to be an OLB. I said no way because he didn't have natural rush ability. Every once in a while, he'd get a garbage sack or come off the corner totally unblocked, and some would say he's got it. Well, he didn't, and doesn't today. Wimbley continues to have one move, which is the dip-under. He got a freebie sack last week when he came unblocked, but was nowhere today.
So the point is that while the scheme can help a little, when push comes to shove, players outside of QB's are typically at their peek by their third or fourth year in the league. That means while Wimbley will make some plays here and there, he isn't our long-term answer at OLB, at least not in the 3-4 defense. Players can make a scheme work, but a scheme can't make players work. It's a fact that this is a fallacy.
Now for my favorite........
Fact or Fallacy: Josh Cribbs can make the transition to WR.
FREAKIN' FALLACY!!
Yeah, I'm gonna toot my own horn. Tough crap.
I preached it during the pre-season that Cribbs doesn't have it to be anything other than a special teamer or a gadget guy. Well, after two games in the NFL as a "featured" receiver, he's an absolute STIFF. It's utterly STOOPID to draft 2 WR's in the 2nd round of this draft, then turn around and put a special-teamer with ZERO experience out there as a wideout, and not just as a receiver in the slot, but as the starter! 
Today, first he drops an EASY pass that sets up a 3rd and long leading to a fumble because he has no CLUE how to play wideout, then he turns around and fumbles a ball on another 3rd and long because he's trying to stretch for that last half-yard when he still needs 6!
Oh yeah, by the way, while Cribbs is out there hurting the offense, hurting Quinn, and probably hurting his ability to return kicks because he's wasting energy on offense, but he's ALSO hurting the two wideouts who were drafted on the first day by taking away their reps and their playing time. Bench the dude already and get past the failed experiment.
I have more, but that's enough for now. I'd like to know what everyone else thinks, and what they see as truth's or fallacies............
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,544
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,544 |
I'll Play: Quote:
Truth or fallacy: The 2009 Browns are a not rebuilding team?
Yes ... but .......
This is a team that was a scoring machine on offense 2 years ago. They went laterally in talent at RT and RG. They have a rookie Center ... with some ups and some downs. They have a lesser receiver at TE. They have Edwards ... Lewis .... Vickers .... Thomas .... Steinbach ....... and that's some of the most important positions on offense. What we have questions and concerns about are the #2 WR, and the QB.
With that being said .....if we aren't rebuilding currently ..... no one told the offense.
Quote:
Truth or fallacy: Brady Quinn was an NFL-ready QB coming out, and was a clear upgrade over Anderson.
Absolute fallacy. Quinn is the golden boy .... and the chosen one. Anderson was the guy in the way of the acsendancy. We scored TDs once upon a time ..... with one of those guys at QB. (Even last year) This year ...... well ... if one has eyes one can see .......
Quote:
Fact or fallacy: The Ryan defensive scheme can help guys like Wimbley play better.
Better? Yes. Best? Who knows? It just looks like Wimbley is still a work in progress even years after he was drafted. He's got the physical tools .... but so do hundreds of other undrafted players every year ......
Quote:
Fact or Fallacy: Josh Cribbs can make the transition to WR.
Maybe a 3rd down/slot guy ..... but not much beyond that. Cribbs lacks top end speed. he appears to lack the same quicks as a receiver that make him so dangerous as a returner. I would hole that Massaquoi and/or Robiske step up .... but what's the use in having WRs if we aren't going to be able to use them anyway? 
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Truth or fallacy: The Cleveland Browns made their return to the NFL in 1999?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744 |
Truth or fallacy:
We should trade Braylon Edwards
Truth- It is clear that we are in a complete rebuilding mode. He is pretty much assured to leave as soon as he is a UFA, we might as well get a 1st or 2nd round pick for him to help the rebuilding.
Go Browns!!![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/BrowniePoints/AndersonSnowPic.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Truth or fallacy:
We should trade Braylon Edwards
Truth- It is clear that we are in a complete rebuilding mode. He is pretty much assured to leave as soon as he is a UFA, we might as well get a 1st or 2nd round pick for him to help the rebuilding.
Trade em'.
However, that would leave Cribbs as our #1. Ugh.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Truth or Fallacy, Toad is a genius for making this thread.
TRUTH
We miss Winslow
Truth - We have no receiving threat other than Braylon, and no big target to go to.
St. Claire is just as good as if not better than Shaffer
Fallacy - St. Claire is worst than I, and I've never played a down of contact football.
Mangini is done; he sucks.
Fallacy - Give him time. This team isn't ready to play yet.
We need a real quarterback
Truth - Our's suck.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,389
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,389 |
Cribbs is lost at WR... I had slight hopes but they're being put to rest. IMO our WR group outside BE is atrocious. Wimbley is not an elite LB, maybe barely average. He can't get penetration from the right side. We are rebuilding in 2009... the climb isn't as high as it was after Botch, but we aren't nearing the summit or anything close to it. I didn't want to believe that in the off-season, but I believe it now (but if we pull one out in Balt. next week, I will jump back on the 'wagon  ). We need a RT, a RG, a LB (or three)... we need one of our young WR to step up soon (I won't be impatient with MassQ and Robiskie). Quinn I won't bother with right now, I already commented in the DA thread and the week is still young. 
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 974
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 974 |
Quote:
truth or Fallacy, Toad is a genius for making this thread.
TRUTH
We miss Winslow
YES
Quote:
Truth - We have no receiving threat other than Braylon, and no big target to go to.
False, we had momass open on at least one play. I don't think that was the only one.
Quote:
St. Claire is just as good as if not better than Shaffer
Just as good, they both suck
Quote:
Mangini is done; he sucks.
FALSE, he has more to learn but he isn't done.
Quote:
We need a real quarterback
Truth - Our's suck.
I saw Quinn alone on the sidelines, more then once. That disturbs me a lot.
We're trying to throw the ball downfield and he checked the ball down to Trent Richardson and the Indians on the choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 327
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 327 |
Quote:
Truth or fallacy: The 2009 Browns are a not rebuilding team?
Truth or fallacy: Brady Quinn was an NFL-ready QB coming out, and was a clear upgrade over Anderson.
Fact or fallacy: The Ryan defensive scheme can help guys like Wimbley play better.
Fact or Fallacy: Josh Cribbs can make the transition to WR.
1. Totally agree, we need more talent.
2. There were people that said he was nfl ready? BQ doesn't have the tools that DA had, but as far as sustaining drives, being able to elude rush, not wasting timeouts because he's confused, yeah he is better. So far Accuracy, overall not as good as advertised, but as we saw with TC, if you don't protect a QB it doesn't matter who they are they will fail.
3. i think it has been helped a little, but not a whole lot, we need to get some turnovers.
4. 1 million percent agree, cribbs as a No.2 is a liability.
Ruining QB's since 1999.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 218
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 218 |
this is fun Toad....
truth or fallacy:
The strength of this team is the offensive line.
Fallacy. the strength of this team is the punter and the field goal kicker, and has been since 1999. This offensive line can't give the QB three seconds to make a read, and the result is what you had today.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177 |
I think we arent "rebuilding" as so many homer fans wanna stamp on this season. We just stink, have no talent, and have horrific coaching.
Your right that Wimbley, isnt, hasn't, and is NEVER gonna be worth a darn as a 3-4 LB.
I was supportive of Quinn getting the starting gigg, however, I don't think he or DA are ever gonna be much of anything in this League.
Cribbs thing is obvious....bottom line....we are a bad team, lacking a QB and Coach. We arent rebuilding, we just did some stupid things this offseason, and drafted poorly.
I think its also fair to call EM onto the floor for his QB decision, hes supposed to more know that the fans right?
Pretty much a spot on take on whats going on Toad.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 830
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 830 |
Quinn won the QB competition. Fallacy Even bad Anderson moves the ball, gets a few points on the board, and opens the run up. I havent seen QB play this bad since Doug Pederson was starting for us. 
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,544
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,544 |
Quote:
Quinn won the QB competition.
Fallacy
Even bad Anderson moves the ball, gets a few points on the board, and opens the run up. I havent seen QB play this bad since Doug Pederson was starting for us.
You obviously missed the last 6 weeks of last year and a couple of guys named Ken Dorsey and ... oh yeah .... Bruce Gradkowski. (or however the hell you spell it)
Oh wait .. this might be as bad as that .... 
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Truth or Fallacy: Eric Mangini learned from his time in NY.... Fallacy...you need proof? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,448
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,448 |
That was a good one ! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,435
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,435 |
Truth or Fallacy?
Can Mangini Coach?
Truth.
Mangini in my oppinion is not a bad coach, his first year in New York he took the Jets to the playoffs, why? because he had some talent on the team. They had an offense that could move the ball and score some points. Eventually we will see some results from these players, they will get sick of losing here pretty soon and will show some desperation on the field. It's not all on Mangini, there is just an overall lack of depth on defense, and an offense that doesn't want to move the ball.
Truth or Fallacy...
Is Quinn the better option right now?
Fallacy.
It depends on how you look at it, dating back to Houston last year Quinn has done nothing but regress. Played great against Denver last year, Average against Buffalo, and then poor against Houston. Now he has played poorly his first two games, even worse yesterday than last Sunday. It just depends on your point of view right now. If the coaching staff wants to try and win some games and keep this season alive than the smart thing to do is to put in Anderson before this locker room splits apart.
Players on both sides of the ball are going to get sick of not moving the ball and putting points on the board. Quinn has showed no leadership, no urgency, and little ability these first two games to even move the sticks. It's not all been the lines fault, theres been a mixture of predictable and bad play calling, the offensive line has been poor at times but there have been alot of drop backs where he has had plenty of time to find receivers but throws inaccurate passes or is too afraid to throw down field. Eventually there will be players in the locker room who will want Anderson back in, and a split locker room will be even worse than what we've seen the past two games.
Truth or fallacy...
Are we re-building?
If we keep Quinn in there much longer we are officially rebuilding. Our offense has 8 of 11 players on the team from 2007 when our offense was elite. If Mangini wants to give this offense a shot of adreniline he will start Davis, start one of the rookies and put Anderson in there.
If however he wants to ride it out with Quinn and take the top 5 draft pick, than so be it. As long as Quinn is in guys we are rebuilding. Get ready for another slaughter next week @Baltimore.
"You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,150
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,150 |
The Oline is the reason for Quinn's crappy play
Fallacy. He had time and open receivers on numerous occaisions until Denver started loading the line later in the game.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,818
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,818 |
Do I agree with you on all counts??
Truth
On Cribbs, I would start a conversion to safety today. The guys strength is reading and reacting, not confining him to set routes.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
On Cribbs, I would start a conversion to safety today. The guys strength is reading and reacting, not confining him to set routes.
Hmm, interesting thought.
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,389
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,389 |
I've seen others suggest the same thing, but can anyone seriously expect Cribbs to be a better safety than Elam/Pool/Adams? Why not switch Mack to H-back while we're at it?
Maybe our fortunes can turn if we convert Robiskie to corner?
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,818
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,818 |
I have said it for a long time.
I think he could be better. Maybe not tomorrow, but maybe next year.
The fact is he isn't a receiver, so why continue that??
Maybe all he will ever be is a return guy, but IMO he would be a great safety.
Cribbs is a read and react player as proven by his ability to return kicks...that is all read and react. He has speed, non receiver hands, he tackles, and doesn't shy from contact...that spells safety.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,389
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,389 |
Maybe (and that's a big MAYBE in my opinion), in an emergency situation. He can read and react on kick coverage because he only has to worry about the kick returner, but it's a whole other ball game when you have to worry about WRs, TEs, three-wide sets and stuffing ballcarriers out of the backfield.
gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Maybe all he will ever be is a return guy, but IMO he would be a great safety.
I can't agree with that.
He's not a good receiver because half-way through his NFL career, he's never had an ounce of experience at it, and as we've seen, it's WAY WAY too late for him to learn.
Same goes for defensive back.
In the meantime, his failures while learning on the job will help cost us games, just as his play at receiver has done in the past.
People need to stop making Cribbs out to be something he isn't. Leave him where he does good work and leave the rest of the positions to the players who fit them.
Cribbs is a special-teamer who can do spot-duty as a gimmick player. Enough is enough with him.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520 |
I wonder why EVERYONE in the world thinks trying to use Cribbs as a #2 WR is a mistake except for our head coach ? Gotta be more to it...
I know he did mention something about Robinski needed to make progress in the special teams dept in order to be able to be active for games. Maybe one of the reasons he can't get on the field on game day is he is a liability elsewhere.
Two seperate issues I know but right now I think he looks at the numbers and wants the most bang for the buck come game day instead of activating someone that is not contributing elsewhere while learning his position at the same time. Cribbs does that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Quote:
I wonder why EVERYONE in the world thinks trying to use Cribbs as a #2 WR is a mistake except for our head coach ? Gotta be more to it...
I know he did mention something about Robinski needed to make progress in the special teams dept in order to be able to be active for games. Maybe one of the reasons he can't get on the field on game day is he is a liability elsewhere.
Two seperate issues I know but right now I think he looks at the numbers and wants the most bang for the buck come game day instead of activating someone that is not contributing elsewhere while learning his position at the same time. Cribbs does that.
So he's waiting to see more improvement in Robiskie in the ST dept. before he dresses. This, in case you don't remember, is a WR that HE...again, HE drafted at what... 36!!! ??
Yep...there's gotta be more to it....like, oops, I made mistake in drafting!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,297
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,297 |
This whole thing with Robo has me very perplexed. The guy was a consensus second rd pick...right? So...right now he's not good enough to be important enough to the offense that he is active on game day AS A WR? And his ticket to being active is his contribution on ST? Lord, I hope that is not the case. Also, this notion that darned near everyone needs to contribute on ST has me really scratching my head. I get the importance of special teams and players being able to contribute there...but how many guys is enough? How many guys do we have who play only ST? I'd hope that a 2nd rd pick with 4 yrs of college in the Big Ten could be active on gameday as a WR and NOT have to earn an active spot with his ST. Activate Robo...play him and Mo Mass to see what we've got and keep JC on ST. The new ST demon - picked up off waivers and newly converted to WR - can be inactive. JC takes that guys spot on ST (so ST gets better) and our 2nd Rd WR gets on the active roster at a position he has played since grade school (Need to see if the WR play gets better...could not hurt). I'm sticking with EM for a long while...but the JC experiment is hurting us on offense AND the beloved ST and we need to get something out of our 2nd rd picks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
I think the numbers may have something to do with it, just different numbers.
Cribbs wanted more money or was going to hold out. So he gets a chance to earn more money at WR. He fails miserably, but the team gave him a shot in good faith and maybe, just maybe we keep the best return and coverage guy in the entire NFL..
The strategy at QB may be similar. This fanbase would never support any other QB until Brady either plays well or demonstrates he is no where near what he was hyped to be.
So you take a shot at what might work, in order to make us stronger down the road. Hopefully it's a short road.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
The guy was a consensus second rd pick...right? So...right now he's not good enough to be important enough to the offense that he is active on game day AS A WR?
Beating a dead horse here (except it's all relevant) ask yourself this question:
If we weren't trying to make Cribbs into a starting receiver, would Robo be active?
I think we all know the answer to that one.
Sometimes a receiver is just a receiver, and sometimes a special-teamer is just a special-teamer.
Sometimes, NFL coaches think they know more than they really do.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Quote:
Quote:
The guy was a consensus second rd pick...right? So...right now he's not good enough to be important enough to the offense that he is active on game day AS A WR?
Beating a dead horse here (except it's all relevant) ask yourself this question:
If we weren't trying to make Cribbs into a starting receiver, would Robo be active?
I think we all know the answer to that one.
Sometimes a receiver is just a receiver, and sometimes a special-teamer is just a special-teamer.
Sometimes, NFL coaches think they know more than they really do.
We all see it except Mr. Mangini. An article on the main site states that Josh is working hard to be a good WR, he is wired to work hard (or something along those lines) and the dealio goes on.
No doubt JC will do what is asked but why at the detriment of your #2 draft pick?
Not the kind of logic I'm wanting out of my new coach. If Robiskie is gonna fail let it be done on the field where we can can see it, agree with it and move on.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Quote:
Sometimes, NFL coaches think they know more than they really do
As do message board posters.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Quote:
If Robiskie is gonna fail let it be done on the field where we can can see it, agree with it and move on.
So, if Mangini sees that Robiskie cannot produce, he still needs to put him on the field so all of us fans can see he's not going to produce?
Great logic.
This place is beginning to look more and more like the "other" board.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Quote:
If we weren't trying to make Cribbs into a starting receiver, would Robo be active?
I think we all know the answer to that one
I don't know the answer to that one. Robo also hasn't beat out MoMass or Furrey. So who's to say that Mangini hasn't seen enough to decide that BE, MoMass, Furrey, and Cribbs are our 4 best receivers? (Regardless of who the #2 is)?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Quote:
Quote:
If Robiskie is gonna fail let it be done on the field where we can can see it, agree with it and move on.
So, if Mangini sees that Robiskie cannot produce, he still needs to put him on the field so all of us fans can see he's not going to produce?
Great logic.
This place is beginning to look more and more like the "other" board.
We've got zero info as to his status. Did he screw the pooch in the draft? If so, they need to man up and say so! None of the secret society crap that is the norm for this guy. He's showing us Cribbs is not a WR...there's a difference?
Sweep it under the rug and say he can't play special teams. Or maybe we'll just let him off the hook just this once since it was only what, his 3rd draft!?
If he was a later round pick it might not be such an issue, but this a number two on a team that can ill afford a screw up in the draft at all let alone a #2!
Maybe there's something wrong with that logic also?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936 |
Well, after watching Robo struggle through camp this summer, I'm not surprised we aren't seeing more of him just yet. Based on what I saw, he needs to get stronger. He had a REAL hard time during press drills vs. our DBs the handful of times I was able to watch them. Also, he had his fair share of drops throughout camp.
Rough start for the rookie, but hopefully he'll get better... soon.
[color:"white"]"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
-- Mark Twain [/color]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Why do YOU need to know anything as far as his status?
He's not playing, so obviously Mangini thinks he's not good enough to play and contribute.
There's your status.
We, as fans, don't need to know anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,297
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,297 |
Quote:
Quote:
The guy was a consensus second rd pick...right? So...right now he's not good enough to be important enough to the offense that he is active on game day AS A WR?
Beating a dead horse here (except it's all relevant) ask yourself this question:
If we weren't trying to make Cribbs into a starting receiver, would Robo be active?
I think we all know the answer to that one.
Sometimes a receiver is just a receiver, and sometimes a special-teamer is just a special-teamer.
Sometimes, NFL coaches think they know more than they really do.
Toad, I honestly don't know the answer to that one. Would Robo be active if JC weren't testing the waters at WR?
I know this...I won't like either answer.
If yes, then WTH is EM doing? Because JC is struggling at WR and our ST is struggling without JC.
If no, then we very well may have botched a 2nd rd pick...again.
It is a question I'd rather not have to ask...but we must.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Sometimes, NFL coaches think they know more than they really do
As do message board posters.
When certain message board posters know Cribbs is a bum at wideout and burdening the team, then sees it proven because the coach elects to play him and he flops, then yes, the message board poster does know more.
Just because people are paid to do jobs doesn't mean they are the ultimate authority. Our history is littered with guys who knew less than many posters here, and they are now either out of the NFL or back to scouting. So don't be so quick to discount knowledgeable fans just because you don't agree with the opinion.
From where I'm sitting, some of us (and yes, I mean myself) have been more right than these GM's or coaches. Sad.........but true.
And hey, let's call a spade a spade here man: You think this is the "other board" for no other reason than you don't like the opinions. Until Mangini actually proves us detractors wrong, we're right.
Sucks to be right about how they are wrong.
So, let's go back to the theme:
Truth or Fallacy: Mangini screwed up the QB comp?
Truth, because Quinn clearly needed every rep he could get his hands on, and Mangini outsmarted himself by trying to make the Vikings guess. Well, guess what? All he REALLY did was limit our offensive cohension. So what's the result?
BROWNS ARE DEAD LAST IN THE NFL ON OFFENSE.
Yeah, guess the head coach really does know more than message board posters. 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,246 |
Question, then, Toad, is how much longer will it take Quinn to get that cohesion? Assuming he's been getting all 1st team reps since the week before the Vikings game, how much longer does he need to develop those connections?
I am unfamiliar with this feeling of optimism
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Toad, I honestly don't know the answer to that one. Would Robo be active if JC weren't testing the waters at WR?
Use logic to guide you.
With one less wideout active, don't you believe Robo would then be elevated?
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Quote:
Quote:
Toad, I honestly don't know the answer to that one. Would Robo be active if JC weren't testing the waters at WR?
Use logic to guide you.
With one less wideout active, don't you believe Robo would then be elevated?
Let logic guide you.
Just because Mangini might decide Cribbs isn't a #2 doesn't mean that Cribbs won't still be a better #4.
Maybe Mangini goes
#1 BE
#2 MoMass
#3 Furrey
#4 Cribbs
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Time to play: Truth......or
fallacy!
|
|
