|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
These threads are getting all mixed up and didn't know where to place this. Pluto article Terry Pluto's Talkin' ... about Colt McCoy and the West Coast Offense, the newest Cavalier and some Tribe spring-training tidbits Published: Sunday, February 12, 2012, 4:25 AM Updated: Sunday, February 12, 2012, 4:28 AM By Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Sure, we're getting a taste of winter, but there's plenty of sports talk to keep you warm. About the West Coast Offense ... 1. The Browns believe Colt McCoy will be a more productive QB next season. They still are keeping their options open, but if they decide not to sign a free agent such as Matt Flynn or use the No. 4 pick for a quarterback, they are convinced McCoy will be better. It's because McCoy has been in three different offenses in three years -- at Texas, Browns under Brian Daboll, Browns under Pat Shurmur. 2. The West Coast offense is different. When a play is called, the quarterback has a structured progression: 1-2-3 options. He has a little less freedom than some offenses to find an open receiver, but WCO coaches believe the priority list of receivers on each play helps the quarterback make a quicker throw and operate with less confusion. 3. I was critical of the throws to Greg Little standing in the middle of the field, about five yards from the line of scrimmage. He usually caught the ball, and was blasted by the defense. The Browns say Little was often not the main receiver, he was there to occupy a safety as other receivers made cuts behind him. Think of a triangle, with Little in the middle. 4. What the Browns don't like to talk about is that those cutting receivers either -- A.) Didn't get open fast enough, B.) McCoy became impatient and threw to Little as a safety valve, or C.) The timing was off. Obviously, there were different breakdowns. When Little was targeted 13 times in a loss to the Bengals -- a game where he had four drops -- it was not by design. McCoy went to Little so often because he believed Little was the only one open, not because he was No. 1 in the progression. 5. The Browns believe Little should be given credit for making some very tough catches, rather than dwelling on his 12 drops (No. 2 in the NFL). He led the team with 61 catches. He was in a new offense after having missed his final year at North Carolina because he took money from an agent. They are very upbeat about his future. In Mel Kiper's 2011 rookie rankings, the ESPN analyst ranked Little at No. 20, a real jump for being picked No. 59. Kiper wrote: "Little needs to become more consistent, but, after missing a year of football, he showed hints of future stardom -- he had seven more catches than [the Falcons'] Julio Jones." Among rookies, only the Bengals' A.J. Green (65) had more catches. 6. The Browns believe Little is their top receiver ... right now. They were impressed by how Joshua Cribbs improved. He caught a career-high 41 passes and led the team in catches of at least 20 yards. There were some rumors about Cribbs not returning in 2012, and that's ridiculous. The coaches love how he played well against teams such as Pittsburgh, along with his willingness to play special teams. 7. Jordan Norwood earned some respect for his play as a slot receiver, and he has chance to make the team next season. The Browns are hoping Carlton Mitchell can show something in the mini camps. Mitchell has the speed and physique (6-3, 220), but he's battled injuries and inexperience, having only three catches in two years. 8. Hard to know what to make of Mohamed Massaquoi, who had a foot injury and the second concussion of his pro career. Massaquoi has averaged 34 receptions over his first three seasons, and has been handed the starter's job each year. 9. While the Browns see value in Little and Cribbs, they know they must find a receiver with speed who is a real threat, not "just a track guy," as speed players with bad hands are known. Kiper has the Browns looking hard at Kendall Wright of Baylor. Dan Shonka of Ourlads.com, an NFL scouting service, also likes Wright for the Browns, comparing him to the Panthers' Steve Smith. 10. The Browns led the NFL last season with 43 dropped passes, and were 29th in pass plays of at least 25 yards. So it's not as if the dropped passes were a product of a big-play offense. Quarterback is an issue, but so are the receivers who must quickly get open and hang on to the ball. About the Browns and football families ... 1. While some fans were bothered that the Browns hired Brad Childress as offensive coordinator because he's so close to Shurmur, Mike Holmgren, etc. ... well, that's how it works in the NFL. Josh McDaniels is back with Bill Belichick in New England, where he started his pro coaching career. McDaniels left to be head coach in Denver, then offensive coordinator in St. Louis. After being fired from both jobs, he returned to Belichick. 2. Brian Daboll is the new offensive coordinator in Kansas City. He is the former Browns offensive coordinator under Eric Mangini. Mangini and Daboll are part of the Belichick football family, although Mangini and Belichick clashed after "spygate" a few years ago. 3. So what does that have to do with Daboll in Kansas City? The Chiefs' general manager is Scott Pioli, who broke into football with Belichick. The head coach is Romeo Crennel. Before he was the Browns' head coach, Crennel was Belichick's defensive coordinator in New England. So Pioli and Crennel turned to Daboll, who did a nice job in Miami once Matt Moore took over as quarterback. 4. Crennel's associate head coach is Maurice Carthon, who worked with Crennel in Cleveland ... and that relationship eventually goes back to Belichick. 5. I can write a book about all the Belichick connections in the NFL, but Akron native Michael Holley already did, it's called "The War Room," and it's an excellent read. The Browns have switched football families. Phil Savage, Crennel and Mangini were in charge of the team from 2005-10, and they were from the Belichick tree, which really begins with Bill Parcells. 6. The other big NFL family is Holmgren (back to Bill Walsh) and the West Coast offense. In last week's notes, I laid the connection from Holmgren to Eagles coach Andy Reid to Shurmur and Childress. So we will see if the Browns can do better with this family.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085 |
Thanks LD..Pluto is always fun to read..
Dang 43 dropped passes.. 9 of those by our best receiver from last year.
that's just gotta stop. I don't give a darn who the QB is. Put either of the Manning Boys or Tom Brady back there, 43 dropped balls is gonna kill this team.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
Thanks LD..Pluto is always fun to read..
Dang 43 dropped passes.. 9 of those by our best receiver from last year.
that's just gotta stop. I don't give a darn who the QB is. Put either of the Manning Boys or Tom Brady back there, 43 dropped balls is gonna kill this team.
No problem Daman! Little actually had 12 drops, but who's counting.  I fully expect a productive second year from McCoy and the Offense if that is the route we go. He hinted at some of the points some of us were making about the routes and clarified the Brown's thinking in that.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545 |
I wonder ...... and this is not slamming anyone ..... just a wonder .......
I wonder how many of those passes were simply a matter of the ball getting to the receiver in a catchable area ...... but where the receiver was expecting it inside and it went out, or expecting it out and it went inside. (because of a mistake on either end)
I also wonder how many were because guys heard footsteps. With the number of concussions last year, it would be kind of a natural reaction.
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: Jun 2011
Posts: 745
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 745 |
anytime a your targets drop a 43 combined passes,it will affect a QB's psyche.
Little had 12..Watson was second with 7.
It all relates with McCoy not having trust in his WRs.
the bridge of trust is broken.
if you look at random stats at the Browns TE/WR's...it reflects just how bad they were as a units..
28th in YAC catch 1434 yds (the top 5 teams in this category went to the playoffs)
lead.
16 combined TDS.
Outside of Greg Little...which WR/TE's actually shows promise and hasn't peaked yet?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,313
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,313 |
Well Ytown i can think of at least a dozen or more drops that were wide open , but that's not why i want a diffeant QB. Every team has drops...I just disagree on who that QB should be..You want instant flash i want long turn upside that is our main differance and i'm not going to argue it.
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 |
In regards to 43 dropped passes and the Qb not trusting his receivers.
The qb can not trust his receivers and give up on them, and then the receivers can not have trust in what the QB does and then give up on him.
I think it is easier to for a good QB to find success with Bad Receivers than for Good Receivers to find success with a Bad QB. A quarterback has 5 eligible and up to 8 or 9 receivers to get the ball to in a given game. The 8 or 9 possible receivers have only 1, sometimes a 2nd quarterback to catch passes from during a given game.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085 |
Quote:
I wonder ...... and this is not slamming anyone ..... just a wonder .......
I wonder how many of those passes were simply a matter of the ball getting to the receiver in a catchable area ...... but where the receiver was expecting it inside and it went out, or expecting it out and it went inside. (because of a mistake on either end)
I also wonder how many were because guys heard footsteps. With the number of concussions last year, it would be kind of a natural reaction.
What's the difference, another QB puts the ball in a place where it's considered catchable but drops it, it will still be McCoys fault... 
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Quote:
I wonder how many of those passes were simply a matter of the ball getting to the receiver in a catchable area ...... but where the receiver was expecting it inside and it went out, or expecting it out and it went inside. (because of a mistake on either end)
"Drop" is one of the most forgiving stats in the NFL - scorekeepers don't usually assign a drop unless the ball hits the receiver dead in the hands, in stride, with nobody around - catches that require any ability whatsoever are usually not assigned as drops.
If a team has 43 drops in a season, it probably translates to 70 balls that the receivers "probably should have caught"
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560 |
http://www.facebook.com/terrypluto/posts/326444230732768In This week's Sunday Notes., I was NOT writing about who should be the quarterback. By Terry Pluto Until they make a move for a QB, how am I supposed to discuss the WCO? Talk about Flynn? RG3? These guys are not here...at least not yet. OK, You can say it's about McCoy or a Quarterback To Be Named Later. But I'm not writing about the QQB decision. Tis was a story about how the offense was supposed to work, what went wrong, etc. It was not QB driven. I'm not married to Colt. I'm open. My first choice is Luck...and good Luck with that. I loved Brantley. Not there. Then, it's probably Flynn because I don't want to trade up for a QB. But for now, I talk about Colt because he's there. At least 50 percent of the starting QBs are viewed as backups if their teams could find someone better. Besides, it doesn't matter what I want. These WCO guys have theiir own way of doing things, it's why they hire each other, etc. The real issue in my story was the miscaluation of receivers, etc. Yes, it was about the FAILURE of the receivers in this system, not QBs. Keep in mind, I'm not stopping them from getting RG3 or anyone else. These guys are totally sold on their system and they look for a QB to fit it. That's reality. At the moment, I don't know who that QB may be. I'm still putting the data together, but the Browns were in the bottom 20 percent in passes thrown from the Shotgun...I will have the final figures in the next few days. So the next QB must play under center, because they aren't changing dramatically. But until they get guys who can run patterns, get open quick and hang to the ball -- and add real speed -- every QB will struggle here, Colt or the new guy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560 |
My above post was Pluto's facebook explanation to haters linked by twitter. Obviously he meant Barkley instead of Brantley.
I agree with Pluto. Whomever is the QB needs things fixed to succeed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085 |
Quote:
My above post was Pluto's facebook explanation to haters linked by twitter. Obviously he meant Barkley instead of Brantley.
I agree with Pluto. Whomever is the QB needs things fixed to succeed.
So True..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
Mo Carthon is the associate head coach in KC aaaaahahahahaha....man he sucked in cleveland how did that work?
Also...proof that Savage had more to do with decisions than romeo...man RAC got the short shrift here..
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,821
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,821 |
Did anyone ever think Romeo had a big say?
So a system QB is what we are looking for. Colt might be that.
As long as we double our win total this season, I don't care what they do. If we don't win 8, kick them all to the street if they can't make decisions on the QB and the coach. If I was Lerner, I would tell Homie that if we slip to 3 games below .500, I would expect to see a coaching change the following day.
That's how you change a losing culture. You get rid of the losers.
Oh...as of this weekend, it is now "this" season since I just paid for my season tickets.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
If we hadn't won the Miami and Seattle games, and lets say based on SOS or whatever it is, we got the #1 pick ahead of Indy and Stl... Would it be a question of "Colt should get another year!" then? Some people on here confuse me, because at one point they say things like Colt should get another year, but also, that if Luck was there at 4 they would take him..? Who do they think is going to start next season? This is possibly going to be one of the longest off seasons ever... With a chance of not even a hint of knwoing anything QB related until the end of April... *starts counting days* 
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,821
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,821 |
Than's a good point my man. Either he is good enough to keep and play or he needs to be replaced.
Some people say they don't think Griffin is going to be good, yet think Colt is??
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545 |
I also love that some people feel that RG3 can never be very good because be played out of the shotgun in a spread offense ............. Yet think that McCoy will be just fine ..... even though he played out of the shotgun in a spread offense .............  To me it's more about the upside of the player than solely the offense he played in college. There are many more factors that go into making a successful NFL QB, and to me it looks as though RG3 is light years ahead of Colt McCoy in almost all of them.
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: 28,218
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,218 |
Quote:
Did anyone ever think Romeo had a big say?
So a system QB is what we are looking for. Colt might be that.
As long as we double our win total this season, I don't care what they do. If we don't win 8, kick them all to the street if they can't make decisions on the QB and the coach. If I was Lerner, I would tell Homie that if we slip to 3 games below .500, I would expect to see a coaching change the following day.
That's how you change a losing culture. You get rid of the losers.
Oh...as of this weekend, it is now "this" season since I just paid for my season tickets.
A system QB is all we've ever been looking for since Holmgren got here... and there is an exceptional chance that Colt is it.
We are not looking for the Super-Prototypical player that would rock out in a sandlot game... we want a guy that can and will run the system EXACTLY as he's told to. Do the reads that he's told to in the order he's told to.
Also, as far as WR's go... chances are we aren't really looking for some prototypical "burner" type. Instead, look for us to go for someone shiftier that runs great routes, is intelligent enough to pick up the offense quickly and can go across the middle time and time again. Having some deep speed won't hurt, but I don't believe that it is the primary quality that we're going to look for.
This is the WCO .... roughly 70-80% of our plays will be passing plays with the overwhelming majority happening in the 1-15 yard range.
We no longer will attempt to use the run to set up the pass... that is not how this offensive theory operates. So, people calling the QB "Capt Checkdown" and stuff need to understand that this is how our offense works.
To quote Wikipedia's entry on the WCO:
Quote:
Walsh's West Coast Offense attempts to open up running and passing lanes for the backs and receivers to exploit, by causing the defense to concentrate on short passes. Since most down and distance situations can be attacked with a pass or a run, the intent is to make offensive play calling unpredictable and thus keep the defense's play "honest", forcing defenders to be prepared for a multitude of possible offensive plays rather than focusing aggressively on one likely play from the offense.
It all comes down to execution, and until you and everyone else knows the system, you can't execute well.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,297
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,297 |
Guys...please stop pretending that you do not understand what the "pro-Colt" guys are saying. (OS,Peen, YT)
To clarify:
For the most part, the pro-Colt crowd would rather use our two #1s to improve positions other than the QB...not necessarily a Colt lovefest. We need some talent.
The pro-Colt crowd would take Luck if he were there when we pick because he is the highest rated QB propect since Manning or Elway...but are unwilling to trade 3+ #1 picks for him. So we aren't getting him.
The pro-Colt crowd does not - generally - put RGIII ANYWHERE near the prospect level of Luck. They believe he may be good, but he is simply the 2nd best. They would absolutely NOT Trade a donut to move UP to get such a guy...OR...simply do not value him at any #1 pick we end up with. Too much boom or bust for a bad team to chance.
You three probably know more about football than I will ever know...but you are all too savvy to pretend that you cannot understand where the pro-Colt folks are coming from.
They may be right...they may be wrong...but I believe that most have been qute clear as to why they would go with Colt for another year AND why they would/wouldn't sell the farm for Luck or simply even pick RGIII.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085 |
Quote:
For the most part, the pro-Colt crowd would rather use our two #1s to improve positions other than the QB...not necessarily a Colt lovefest. We need some talent.
That's where I sit.
Quote:
The pro-Colt crowd would take Luck if he were there when we pick because he is the highest rated QB propect since Manning or Elway...but are unwilling to trade 3+ #1 picks for him. So we aren't getting him.
Let me say, I'd also take RG3 if he landed at 4.
For me at least, it's not a matter of being in love with McCoy or not,, it's a practical matter that I don't believe it will help the team to put picks up in trade to move up to get either guy.. I think it will be years before we see either guys value, given the talent that would be around them.
And it's not like Luck or RG3 are the last Great QBs that will ever come out..
The argument: what if we win 6 games next year and take ourselves out of contention for a Top QB in the draft..
If you got receivers, if you got a RB, if your line is solidified... At that point, trade the whole damn draft to get the final piece of the puzzle.. I'd be good with that.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,844
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,844 |
Quote:
Guys...please stop pretending that you do not understand what the "pro-Colt" guys are saying. (OS,Peen, YT)
To clarify:
For the most part, the pro-Colt crowd would rather use our two #1s to improve positions other than the QB...not necessarily a Colt lovefest. We need some talent.
The pro-Colt crowd would take Luck if he were there when we pick because he is the highest rated QB propect since Manning or Elway...but are unwilling to trade 3+ #1 picks for him. So we aren't getting him.
The pro-Colt crowd does not - generally - put RGIII ANYWHERE near the prospect level of Luck. They believe he may be good, but he is simply the 2nd best. They would absolutely NOT Trade a donut to move UP to get such a guy...OR...simply do not value him at any #1 pick we end up with. Too much boom or bust for a bad team to chance.
You three probably know more about football than I will ever know...but you are all too savvy to pretend that you cannot understand where the pro-Colt folks are coming from.
They may be right...they may be wrong...but I believe that most have been qute clear as to why they would go with Colt for another year AND why they would/wouldn't sell the farm for Luck or simply even pick RGIII.
Excellent post!!!
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545 |
Quote:
If you got receivers, if you got a RB, if your line is solidified... At that point, trade the whole damn draft to get the final piece of the puzzle.. I'd be good with that.
And what if that's not enough.
What if we get into some 6-10 position ....... where we're picking around 10th, 11th, or so in the draft.
Now, let's say that the top pick is a wonderful and amazing QB ....... and that while there are others available ....... none have the same level of ability. Let's say that it's not even close.
Team 1 has a QB. Let's pretend that they are the Colts, and that Manning was cut, and Luck was lost for the season in pre-season, and they are sitting there, again, at #1. Let's say that they really want a particular DT ..... but they don't feel that he is worth the #1 overall .... or that they feel that they can get value out of the position by trading down a spot or 2 and still getting their guy.
Let's say that a team like the Dolphins is sitting at #2 ..... having not found their QB this off-season. The Redskins, in the same boat, and at #3.
Indy is taking phone call after phone call from those 2 teams, plus the Browns. The Colts really want the DT they have their eye on, and they feel that he could be the key to revitalizing their defense.
Who do you suspect they would trade with in that situation? Is that scenario that far fetched? (You could substitute any team with their QB established at #1, who slipped due to injuries)
What would we do in that situation? Wait yet another year? Maybe hope for 6-10 again .... or maybe even 7-9? Hope we pluck a miracle out of thin air?
I am of the opinion that if you don't have a franchise QB, and you are in position to get one, you get him. We do not have a franchise QB. We are in position to get one. If we don't and this team goes 4-12 again, I don't see Lerner having any choice but to blow it all up again ...... and we're back to square one. (especially if we have an opportunity to get a guy, and he goes on to star elsewhere)
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: 43,085
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085 |
Quote:
And what if that's not enough.
What if we get into some 6-10 position ....... where we're picking around 10th, 11th, or so in the draft.
Rothlesberger was picked 11th.. Rodgers was picked what,, 21st or 22nd.
That's what if
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 820
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 820 |
Quote:
Quote:
And what if that's not enough.
What if we get into some 6-10 position ....... where we're picking around 10th, 11th, or so in the draft.
Rothlesberger was picked 11th.. Rodgers was picked what,, 21st or 22nd.
That's what if
And if we give away our draft to move up to grab a "franchise" QB and we have to endure another season of horrendous football, how many will then be calling for heads to roll because of the lack of offensive production?
I firmly believe that the 2011 Browns were such a horrible team offensively that we need every pick we've got just to get this thing off bottom. I see a team that is still a few years away from contending for anything. If a QB is there and is a good value for the pick we should take him. And if we can get some help from FA we should definitely take it. But we have the worst receiving corps I've ever seen in pro football right now and until that is fixed somehow we're doomed.
"Let people think this is a dumpster fire," - Mike Pettine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545 |
Quote:
But we have the worst receiving corps I've ever seen in pro football right now and until that is fixed somehow we're doomed.
The receivers on the Jaguars and Rams thank you for your support.
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: 43,085
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085 |
Quote:
And if we give away our draft to move up to grab a "franchise" QB and we have to endure another season of horrendous football, how many will then be calling for heads to roll because of the lack of offensive production?
Yet, that's what some on here are advocating we do THIS YEAR to move up 2 spots to get RG3. At least I'm saying to trade your draft (or some portion of it) AFTER you get the other positions solidified..
you will hear this argument: well it will only cost us our two 1st rounders this year and maybe some lower rounders this or next year.
What if it costs more than that to move up 2 spots.. and given that there are other teams that want a Franchise QB,, will it become a bidding war..
And if it doesn't, what's that say about RG3?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,821
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,821 |
Quote:
Let me say, I'd also take RG3 if he landed at 4.
Let me say, I don't understand that line of thinking.
If he is good enough to be taken at #4, you are basically saying he is a potential franchise QB....I mean a really good, plus player at the position.
If he is good enough to take there for those reasons, he then IMO gives you every reason to move up and take him if required. You don't select a QB at #4 if you think he has the potential to be your average Joe QB.
I don't have any clue what the brain trust is thinking or how they hope to draft, but I will say if Griffin is the guy we want, and lose out on getting him because we refused to trade up, every one of them should lose their job. End of story.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,901
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,901 |
Realistically, what would it cost the Browns to move up to the #2 position, to draft RG3?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
depends on free agency (among other unsettled things.) If the Skins and Dolphins both pick up FA QBs, they may not have to move up to 2. If only the Skins pick up a FA QB, I think it would be pretty safe to say we'd only have to give up #37 and #4. Of course, we don't know what washington, miami, seattle, or someone else nobody is talking about is willing to give up.
Last edited by CleveSteve; 02/13/12 11:08 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,085 |
I know you don't understand that line of thinking
Let me splain it to you... (my tribute to Ricky Ricardo)
What you have to give up to move up to get a guy that may or may not work out is what's at stake here.
Do you only have to give up your two 1sts this year, or it is, two 1sts this year, one next, and some lower round picks?
Look peen, if who ever has the 2nd pick were willing to trade up even, then my arguement goes right out the window,, and I'd have no issue with it.
Or even if, we had to give up our 4th over all and a conditional 1st rounder 2 years from now based on RG3 production.. I got no issue.
I would also have no issue with a trade today if we had enough of the surrounding cast in place.. We don't.
Not sure if that explains it better for you or not.. But that's where I'm standing..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
depends on free agency (among other unsettled things.) If the Skins and Dolphins both pick up FA QBs, they may not have to move up to 2. If only the Skins pick up a FA QB, I think it would be pretty safe to say we'd only have to give up #37 and #4. Of course, we don't know what washington, miami, seattle, or someone else nobody is talking about is willing to give up.
I don't think it will take any less then a first round pick along with a mid to later round pick this year and one next year.
No matter how you slice it, it's going to cost us 3 picks equaling a defecate of -2 and one of those will be a first round pick (22). One that we gave up the 6th pick for and I think that has to be in the discussion as to completing that deal.
--If you come to the bargaining table without a first round pick in hand the next thing you will here on the line is ... "Please hold" mean while another team might be handing in their card to the podium.
Oops and that's along with the 4th selection so that would relate to a defecate of -3 picks (one of the being our first round pick (22) or at the very least our first next year.
I don't know why , but I have a feeling Seattle could be a surprise player to trade the farm to get RG3 or Luck if they can't land Flynn in FA. I think that team is closer then we are from being one player (QB) away from a good team.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 02/13/12 11:48 AM.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Quote:
Let me say, I'd also take RG3 if he landed at 4.
Let me say, I don't understand that line of thinking.
If he is good enough to be taken at #4, you are basically saying he is a potential franchise QB....I mean a really good, plus player at the position.
If he is good enough to take there for those reasons, he then IMO gives you every reason to move up and take him if required. You don't select a QB at #4 if you think he has the potential to be your average Joe QB.
I don't have any clue what the brain trust is thinking or how they hope to draft, but I will say if Griffin is the guy we want, and lose out on getting him because we refused to trade up, every one of them should lose their job. End of story.
Peen, it's how I feel as well, so I'll explain my thinking.
My position on the draft is that you pick the player that most elevates the overall talent on the field. Were RGIII or Luck to be available at #4, they would definitely represent that choice IMO.
If you had asked me in December if I would trade from #4 to #2, giving up #22 and a mid round pick or two if I had to for RGIII, I'd have said yes. Then Matt Stinkin' Flynn came out and threw for 6 touchdowns against a playoff team. Why? Because he's awesome? No. Because Green Bay has a multitude of talent and he's been there for years to learn the scheme. If we throw RGIII into the game throwing to Greg Little, Mohammed Massaqoui, and Josh Cribbs, how good can we be? Tony Pashos is still out there blocking, and we've still got no speed.
I don't think Matt Flynn is naturally better than Colt McCoy. Obviously, there is a balance between talent and experience. Do I think Griffin is more talented than McCoy? Of course. That is easy to see. Would I rather have Griffin than McCoy at QB all other things being equal? Yes. Would I rather have McCoy and a significantly upgraded supporting cast or RGIII and the below average group on O we've been throwing out there? Probably the former.
My point is that upgrading three positions on offense (or WR, RT on O and RDE or CB on D) is more of an overall upgrade than just improving the QB. JMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,545 |
Quote:
Realistically, what would it cost the Browns to move up to the #2 position, to draft RG3?
I think that it will cost, at least, our 2nd round pick.
The other teams in "contention" would have a lower 1st round pick to offer, as well as lower picks in any other round of the draft. If St Louis, for example, traded down to our spot, and picked up our 2nd round pick, they would pick 4th, 34th, and 36th. They could fill some holes around Bradford quite well, and quickly.
They also stand a good chance of getting a player they want at a lower draft spot. If they more to 6 or below, they stand a chance of losing that player.
It might take both of our 1st rounders. I dunno. That would be a really huge price to pay, but if they believe that RG3 is a franchise guy, it's not that big a price to pay. We would still have all of our 2nd-7th round picks, as well as our extra 4th, and compensatory picks. I do not believe that the Redskins nor Dolphins could match that pair of picks in terms of immediate help and quality picks. The other 2 teams could offer future picks ..... and while that's all well and good, I have to think that the Rams are looking for immediate help. I think that 2 first round picks this year could trump any other offer.
I do not believe that we would have to pay more than that, however, if it took throwing in a lower round pick on top of that, I would.
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 |
Quote:
I do not believe that we would have to pay more than that, however, if it took throwing in a lower round pick on top of that, I would.
I agree that later round picks with the addition of our compensatory picks, that we could easily part with a couple of those picks, but to move up to #2 in the Draft it's going to take your first (swap picks) and another either this year or next year and if it's next year then they would probably have to throw in another later round pick too.
Their going to want two for one as far as first round picks.
Perhaps the knowledge that we have the ammunition to trump anyone else's deal without going over board, will be enough to deter some others from attempting to do so.
Our best case scenario if we what Griffen is for him to fall to us at 4.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
I don't know, I'm not sold that it will take both of our #1s even if Miami were to offer this and next year's #1. What would it take to move up from #8 to #4? A 1? Two 2s? There is some value there. I think St. Louis would much rather move down to #4 and get Blackmon or Kalil than #8 and get whatever is left.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Our best case scenario if we what Griffen is for him to fall to us at 4.
I agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
They [Miami] would be looking at Riley Reiff (or perhaps Blackmon) the #2 OT and who knows they might have him rated higher then Kalil.
The best case scenario for the Rams is for it to become a bidding war in witch one team has to sweeten the pot over another and that's why I believe it's going to take two first round picks to move up to #2.
Our best case scenario is for other teams to be deterred, knowing that we have the ammunition to trump any 'reasonable' deal on the table allowing Griffen to fall to us at 4.
As much as I like Blackmon ... I have to concede that I don't believe that is the direction we will take ... WR or RB is a long shot with our FO at 4.
I still keep my fingers crossed that we will bring in a proven talent as well as hedging our bets with a WR later in the Draft. I don't care who is our starting QB.
That has been on the back burner for far too long already.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 02/13/12 12:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
I don't know, I'm not sold that it will take both of our #1s even if Miami were to offer this and next year's #1. What would it take to move up from #8 to #4? A 1? Two 2s? There is some value there. I think St. Louis would much rather move down to #4 and get Blackmon or Kalil than #8 and get whatever is left.
I agree. Even Washington at #6 is a danger for StL because they could still miss out on the piece they covet (whether it be Kalil, Blackmon or Claiborne).
Plus, it's often stated that "next year's 1st" is de-valued by 1 round (obviously some teams like NE don't do that). So, next year's 1st may not be seen as any or much more valueable than this year's 2nd anyway. And, we would trump either Miami or Washington with our 1st and 2nd round pick compared to theirs.
I really hope we hold onto #22 if we do decide we need to trade up.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I am of the opinion that if you don't have a franchise QB, and you are in position to get one, you get him. We do not have a franchise QB. We are in position to get one.
I don't know too many people that would disagree with that.. it comes down to how sure you are that RGIII is one. Obviously nobody ever knows for sure but if you are as certain as you can be that RGIII is that guy, then go get him.. we can make up for the other draft picks in other ways over the next couple years to put guys around him.. I'm less worried about that than most... But you absolutely positively do not give up a single thing unless you have achieved that level of certainty that RGIII is that guy because if you give up the picks and get it wrong.. then we are all screwed for years to come.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
I have heard it will take at least first and second round pick this year and then a first round pick next year to move up to take RGIII.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Pluto article
|
|
