|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
To further clarify, Sam was also talking about Winslow. He doesn't.........can't.........understand how having a divisive presence combined with an undeserved contract extension does more harm than good.
***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: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
I believe the guy has made mistakes this year. But I'm wondering why we can't give the guy a second chance to redeem himself. Why can't he be afforded the chance to see if he can improve? We seem willing to do this with our favorite players. Why can't we do this with our coaches?
RAC got four years.
edited: offtopic, answer in Mangini-thread...
Last edited by DjangoBrown; 12/23/09 12:59 PM.
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
The problem is that Quinn hasn't played enough to "screw up his mechanics". The guy has less than a season's worth of starts under his belt.
I think that Toad did hit one thing exactly on the head, and that it appears that Quinn does not handle pressure well at all. Even the thought of pressure is enough to throw him off.
but that doesn't seem to make sense.....if you are not getting the repetitions, you can throw off your mechanics...if you are getting repetitions but are doing them incorrectly, then you can throw off your mechanics.
watch how Brady is throwing...the motion is different than it was last year....maybe it is because of the pressure that he is doing it, maybe it cannot be corrected or that it won't improve his accuracy even if it is corrected....but it is not because he hasn't played long enough.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Now, regarding mechanics, yeah, his are bad. VERY bad. The thing is that he wasn't this magically sound QB in college. He did all this stuff back then too. The only difference is that in college you can get away with it. You can't at this level.
Keep in mind one of the knocks on him coming out: He wilted when pressured. Part of that "wilting" is poor mechanics when he's pressured, which is why you see so many off-balance throws. Some guys like Favre can do that but most can't. Quinn's mechanics have ALWAYS been flawed. This isn't something new. It's hard to imagine that the coaches haven't worked HARD with him on this. Brady just has to figure out a way to overcome that flaw himself. If he does, yes, his accuracy will improve, but do I believe it'll be enough? No. We've seen him make terrible throws too many times as a pro when he's had excellent protection or time to throw.
I agree...he wasn't perfectly sound in college or last season...he was just much better than now. maybe it was that he had less pressure, so his mechanics seemed to benefit while he still had the same issues underlying....it is a sound theory.
I'm hoping that if he can fix that flaw (and it is a big flaw) he can go from bottom third to middle third QB in the NFL. i'm thinking less and less that he can be a long-term solution at QB, but I am still holding out hope that he can be good enough so we don't have to reach to draft one at the top of the draft this year.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,468
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,468 |
I'm putting myself in the camp that think Holmgren can magically fix Quinn. Let him work with our QBs and see what happens. Again  Please please please just don't draft a QB this offseason.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 3
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 3 |
Quote:
Unfortunate for Quinn but it does give Holmgren a chance to get a fresh look at Anderson as we head into the offseason.
The glass is half full...mac
Holmgren will release DA or trade him before training camp,after he drafts a QB.He will not go and make the same mistake Savage and Mangini made with DA.Plus DA is due to make 7 million next year and no team will pay that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Holmgren will release DA or trade him before training camp
NRTU.
Let's get one thing out in the open so we can eliminate any false possibilities:
Derek Anderson is due a salary of $7.5 million AND a roster bonus of $2 million for the 2010 season, due in March. Nobody is going to trade for Anderson with that kind of money AND a draft pick or player involved.
Anderson, no matter what he does, is finished as a Brown, even as trade-bait. He's going to be released well-before that $2 million bonus is due.
I mention this because I've seen numerous examples suggesting that Anderson being thrown into the starters role now is somehow a gambit by the Browns to audition him in order to drive up his trade value. 
$9.5 million dollars, folks. $9.5 million dollars. No organization is going to take on that contract no matter what Anderson does in two worthless games.
***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: 16,195
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195 |
If he does manage to show signs of life in the next two games, it might make it a bit more attractive for someone to bother to want to redo his contract. Otherwise, I would imagine they'll simply release hm.
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044 |
well i doubt anyone would really give him much money so i fully expect him to take a huge paycut. whether i still want him on this team will be decided by these next few games. if he comes out looking like he did when he was benched, he's free to explore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
He'd have to cut all the way down to just about veteran minimum AND waive his $2 million signing bonus before someone would give up a late-round pick for him, so if he's going to do that, he's going to be better served to tell the Browns to screw off on a reduced deal and simply become a free agent where he can pick and choose where he goes and at what price.
He might be as dumb as a Skapoose moose, but his agent isn't. 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,044 |
true but i was hoping we'd get some sort of home advantage. you know, all those adoring cleveland fans
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Yeah, all the ones disguised as Quinn jerseys *L*
***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 |
Well I'm glad it was only a mild left foot strain. No surgery is always a good thing and lots worse than 4 weeks in a walking boot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
ESPN.com's Adam Schefter tweeted on Tuesday that Brady Quinn's foot injury has landed him on the IR and that Derek Anderson will start the final two games of the season. With Mike Holmgren brought into the mix this week as the team's new czar of all things football, we begin to consider the future of everyone in the organization, including Quinn and Anderson. As we noted on Tuesday, it's possible that Holmgren feels he's seen enough of Quinn already, and wants to see what he's got in Anderson. Not very much, if Anderson's performance earlier this season is any indication, but we'll give him the benefit of the doubt. It's likely that one of these two men will be traded this offseason, and it's possible that both could actually be traded. Both? Think about it. Prior to Quinn's recent hot streak, he wasn't thought of too highly; in fact, neither of these two men was good enough to win the QB competition outright prior to Week 1, with the mystery lasting almost until kickoff. As Bud Shaw of the Cleveland Plain Dealer notes, accuracy is the key in Holmgren's West Coast offense, and neither Quinn nor Anderson can list that as a strength. As such, there's a possibility that Holmgren will get rid of both veterans and use a high draft pick on the team's next franchise QB, which could possibly be Jimmy Clausen depending on how things shake out with the draft order. Using Quinn as a trade chip -- a more valuable one based on the last few weeks -- the Browns could get some players to instantly plug some other holes on the roster, or some draft picks to do the same for the future.
Since ESPN referenced Shaw's article, here's the pertinent parts:
Quote:
There are a lot of questions about what will happen when new president Mike Holmgren sits down to evaluate Mangini. His handling of the quarterbacks appears to be one prominent concern.
(Disclaimer: it may never get to that. Mangini came here as the power base in the organization, something that was apparently news to George Kokinis. Mangini is saying all the right things about looking forward to working with Holmgren. But it's difficult to imagine him suddenly giving up control to a GM and answering to two bosses, let alone one. That's not the job he took.)
Mangini or no Mangini, my guess is Holmgren won't see his quarterback of the future here. Assuming Holmgren will shape this team's offense to fit his vision, you might think Quinn could excel, given the West Coast emphasis on the short passing game.
Derek Anderson believes he can run it, too, saying that "it's not rocket science." But, like rocket science, it does depend on accuracy. That's not Anderson's strength.
We didn't see much of Quinn. But we saw enough to know it's not his, either. If you're not a big-gun quarterback in the NFL you better have extraordinary aim.
Did Mangini's handling of the quarterbacks set them back? No doubt. But that doesn't mean either guy is the answer.
At least with Holmgren here, the Browns are already moving in the direction of finding a quarterback who can become a headliner instead of an afterthought.
This touches on something that I've wanted to say, but was waiting for the right time..........
I've seen it hinted several times that Holmgren is going to be the best thing that could happen to Quinn.
Here's the problem: Holmgren isn't taking an active role in player development. He won't be on the field telling these guys what to do. That's what his coaches are for.
It's a natural mistake to assume that Holmgren's hiring is going to be good for Quinn, but he won't have any effect on any individual player. That isn't his job.
***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: 1,744
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744 |
If we are going to draft a QB high give me Bradford over Clausen. Everything I have ever seen or read about him backs up the fact that he is a complete tool. Assuming shouldar surgery goes fine Bradford used to be the most accurate QB IMO, however, his arm is lacking.
As I said in another thread we are going to acquire another QB through FA, trade, or draft. Until we trade for one or sign a legitimate veteran starter not someone like Brent RatlifFI will believe we are drafting a QB within our first 2 picks and most likely with our top 5 pick.
Go Browns!!![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/BrowniePoints/AndersonSnowPic.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
I kinda share your opinion.
On one hand, I rate Clausen higher than I rated Quinn coming out. In many ways, they are very nearly the same player. Mobile, football smart, average arm, arrogant arses. The difference is that Clausen is much more accurate than Quinn, but Clausen is probably the biggest tool (excellent choice of words on your part) to come out since Cutler. I haven't seen such arrogance since Ryan Leaf came out. At least Cutler hid his.
I'm not on board with any plan that brings us Clausen.
***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: 880
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 880 |
Quote:
The same was said about Jeff Faine. He has not been hurt since he left Cleveland.
The irony on that one is that he was a draft day trade bait after we signed his replacement then his replacement went out in a career ending injury then we traded picks for his said replacement. Apparently needing to still get a good starter we then use a 1st rounder again to get a center...after the guy we've traded away is still a starter elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 24
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 24 |
How bout Tony Pike in the 3rd round? Thats who they should draft!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 301
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 301 |
Quote:
How bout Tony Pike in the 3rd round? Thats who they should draft!
I have to disagree with you about Pike. Yes he is decent when he plays. The problem with him is he is a stick figure and constantly hurt. Brian Kelley continually criticized him for his toughness last year and before the start of this year. No thanks on an injury prone string bean.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
What would be your explanation for why both DA and BQ looked markedly worse under Mangini/Daboll than they did in the Crennell/Chudzinski scheme? Does it make sense to you that they both regressed badly, based on what we had seen from both of them in prior appearances, with the new coaching regime? Whatever happened to "coaching up" promising players .... I thought Mangini was supposed to be a thinking-man's, teacher-type coach? Instead we get two QB's looking clueless in a high school offense. Some of that has to stick to Mangini, imo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
what I don't understand is why Mangini gets the blame for " the QB situation".
Both were here when he came,how is that his fault?
If both are not very good,how can he be blamed for giving both a chance when neither stood out? 
Two factors:
1) He absolutely screwed up the QB situation to start the year. If you'll remember, he tried that idiotic shell-game with the rest of the league, only to have word leak out as to who would start. Yet even knowing that Quinn would start, he didn't give him enough reps to even try to get comfortable in the offense, and it showed.
That's how he screwed up the QB situation.
2) On a local level, the vast majority wanted Quinn. Because he benched the golden-boy early and went to Anderson then back, the Homers in the media would say he mis-handled the QB's. To that end, you're right: He can't be blamed for crappy play on both of their parts.
I've watched all the local Browns TV shows. While I enjoy them, they are absolutely laughable. For one, they recycle the same 4 or 5 people on something like 3 different shows.  When they talk, all you hear is Sam, Tony, and Dough parading Quinn around like he's the second coming of Jesus Christ himself. Because of that, they aren't going to cut Mangini any slack. Sam is so far past the NFL he knew that he's a comical figure. He has no comprehension of how the NFL works today. It's not the same league he knew. Sure, he's forgotten more football than I know, but he has no clue that the league is now a players league and that the cap dictates moves. As for the rest, One of'em has even come right out and said he supported Quinn because he's just sick and tired of a QB-derby. That's idiotic, and indicative of guys that aren't any more objective than some of the fans on these boards.
So......Mangini isn't going to win with them. He does deserve some blame, but not as much as he's getting.
***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: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
but,but.......
if both Quinn and Anderson are THAT bad it really does not matter how he handled the situation, right?
There was nothing he or anyone else for that matter could have done, including coaching -up, right?
Including having Norv Turner as the OC, right?
Count me in as one of those that have pinned their hopes on Quinn. Why? :
1. Anderson's higher salary ( I think) and even more importantly
2. The huge investment in Quinn. You can't blame that investment on Mangini either.
At this point I wonder if either one is a viable #2 much less an average ability starter.Could a new scheme, OC and QB coach flip the switch inside his head bone?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
Quote:
What would be your explanation for why both DA and BQ looked markedly worse under Mangini/Daboll than they did in the Crennell/Chudzinski scheme? Does it make sense to you that they both regressed badly, based on what we had seen from both of them in prior appearances, with the new coaching regime? Whatever happened to "coaching up" promising players .... I thought Mangini was supposed to be a thinking-man's, teacher-type coach? Instead we get two QB's looking clueless in a high school offense. Some of that has to stick to Mangini, imo.
I don't recall BQ looking good in any scheme and DA was decent in 2007 and then regressed under RAC and Opie IIRC. Both were regressing before Mangini got here. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Quote:
I thought Mangini was supposed to be a thinking-man's, teacher-type coach? Instead we get two QB's looking clueless in a high school offense.
I would like to retract my statement about Daboll & Mangini running a "high school" offense. That's an insult to guys like Ted Ginn and Chuck Kyle. My bad ... I should have said "playground" offense. Joe Montana would struggle in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
Quote:
Quote:
I thought Mangini was supposed to be a thinking-man's, teacher-type coach? Instead we get two QB's looking clueless in a high school offense.
I would like to retract my statement about Daboll & Mangini running a "high school" offense. That's an insult to guys like Ted Ginn and Chuck Kyle. My bad ... I should have said "playground" offense. Joe Montana would struggle in it.
that's fine. Then you are saying that both BQ and DA will light it up as long as we get a new scheme?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Nope. I think that an NFL-caliber offensive scheme, a couple good receivers, and a consistent running game would show them both to be average to just above average QB's, not the shlubs they look like now. Mangini has to answer for the hiring of Daboll, the sheer suckitude of our receivers, and the burying of Jerome Harrison for at least half of the season, not to mention his poor handling of the pre-season "QB competition".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
The WR situation is what it is b/c:
1. Stallworth got suspended for the year.
2. Edwards was leaving,so he was traded to at least get something in return.
3. there was no viable FA out there that would be a magic pill
None of this is on Mangini.
Wada ya mean no running game? The running game has been consistent. We are currently 11th,right?
Harrison may have been buried on the roster for half a season, but if it had been RAC he would still be buried.
Mangini's "handling of the QB competition" is a red herring. This team was going to suck in spite of the fact that Mangini really only made one mistake.That mistake was reaching on Viekune.
Those terrible rookie ends may turn ito nuggets just yet.
Does the passing game suck b/c of Daboll or b/c of the bad play?
Chicken/egg
So will BQ and DA be average or above if we just get a new OC and scheme?
I sure as hell hope so,but I'm not going to bet the ranch on that happening.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
Nope. I think that an NFL-caliber offensive scheme, a couple good receivers, and a consistent running game would show them both to be average to just above average QB's
Neither DA nor Quinn will ever be above average QBs. Anyone who thinks so is living in LA-LA land ... JMHO. If they had that type of ability, you'd see it with your eyes right now. They don't. Case closed.
The QBs might have regressed under Mangini, but their floor was much lower than their ceiling was high to begin with. If he screwed it up, it's not like we took that much of a step back.
There's an idea Browns fans need to start getting used to ... we have no QB. And we won't until we draft one or sign someone with a proven track record.
I don't wish injuries on anyone, but if there is one positive to the Quinn injury it's that he can't have two decent games to end the season and give everyone a false sense of hope.
Say NO to Quinn in 2010.
Say NO to DA in 2010.
Just say NO.
...*L*...
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
We are gonna have to agree to disagree on whether something is "on Mangini" or not.
Mangini is the one responsible for:
Hiring Daboll.
Trading Winslow and Edwards.
Drafting (reaching on) both Robiskie and Massaquoi, and then burying Robiskie.
Burying Harrison - I believe he was inactive for 4 games.
Not giving either QB enough reps with the first team in preseason.
Keeping Daboll when it was obvious to everyone that he was overmatched.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Quote:
Mangini is the one responsible for:
Trading Winslow and Edwards.
I'm really sick of reading this. Anyone who hates Mangini will use this as a pile on ... a little cherry on top of all the other gripes as an attempt to strengthen the argument against him. Winslow and Edwards had to go. That's all there is to it. Their own situations as it pertained to the Cleveland Browns made trading them Option #1 in both of their cases.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
....... and don't forget the Kokinis and the other front office personnel lady being fired. That has been blamed on Mangini. And even if it was" Mangini's fault" in retrospect how has it set back the organization? In fact,now Holmgren can get someone else prolly even better or do it himself. Mangini has cleared the decks. It's all uphill from here if all the right decisions are made. If all of these young guys peak at the same time:look out! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
Quote:
Not giving either QB enough reps with the first team in preseason.
Keeping Daboll when it was obvious to everyone that he was overmatched.
Which QB should have gotten the most reps and why?
Daboll or the QBs? To me it's chicken and egg.....
But it's good that we can still disagree without getting into a personal pizzing contest like happens here alot 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,517
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,517 |
"Keeping Daboll when it was obvious to everyone that he was overmatched."
I've come around to the opinion that Daboll isn't the main problem with the O.
Execution and talent is.The past few weeks they've been running some well designed plays.Perhaps they were running those same plays earlier,but just couldn't get them executed.
"Not giving either QB enough reps with the first team in preseason."
That falls squarely on the shoulders of both QB's.Mangini gave both ample opportunity to sieze the starters role,niether took it.
"Trading Winslow and Edwards."
Didn't care for the Winslow trade,but the Edwards trade sure is looking good now.
I agree with you on the draft,the entire 2nd round stunk.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
"That means if Mangini is kept, he'd have to suffer through a defensive AND offensive philosophy switch. It would be Holmgren's OC and Holmgren's DC and schemes."
You are Half right...Holmgren and the new GM whoever that may be will assess the team and when they do they will find that the Defense is not BROKE when they see the film - Oh they need some talent added to it - but as a UNIT functioning it ain't Broke.
They will look at the film and assess the Special Teams and they will find that ST UNIT is not BROKE.
They also will see these two UNITS and see the capable hands that they are in regarding Ryan and Sealey.
They will look at the film of the OFFENSE as a unit and they can come away with nothing more than the summary that IT IS BROKE!!! They will look at Daboll and see he has a history as an assistant coach but a first time crack at OC and apparently way over his head.
Your claim is that they will possibly keep Mangini but fire all his staff and force Mangini to run schemes he does not believe in. Regardless of firing lets put it this way...Ryan is forced to run a D I think he'll walk knowing the writing is on the wall. Sealey don't know what he'll do. Cause probably he would have full control of the ST.
Anyways yeah sure it could happen only if MORA is the heir apparent as soon as he can get fired in Seattle. Holmgren would probably force Mora's D....
But I don't see Holmgren over concerned about a Defense THAT AIN'T BROKE. And please don't throw me stats stating we are ranked bottom of the barrel. I'm talking about FILM and real football not Strat-O-Matic.
The D needs some Studs to get healthy, and they need some studs added via FA n Draft! Not saying to stay status Quo...stating simply its on its way to good things.
The D has a very good DC at its helm as well as Mangini's prowess involved with Game planning help and execution.
The O is Holmgrens personal genius side of the ball. Considering that IT IS BROKE and Daboll is not experienced. I see Holmgren FIXING it and dictating to Mangini on how it will function. And for Mangini to make it his own.
I don't see if Mangini stays - there will be a complete internal overhaul of his assistants and of philosophies. I would 100% expect an entirely new OC and new Offensive scheme brought here.
Of course what are the odds Mangini stays??? I think very slim. I think he stays it means the guys that Holmgren really wants are tied up in 2010 and will wait for them to be available to take over. Gruden and Mora come to mind. In that case maybe Holmgren sticks with Mangini as long as he has no problems changing the Offense over. And I see Mangini giving this up...but I would doubt to see him give up the D as well...he would walk.
JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895 |
1) Re: Reps
Sorry all, I am just not buying this. Both QB's were getting reps, one with the first team offense and one with the second team. While I could buy "Not enough reps with the first team" (Which would be speculation) I think any QB should overcome lack of 1st team reps in a few weeks...neither of our QB's did. Either they are not good enough or they are slow to adjust...or we are just damn unlucky.
2) Mangini mismanaging QB's
Honestly it looks like he did make an accurate read here...both QB's seem to be problematic. But if he couldn't pick a starter between these two he should've tried to trade one while their value was high. I know this is mostly a 'hindsight' comment...but if he couldn't pick and choose between 2 mediocre guys whose value was inflated he should've played off that value.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
he didn't trade either b/c of the risk of injury..
we don't have a legit 3rd string QB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895 |
Quote:
he didn't trade either b/c of the risk of injury..
we don't have a legit 3rd string QB.
A valid point, although many think we do not have a valid 1st string QB now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195 |
Quote:
he didn't trade either b/c of the risk of injury..
we don't have a legit 3rd string QB.
I thought we had a legit 3rd in Bartel, he clearly out played Ratliff but ended up on the PS and got snatched by another team.
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Quinn to IR
|
|
![[Linked Image from thumb0.webshots.net]](http://thumb0.webshots.net/t/34/34/0/73/58/2594073580091396520Miskbz_th.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)