|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
That's a case where you just have to worry about what you can worry about when it's time to worry about it  If they are making a ton of money and are now a backup because they can't push aside anyone else... cut em or trade em. A worst, you suck it up for one season and then dump 'em.... in either case, each one will be its own special situation. There's no magic catch-all answer for that.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
Quote:
Get competitive with your starters first, then worry about depth..... and depth will start to take care of itself as you upgrade your starters and your former starters become the backups.
If you aren't competitive with your starters... your depth doesn't mean diddly.
I can see that.. the only worry I'd have (and it's probably not really a problem) is that your former starters are mostly likely costing the team a bunch of money.. Could play havoc with the CAP.. (if there is one)
That's true.
Also, you are not going to draft starters in rounds 1-7 every year. There are guys from the 4th round on who you take flyers on, or who are spectacular special teams guys (for example) but who may never become starters.
Building a team requires getting both starters and backups. Ideally, many of your backups will not be "replaced former starters", but young guys ready to step in when the current starters are no longer starting for your team.
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: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Trading deadline has come and gone and it looks like we were not a participant.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Yep,...I guess we're happy with what we don't have, and our 1-5 "competitive" record.
I think salaries should be based on wins.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,679
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,679 |
Quote:
Trading deadline has come and gone and it looks like we were not a participant.
There was only one trade made so we weren't the only ones.
Joe Thomas made Justin Timberlake change his name. He didn't want wusses to have the same initials...
Dawg Talker since 3/26/2005...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
I think the main place I differ from most is priorty.
I see the list like this:
1. DE
2 ILB
3. OLB
4. WR
5. QB
I believe in Mike Holmgren's Qb Philosphy(which was one of the reason i was so excited he came on) which is as he said at his opening day press conference:
"I believe in drafting a QB every year"
He also tried trading up with St. Louis to select Sam Bradford. Holmgren has also been in several situations where, having perpetual playoff teams with great quarterbacks, it really hasn't made much sense to draft a QB early.
Quote:
Why "waste" a 1st rd pick on a guy you HAVE to commit to for 4-5 years? I mena if you make a mistake and take another Ryan Leaf..your STUCK with him for at the very least 4 years...
Yeah, missing on a first round QB sets the team back, no doubt. Of course that's true with any position, but especially so with QBs as they tend to be paid a bit more and become the "face of the franchise".
The flip side is that landing a franchise QB, or even a quality starting QB, is the surest fire way of quickly turning around a franchise or elevating a franchise to the next level. Many of the best teams in the league have great quarterbacks and many were drafted in the first round-- P. Manning, Rivers, Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Roethlisberger, E. Manning, Brees (drafted 32nd overall, 2nd round), and more.
Quote:
however if your smart like Holmgren(and I pray to god he don't go away from what has worked for him all these years) you draft a QB in the 3rd-6th rds every year...eventually you will hit on a guy.
your giving yourself "more chances" to roll the dice and stroke the fire and eventually you will hit on someone...
Taking a 1st rd QB I see as more of a luxary then a franchise changing "need". You MUST have a good team around a 1st rd Qb or your wasting a TON of money...tons...
In my eyes, a lot of it comes down to availability. You don't take a 1st round QB just to say you took a 1st round QB. But if a franchise QB falls in your lap (or you're bad enough to get, say, a top 3 pick), you have to take him. You just have to. Even if it's less of a sure thing than many other positions (and I full admit that is correct), it's the best way to REALLY change a team's fortunes. Again I want to stress that basically all of the best teams in the NFL have great quarterbacks and great passing games.
You have to take a franchise QB when you can; if you wait, the chance might never come around again when you finally build your team.
Quote:
This team has way too many needs elsewhere to "risk" taking a QB that high and you can't believe all the hype about 1st rders...they have been wrong more times then they have been right..
Look at the things these scouts and media said about Russell, couch, Leaf, Akili Smith, etc...for everytime they have been right they have been wrong 5 times.
when picking in the 1st rd you have to weigh your odds...and pick a position that has the "least" chance for failure and the highest chance for reward AND fits what your team needs...thats why OL, DL, LB, S those positions work out most of the time..
I say take the franchise QB if he's there, otherwise, go with your plan...
Quote:
This team needs to focus on making good solid picks...is anyone going to argue that Bill Bellichik taking Richard Seymour #6 overall was a bad move?
That was a great pick. If you rerun the draft today, he probably goes #1 overall (actually, Drew Brees would, who are we kidding  )
Quote:
We need to focus on hitting with our draft picks in the 1st and 2nd rds on "lower risk" areas and build a good solid foundation of good players...particularity in the D Front 7, Secondary, and OL positions...
but still draft a Qb prospect every year in the later rds..eventually we will hit on a guy...we will hit on our Tom Brady, our Brett Farve...in the meantine...build the rest of the roster with solid quality guys that can play football and things will work out.
Once you have a good solid roster in place...you can win with just about anybody at QB
the Steelers got the the AFC Championship game with Kordell Stewart...they got to the super bowl with Neil O'Donnell...neither of those guys were great QB..but it can be done... they lost because of mistakes on both sides of the ball, but having a 1st rder doesn't guarantee you will win....Tell Tom Brady, Joe Montana that..
The Steelers didn't win their 2 Super Bowls until they got Roethlisberger, unfortunately
Quote:
i am a big proponent of building the team first and then go from there...The Ravens were competitive with Kyle Boller of all people....just build out a solid roster first..then worry about a QB..in the meantime...just build and take a Qb later every year and keep rolling the dice....
The Ravens are an interesting example because people point back and use them as an example of winning despite having a not so great QB. I say that if you have to go back 10 YEARS (or 8 with the Bucs) to find a good example of a team with a dominant defense and running game winning a title that sort of proves the point. Since then... all franchise QBs.
Also, the Ravens defense has been so good for so long that you could make a strong case that with a decent QB all those years, they could have challenged the Patriots for the team of the decade... i.e. with multiple SB wins. Just saying.
Quote:
we will get our Matt Hasselbeck...he may already be here with McCoy and there is no way we will know until the kid has played atleast 20 games or so...no way to know...
The OL and the team seems to be rallied around this kid..drafting a 1st rd Qb next year if the team is behind McCoy is just recipe for another Quinn/Anderson v2....if McCoy plays well and has a 80 or higher rating at the end of the year commit to the kid and let him grow..
Quinn/Anderson was Quinn/Anderson because they both sucked. They are both proving it in new cities. Now, having 2 *legit* quality QBs like Philly... that is not a problem. That is an asset, and a beautiful one at that.
Now, with that being said, if McCoy continues to show promise, that should definitely be a consideration. No doubt.
Quote:
I shudder at the thought of this team taking another 1st rd QB..shudder...this roster is not ready for that yet...and it look like we got really lucky with MCCoy..NO Rookie looks like that against dick Lebeau..no rookie...
Steeler fans are already saying they think McCoy will be there biggest nemesis in the future and he reminds them of a young Brian Sipe with mobility....we need to give this kid a real chance and this FO needs to show him they are behind him by NOT drafting some 1st RD QB...If Colt plays well enough commit to him and move forward...He is costing us peanuts right now...the money spent on a 1st rd Qb can be used to bring in 2-3 good FA and another draft pick to fix the rest of the team..thats my point..
50 Mill is enough for 3 or 4 more GOOD players...it don't make sense with all the holes we have...thats my point...
Colt McCoy has played one game. I'm a proponent of letting him play so we can see what we've got. I'll say that I'm cautiously optimistic.
Also, there should be a rookie salary structure in place next year. Paying huge money at the top of the draft shouldn't be as big of a factor.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833 |
Quote:
Quote:
how many times did our blitz work this past sunday?
just sayin......
Depends on how you define "work" I guess..
If your saying a blitz works when the QB is sacked.. How many times was Rothlesburger sacked.... whatever that number is, that's how often it worked.
If you view a blitz as successful because it stops a successful run or pass,, then a few more times I guess..
Point is, what they are doing isn't working either because the Blitz isn't effective, or Wright can't handle being on an island..
Take your pick
can I pick both ?
Ben was able to coplete passes behind a less than stellar OL.
Look at our sack stats, they are putrid.
Ya , ya I know that pressure counts too but apparently that is not doing the job either.
the Bears are successful with a cover 2 zone defense. Not having to bring safeties except for the surprise factor is what we need to accomplish.
If the DL's responsibilities are to eat up blocks, then where is the breakdown in the pass rush?
I'll say it right now. Our LBs are just OK, not difference makers. We need two of them and right now we don't have them.
Roth is OK, Barton is a run stopper as is Gocong. They are one dimentional and are really back-ups. Benard is a pass rusher but not a great run stopper by the looks of things.. Fujita is having a decent, but not great, all around year. Bowens , Costanzo and Trusnik are MIA.
Roth and Fujita are our only starting quality LBs. The rest are solid back-ups only.
JMO............
PS we need to retain DQ. not for an extravagant price and only if healthy.
Also, JMO
Last edited by Line Judge; 10/22/10 10:16 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 110
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 110 |
Quote:
Quote:
i am a big proponent of building the team first and then go from there...The Ravens were competitive with Kyle Boller of all people....just build out a solid roster first..then worry about a QB..in the meantime...just build and take a Qb later every year and keep rolling the dice....
The Ravens are an interesting example because people point back and use them as an example of winning despite having a not so great QB. I say that if you have to go back 10 YEARS (or 8 with the Bucs) to find a good example of a team with a dominant defense and running game winning a title that sort of proves the point. Since then... all franchise QBs.
Also, the Ravens defense has been so good for so long that you could make a strong case that with a decent QB all those years, they could have challenged the Patriots for the team of the decade... i.e. with multiple SB wins. Just saying.
I do agree with building the team without focusing on just a 'franchise QB' to draft. But, when you think of the time it will take to put quality parts in place to have strength in each area, we will have enough drafts to select a QB with 'franchise potential' somewhere within those upcoming drafts - maybe first, maybe 2nd, maybe later, but we shouldn't miss the pick just because we're focusing on picking someone who fills out an area of need. Say, we repeated this year's draft with a choice between a Bradford - with some high cost, i.e., giving up an extra pick - and naturally picking in our spot with an Eric Berry or a Ndamukong Suh available. What would you do? I'd say take a Bradford if you assess his potential as franchise, even though SuhâBerry are can't miss hits in positions of need. Same thing with Snachez in '09 vs having available Crabtree or Cushing - I gotta believe Holmgren would not have done the Mangini downward shuffle first of all - you take Sanchez and sit him, like McCoy.
2011 may be totally different and we all can prioritize our needs, but you always INVEST when you are getting a franchise potential QB, especially when you look at the Browns needing at least 15 1-3 round picks to make the team achieve above average skills in positions of need. Out of those 3 draft years, take the QB if you don't have to do extremely unnatural things.
Bottom line, build the team but go off the list when you are presented a high probability of QB success.
jmo. whadoiknow 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 110
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 110 |
Quote:
Colt McCoy has played one game. I'm a proponent of letting him play so we can see what we've got. I'll say that I'm cautiously optimistic.
Also, there should be a rookie salary structure in place next year. Paying huge money at the top of the draft shouldn't be as big of a factor.
Not picking on you gopher, but here's another angle ...
McCoy, based on his 2 preseason games, his 1 start and his history tells me he has the ability to, at minimum, be a quality backup if we need such over the next couple years. That being said, I still say make the 'franchise' investment and sit the guy down to develop his readiness. You gotta do that anyway with a team with our quality level and you either end up with a guy ready to lead the team or McCoy becomes Brees v.2 and you have a Brees/Rivers dilemma instead of a Quinn/Anderson one. If you can pick the right guy, you succeed where it's most important. If you don't, we're no worse than today and it takes 4 years rather than 3. Holmgren has the right idea and I believe he can put the right value on the right guy - be it 1st round or 3 or 4, whatever.
another .02 on this matter, not gopher's opinion
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Trade Deadline
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
