|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
yt...so it's all Colt McCoy's fault...again.
Thinking about this relationship between QBs and WRs and how dependant they are on each other, in order to be successful...
...I was thinking about Derek Anderson and the 2007 season when the Browns went 10-6. It was Anderson's most effective year as a QB but he had Kellen Winslow and Braylon Edwards along with Joe Jurevicius...who together caught 212 passes.
Winslow and Edwards had pro bowl years with 1106 and 1289 yd receiving. The key to Anderson's success was his receiving corp, especially these two guys. With Winslow was 6-4, Edwards 6-3 and Jurevicius was 6-5...and all 3 would sell out going after a pass...thus, the size of the "windows" Anderson was throwing to, were huge compared to the size of the window McCoy has to throw to.
All Anderson had to do was get a pass close and his receivers would go get the ball. Anderson developed a confidence in his receivers and was not afraid to throw the ball, even if his receivers were covered.
Also, a key ingredient in Anderson's success in 2007 was an offensive line that only allowed him to be sacked 14 times. The Browns Oline ranked 5th overall in pass protection and were 2nd in run blocking.
No doubt in my mind that Anderson's "receivers" made him appear to be a better QB than he really was. Anderson was not known for accuracy but his receivers would go after any pass that was in the neighborhood and more often than not, they would come down with the catch.
Feel free to compare McCoy's receiving corps last season vs Anderson's receiving corps in 2007...not even close, is it?
Other than Greg Little, who spent much of his rookie year knocking off the rust after missing his entire senior year of college football, Colt McCoy had no receivers close to the caliber of Winslow and Edwards.
Momass has at times shown the ability to go after passes but more so in 2010 and not so much in 2011.
Kind of hard for a QB to have confidence in his receivers if they are not willing go after passes that might not be exactly where the receiver would prefer. Add to the equation a coaching staff that emphasizes no interceptions and what you get is a QB who is reluctant to pull the trigger.
...and let us not forget that other key ingredient needed to have a successful passing offense...PASS PROTECTION. Your QB needs to know he will not be running for his life in less than 3 seconds, if he drops back to pass.
What is needed for QB success?...look no further than the supporting cast Derek Anderson had in 2007...then compare that supporting cast to the supporting cast the Browns surrounded McCoy with last season.
BTW, Derek Anderson's supporting cast made him a Pro Bowl QB in 2007...now tell me again why the supporting cast does not matter.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
How many of our guys got concussed this year? Are you seriously going to say that it's because not one of them knows how to run a route?
No because I'm not an all-or-nothing guy. On the contrary, are you seriously going to say that all the receivers knew how to run all their assigned routes in a complicated offense they never got trained in before the games started? That they all knew exactly what to do with only Colt McCoy unable to figure it out or throw a pass 15 yards?
The whole offense regressed. How do you account for that other than blaming solely the QB and/or the Head Coach? It's never one guy. Ever. Hell, now some of them have Heckert in in their scope because his 4th round draft picks haven't heavily contributed in the rookie season. Look at Kendall's post on how bad Heckert has drafted. Completely nuts.
Some of you guys have got to look at the realistic side of what the lockout created in the way of negative consequences. Not one player on this offense had any quantifiable experience in the WCO and the lockout prevented them from getting teaching in it before the season.
Some fans, and you are often one of them, simply want to look at numbers and poor execution and berate those who didn't play well without considering what may have heavily contributed to their lack of execution which in my opinion was a lack of preparation.
The whole game is about preparation and the Browns didn't get time for that. Neither did some of the other teams but none of them had made as many wholesale changes as did the Browns. The entire national media considered the Browns as the team that the lockout would hurt the most due to those changes but on here too many fans just want to grumble about this guy or that guy or all the guys or the head coach and the team in general.
The truth is, in my opinion, that the after effects of the lockout combined with losing what running game they did have this offense never had a chance.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802 |
Quote:
BTW, Derek Anderson's supporting cast made him a Pro Bowl QB in 2007
No doubt the cast was a big influence on him breaking out on the scene, but let's not act like DA didn't partially earn the big numbers. He was new and fresh, had big targets, and a gun. Braylon was catching everything in sight, with K2 healthy, Joe Jurevicius' last solid hoorah, Jamal Lewis' final peak year, and a big cog that led to it (that had evaded us since the return) a solid line. It was our first year of our franchise left tackle; supported by Steinbach, Hank, and Schaeffer at the core of the nucleus. Outside of the big ones at the skill positions, the supplementary parts and options were trash. Tim Carter, Travis Wilson, Darnell Dinkins, old man Heiden? Yeah, let's chuck the pigskin...
The point I'm getting to is that DA at least had plus attributes to his game that made those big plays possible. Dude could throw the skinny post on a frozen rope. Sure he ended up being a guy who'd make a screen pass look overwhelmingly difficult, but his arm strength and size are things that helped our offense stretch the field before defenses figured to dare him to beat them underneath and he couldn't. With Colt, the field's even more compressed. He really isn't even stretching the defense horizontally well enough if he's being a one-read pony (which I know can improve somewhat with a full offseason but he's still limited).
End of the day, there's no extreme camp that is absolutely correct for why our offense sucks. The arguing and camp-labeling is more a way for us to pass the time and try to ignore that both need upgraded. 
Politicians are puppets, y'all. Let's get Geppetto!
Formerly 4yikes2yoshi0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
mac, how many times did McCoy throw deep last year, "allowing our receivers to make a play fr him"?
How many times did they do so?
How did the receivers compare to the rest of the league in "making a play for their QB"?
Someone did a breakdown that showed that the receivers were pretty damn effective at creating big plays ...... when they were actually thrown the ball. It was meant to show how wonderful McCoy was ..... but what it showed me was that the receivers actually were getting open, and making plays down the field. Using the eyes that I have, I could see hos McCoy did on many of those deeper passes last year. He was indecisive and weak on his throws. I remember one true exception, where he rifled a TD to Moore on the left side for something like 20 yards. That was a thing of beauty. However, like the couple of nice slants that he hit late in his year, the exception proves the rule.
McCoy did have a few nice throws last year. Our problems on offense were not "all" him ...... but many, if not most, were. He simply was not effective passing the ball, and that's why the team tried feverishly to replace him. (and I bet they are still trying to get the #1 pick, hoping against hope)
I have this feeling that 22 will be used on a QB. Maybe we'll reunite Blackmon and Weeden in the NFL. Whatever happens, unless McCoy has an almost miraculous improvement, this will almost certainly be his final year as an NFL starter.
Let me ask you what I asked above ...... what other NFL team would have Colt McCoy as their starter?
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 disagree. Massaquoi has good quicks, and if you look at his first year he broke some slants and such for big plays. That's all part of the WCO. However, if you don't have a QB who can get the ball to the receiver on time, or if you have a QB who throws his receivers into concussion after concussion ....... well, then you really don;t have anything.
New receivers are not going to make McCoy better. The only thing that will make McCoy better is if we minimize his impact on the offense as much as possible. If we get a guy like Richardson, run the crap out of the ball, and let McCoy throw predominantly off of play action, then we might have a chance of winning 7 or 8 games. However, if we are going to require McCoy to make plays on offense, then we'll be back in the 13-14 PPG range again.
Captain Cave Man with his Club. 
A true number 1 WR is going to make the whole offense better by loosening things up for other receivers, because the defense has to account for him weather or not the ball is thrown deep or not.
We disagree about Moe and I think the fact that Cribbs was starting over him by seasons end tells me that so too does the Coach.
As a rookie he was an unknown and also we had other options, but that was his best season by far, when he should have been getting better and taking on a larger role. He has not. I think he is #4 on the depth chart (at best) with Little, Cribbs and Norwood ahead of him. Do you agree? If so and we bring in a rookie and perhaps 2 rookies, just where does that leave him ... Outside looking in is where, but hey you go right on posting like he is someone the team can't do with out, just to be indifferent.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 45
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 45 |
DA had a great season when he had some weapons, and JJ was a huge part of that.
He was a big guy, great hands, ran great routes, and had great veteran presence.
Veteran presence, what are you saying you ask?
You can call it field awareness or situational awareness if you'd like.
DA with JJ had a career year. Joe made the hard catches, made sure he was past the first down mark on 3rd and the occasional 4th, and knew how to draw a penelty off of a defensive back when DA screwed it up and JJ wasn't able to catch the ball.
JJ's presence, drive and experience helped Edwards and Winslow, he was a good on field teacher.
We don't have that at all in any way, shape or form, and that's why I would have been happy to see us overpay for a vet wr to help the young guys along and show them the tricks of the trade.
After all, DA tanked without JJ, who was really the unsung hero of our offense and our true go to 3rd down guy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
I agree about JJ ... I loved the guy and to me it was like unfinished business, with how things ended up, but I think that we did try to get Pierre Garcon and he was the FA I wanted most. I think we will draft at least one WR and I also think we might be searching the news wires after the final cuts are made for a vet.
I really feel like we have always missed that veteran presents that JJ brought to the team ... That was a crying shame losing him so quickly. We won't find another like him off the streets, but there will inevitable be some Veteran WR's let lose in favor of some rookies and we could probably get one on the cheap too (League minimum).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
You do know that there are no extra points given if your answer to a post goes over 10,000 words, right? It seems to me your main problem lies in the fact that you seem to think Mangini was a good coach. He wasn't. Even if he was (and he wasn't) it doesn't matter. He's gone. Shurmur will be here, barring a catastrophic season in 2012, for at least 2 more years. So you should learn to live with that as well. The plan is to surround Colt with as much talent as is possible and see if he can become what many hoped they saw in 2010. So pissing and moaning about his faults and/or shortcomings is really a waste of your valuable time, IMO. Nobody is ganging up on you as far as I can see. You and the "Riffer" showed up and decided to take the board by storm. You should expect a little rain with that storm. 
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Who was our #1 in 2009?
Edwards had 10 catches for 139 yards before his 2nd arrest of the year, and subsequent shipping out to New York.
How about in 2008? Yeah, Edwards again, although nowhere near his success of 2007.
The only way a "true #1 receiver" has any value at all is if the defense is concerned about him. No defense is concerned about a guy past his 1st couple of games unless he produces.
If our "new #1 receiver" has 6 catches for 30 yards in his 1st 3 or 4 games, then defenses aren't going to care where he was drafted, or what his pedigree is. Unless he starts producing like a #1, he'll get the same respect the rest of our guys get .... and until and unless the QB throws him the ball, that will be zero.
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 2010
Posts: 106
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 106 |
Quote:
You do know that there are no extra points given if your answer to a post goes over 10,000 words, right?
It seems to me your main problem lies in the fact that you seem to think Mangini was a good coach. He wasn't.
Even if he was (and he wasn't) it doesn't matter. He's gone. Shurmur will be here, barring a catastrophic season in 2012, for at least 2 more years. So you should learn to live with that as well.
The plan is to surround Colt with as much talent as is possible and see if he can become what many hoped they saw in 2010. So pissing and moaning about his faults and/or shortcomings is really a waste of your valuable time, IMO.
Nobody is ganging up on you as far as I can see. You and the "Riffer" showed up and decided to take the board by storm. You should expect a little rain with that storm.
Hey crazyotto55, are you one of those Michigan fans from Fremont cuz of Chuck Woodson?
Last edited by Riffer X; 03/26/12 10:22 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Who was our #1 in 2009?
Edwards had 10 catches for 139 yards before his 2nd arrest of the year, and subsequent shipping out to New York.
How about in 2008? Yeah, Edwards again, although nowhere near his success of 2007.
The only way a "true #1 receiver" has any value at all is if the defense is concerned about him. No defense is concerned about a guy past his 1st couple of games unless he produces.
If our "new #1 receiver" has 6 catches for 30 yards in his 1st 3 or 4 games, then defenses aren't going to care where he was drafted, or what his pedigree is. Unless he starts producing like a #1, he'll get the same respect the rest of our guys get .... and until and unless the QB throws him the ball, that will be zero.
To an extent I agree with what you are saying but if you only have 1 guy worthy of paying any attention to (game plan against) the defense can double team them and hold them to low totals until another reciever steps up.
Thats why so many of those drive killing drops hurt so much.Teams didnt have to double anyone for the most part.
As many have said it was a group effort at looking bad from the coaching down to the water boys. No single 1 player caused us to have a bad season each holds a part and needs to bear some blame and all must improve or be replaced at some point going forward except for Thomas and probably Mack as well.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Look at last year.
Our outside receivers were single covered and the QB still never looked at them. Why would that change next year?
There was one game where the receiver was completely uncovered, and McCoy never even looked at him, instead throwing into the flat. The announcers even asked how he could have missed it.
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:
Who was our #1 in 2009?
Edwards had 10 catches for 139 yards before his 2nd arrest of the year, and subsequent shipping out to New York.
How about in 2008? Yeah, Edwards again, although nowhere near his success of 2007.
The only way a "true #1 receiver" has any value at all is if the defense is concerned about him. No defense is concerned about a guy past his 1st couple of games unless he produces.
If our "new #1 receiver" has 6 catches for 30 yards in his 1st 3 or 4 games, then defenses aren't going to care where he was drafted, or what his pedigree is. Unless he starts producing like a #1, he'll get the same respect the rest of our guys get .... and until and unless the QB throws him the ball, that will be zero.
I can't disagree with most of that, but a 'true' #1 is just that and demands attention.
BE had all the tools to be one, but he wasn't cut from the cloth that separates #1's from wanna bee's.
True. Your judged on your last game in this League and not what you did two or 3 years ago. > Moe!
I have Little doubt that we will use a new WR if we draft one early and if he shows that he deserves respect, then he will get some from the League's DC.
Little was force feed the ball in some games, but he is really not one to stretch the field. I think that he would be more of a weapon if he could work underneath or opposite a deep threat or #1 WR.
I'm not thinking in the moment and limiting my view on Colt McCoy or more appropriately last years Colt McCoy.
If he can't take a step forward, then he will be replaced and we will still need the next guy to have some weapons.
Yes drafting a #1WR probably won't reach his potential if Colt isn't 'the guy', but at some point (and I think we all can agree here) we need to get one.
That should not preclude drafting one if we like him enough.
We don't have a QB so we shouldn't worry about drafting a #1WR? I just don't follow that thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Born a Buckeye. Raised a Buckeye. I expect I'll die a Buckeye. Although, I'm hoping not too soon.
Charles Woodson made a misguided college choice but as a fellow Ross grad I always root for him. Except when he played the Buckeyes or plays the Browns now.
But I digress.......
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
TBH I think Brad Childress is going to be the difference. I had talked about this during the season that Colt would sit on the bench and no one went over plays with him. You never saw him looking at Photos of the plays (what he missed what he should be looking for etc) He just simply doesnt know how to do that yet and no one is showing it to him on the sidelines in real time at game time.
Jake for as bad as he ended up at least mentored Colt in his first year. It shows or at least makes me think those types of things are important.
As to your other thought I agree we dont have a #1 and they dont demand a double team or teams to respect them and that also hurts as well, as far as Colt missing a wide open player Ive seen that from every QB Ive ever watched play the game in 1 game or another so I can kinda give him a pass on that.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Excellent points and I also have the same line of thinking.  If you cant get the best QB you dont pass on the best WR. Your not going to for the most part get them all in the same draft anyway. We need to start to get some of them.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 45
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 45 |
We are in desperate need of quality targets.
I think Little was "the best" option but read somewhere he only caught 54% of his passes.
So logic would state if your best guy could only catch 54% then your qb is going to have a hard time breaking a 60% completion ratio.
I drool at the prospect of trading back to around 6, picking up an extra 2nd, take Richardson, a wr, te and ot all before we leave the 2nd round.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
I thought that Childress was going to be up in the pressbox on gamedays.
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: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
I thought that Childress was going to be up in the pressbox on gamedays.
He may be, I have not heard that. It would make sense on most teams for him to be up there but IMHO it would be a bad move for us this upcoming year. 
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
We are in desperate need of quality targets.
I think Little was "the best" option but read somewhere he only caught 54% of his passes.
So logic would state if your best guy could only catch 54% then your qb is going to have a hard time breaking a 60% completion ratio.
Great point Tobalaz! I like your trade back idea too!
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
Quote:
We are in desperate need of quality targets.
I think Little was "the best" option but read somewhere he only caught 54% of his passes.
So logic would state if your best guy could only catch 54% then your qb is going to have a hard time breaking a 60% completion ratio.
Great point Tobalaz! I like your trade back idea too!
That makes no sense whatsoever. If the most any receiver caught was 54% of the passes thrown his direction, then there is no way McCoy could have completed 57%.  The math simply doesn't add up.
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: Nov 2007
Posts: 323
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323 |
is this just a seasonal migration? i realize its an early spring and all....
im guessing the food became contaminated?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
It seems to me your main problem lies in the fact that you seem to think Mangini was a good coach. He wasn't.
The plan is to surround Colt with as much talent as is possible and see if he can become what many hoped they saw in 2010. So pissing and moaning about his faults and/or shortcomings is really a waste of your valuable time, IMO.
You and the "Riffer" showed up and decided to take the board by storm. You should expect a little rain with that storm.
Well don't go running with scissors over it. I'm actually one of the fans that likes Colt McCoy as clarified in my very first thread on this board QB Consumer Beware. I feel better knowing that you never really did read that post before hurrying to announce I was talking to you like you were 8 years old. Phew! The alternative would have been seeing we actually had the same take on McCoy.
Anyway, I'm very excited about having 4 picks in the top 100 selections this year. We might even have more than that if we trade back. Great opportunities to help a young QB out with play makers.
Regarding Mangini, I'm sorry he ruined all the fun you were having with other coaches here in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2008. When nobody else on the planet wanted the Head Coaching gig with a hollow front office here in 2009 I had 2 choices. Hate the new coach or appreciate the risk taker. I did the unthinkable of rooting for the guy and hoping we could see the guy that turned the 4-12 Jets into a 10-6 football team. That's why I asked earlier in this thread why do we suppose he could he go 10-6 in NY but not here? Is it important to understand we had 1 keeper from the 2008 draft and only 4 draft picks scheduled for the 2009 draft? Would Mike Holmgren tell us how easy the dual role of front office and Head Coach was even for someone with his NFL experience? Why would we want to see the bigger picture when we've been so successful at diagnosing 100% of our problems to the Head Coach and QB. Busting the scapegoat and hiring the replacement has continued to work extremely well here since 1999.
I wouldn't let Mangini ruin all that happiness you keep aiming at me and Riff. My old college fraternity had a guy just like you in the house. Any time any one of us had a bad day, all we had to do was go visit that guy to learn his day went 100 times worse. Then we would learn our days really weren't that bad after all. We called him Frasier. Keep smiling! 
Last edited by Ottomatic Flugel; 03/27/12 08:08 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Don't slap a tuxedo on how you were acting when your #1 goal was to impress your click that gangs up on newbies
This has nothing to do with being new. New people join the board all of the time around here, and they aren't 'ganged up' on by anyone.
I think this is probably the fifth or sixth time I've said this, but it has to do with you coming in talking about how you deal in 'facts' and 'truth' with a snarky tone, and then being completely wrong on nearly everything you said.
Quote:
Instead of seeing we were in every ball game late in the 4th quarter in 2009
Every ball game?
Week 1, going into the 4th, the score was 24-13. Near the end of the 4th, it was 34-13.
Week 2 we lost 27-6.
Week 3 we lost 34-3.
Week 7 we lost 31-3.
Week 8 we lost 30-6.
Week 10 we lost 16-0
Week 13 we went into the 4th down 27-7. It was 30-14 was two minutes left to go.
Quote:
When I entered this thread, I noticed a lot of your friendly welcome wagon click telling Riffer just how welcome he really was.
I actually talked football with Riffer.
Riffer didn't come in telling everyone how he dealt in 'facts' and 'truth' in a condescending tone and then spit out a bunch of incorrect numbers to prove a point that isn't true. Beyond your numbers being incorrect, you were trying to use the one single defensive statistic from 2009 that wasn't awful to show that we were on the right track. Not only was the stat you used incorrect, but it also ignored that fact that our defense was flat out awful in 2009.
You're grasping at straws trying to show that a failure wasn't a failure. Had you not made yourself look like an idiot by doing so in the manner that you did, we would've just debated the topic.
Quote:
Evidently, that didn't sit well with someone so a lot of your click got alerted really quickly somehow
It's 'clique', and I don't really have one around here.
Quote:
If someone hates newcomers at all costs
I don't know how many times this has already been said by myself and others but it has nothing to do with you being new .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
Anyway, I'm very excited about having 4 picks in the top 100 selections this year. We might even have more than that if we trade back. These are some great opportunities to equip a young QB with weapons.
I wonder how many of our fans would enjoy one more season with the Browns drafting in the top 5?
Looking at how close the Browns were to landing RGIII, would a couple more losses last season really been so horrible?
You have to be a BIG PICTURE fan to appreciate what I'm getting at. If the Browns had ended the season 2-14 instead of 4-12...RGIII or Luck would be within our grasp.
Next year at this time, the Browns might be facing a similar situation...needing a franchise QB...would Browns fans be willing to endure another down year if they knew what the payoff was?
Getting Browns fans to buy into the "Big Picture" is tough...but maybe some will begin to understand, the pain they feel with each losing season is only temporary.
Last edited by mac; 03/27/12 08:55 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 295
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 295 |
totally right mac. How different this offseason would be if we had ended up with the second pick by losing a couple of meaningless games. Same thing going on with the Cavs right now. one or two wins in a meaningless season could be the difference between the 4th and the 8th pick in the draft.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
And if the team threw those couple meaningless games, the entire city would call for the heads of the entire organization for giving up and quitting.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 295
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 295 |
Not talking about throwing games, just commenting on the many people who refuse to see the practical benefit of losing games in a lost season. At the end of the day, we'd have been better off going 2-14 than 4-12. Those two wins didn't get us anything in terms of positive momentum or learning to win or any of that rhetoric.
Is there anyone on this board who'd rather be 4-12 with the potential picks we have at 4, or be 2-14 last year with Griffin, and numbers #22 and #34 to get him weapons.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936 |
I may be picking at nits here, but I'd rather be 4-12 than 2-14. Period.
[color:"white"]"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
-- Mark Twain [/color]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523 |
Big Picture my butt.
We've been 2-14,we've been 3-13,we've had the top pick in draft more than once.
Yet,here we sit,staring down the barrel of another crappy season ahead.
The big picture around here looks more like a Picasso than a Rembrandt.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936 |
More like a Jackson Pollock work.  
[color:"white"]"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
-- Mark Twain [/color]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
if RGIII busts, then we'll all be happy that we were 4-12 instead of 2-14
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 295
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 295 |
And if he's a hall of famer, we'll wonder what if for the rest of our lives.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936 |
Doubt it... on both counts.
[color:"white"]"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
-- Mark Twain [/color]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
You are correct in one area in your response to my post....I generally don't read all of your posts. Just as I seldom read all of OverToad's posts. If a post has the look of a Stephen King novel, length-wise, I seldom read it in it's entirety. Call it laziness or whatever you want but if I want to read a 10,000 word essay I'll pull out a good book and work on that. Quote:
Regarding Mangini, I'm sorry he ruined all the fun you were having with other coaches here in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2008. When nobody else on the planet wanted the Head Coaching gig with a hollow front office here in 2009 I had 2 choices. Hate the new coach or appreciate the risk taker. I did the unthinkable of rooting for the guy and hoping we could see the guy that turned the 4-12 Jets into a 10-6 football team. That's why I asked earlier in this thread why do we suppose he could he go 10-6 in NY but not here? Is it important to understand we had 1 keeper from the 2008 draft and only 4 draft picks scheduled for the 2009 draft? Would Mike Holmgren tell us how easy the dual role of front office and Head Coach was even for someone with his NFL experience? Why would we want to see the bigger picture when we've been so successful at diagnosing 100% of our problems to the Head Coach and QB. Busting the scapegoat and hiring the replacement has continued to work extremely well here since 1999.
Seriously? You're still trying to convince me that Mangini is "all that and a bag of chips"? Here's MY stance on the Mangenius.....
I initially thought he was a terrible hire. Lerner screwed the pooch by lapping up all the hype about EM without sampling the bad comments about the guy.
But he was the coach so I tried to warm up to the guy. (Which is more than a vast majority of the Mangini lovers can say about their treatment of Pat Shurmur). Then the God-awful football started. By the end of his tenure I longed for the days of Chris Palmer. The man was 10-22 which is bad enough but the team was nearly unwatchable. He's not coming back to Cleveland and by the looks of it to the NFL either. If he was as good as you seem to think I would have thought he'd have had at least a semblance of interest in his coaching services since he left. But no.....Hell even Romeo Crennel is a HC again.
Quote:
My old college fraternity had a guy just like you in the house.
This is the kind of snarkiness that endears you to all of us. Just exactly how do you know the kind of guy I am? Would it be that we've traded years of posts? No, that's not it. Would it be that we've met at any of the numerous tailgates at any Browns game? Nope, don't think so. Would it be that I had the audacity to disagree with you regarding your man-crush on our former coach? Hmmmm....I think we have a winner.
As I said before it appears to me that you, and to a certain extent Riffer, decided that the best way to jump into this board was to try and make a big impression from the start. And there is nothing essentially wrong with that. You both seem to be pretty intelligent folks. But when you answer people with offhand insults and just general snarkiness you shouldn't be surprised when somebody occasionally calls you on it.
By the way, I will keep smiling, Thanks.
Last edited by crazyotto55; 03/27/12 05:01 PM.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Big Picture my butt.
We've been 2-14,we've been 3-13,we've had the top pick in draft more than once.
Yet,here we sit,staring down the barrel of another crappy season ahead.
The big picture around here looks more like a Picasso than a Rembrandt.
Exactly the minute you play to lose the only thing youve lost is your job. I want them to play to WIN even if that means they win only 1 game. I will root for them to win the same way I expect them to play to win.
RG3 should have fallen to us anyway exactly where we landed in this draft but Washington pulled an Oakland on us. I personally dont lose a moments sleep over it. RG3 will not be the last QB ever to grace the gridiron coming out in the draft.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,681
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,681 |
No doubt. The problem is we were in a position to get it done and we flubbed it up .Now, we have to hope we get the first pick so these goofs don't screw up.
Now, we have to hope we get the first pick so these goofs don't screw up.
Yes, I am still chapped about how that debacle played out.
People say Snyder always gets his guy like it's a problem. Folk's, it isn't. It's a quality. Might be part of the reason the guy has billions and we here have some small fraction of that.
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: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
No doubt. The problem is we were in a position to get it done and we flubbed it up .Now, we have to hope we get the first pick so these goofs don't screw up.
Now, we have to hope we get the first pick so these goofs don't screw up.
Yes, I am still chapped about how that debacle played out.
People say Snyder always gets his guy like it's a problem. Folk's, it isn't. It's a quality. Might be part of the reason the guy has billions and we here have some small fraction of that.
Actually no we dont Washington and Oakland are both with out picks next year to make crazy  offers. There should be at least 3 top teir QB's next year.
We are in perfect shape actually if you think about it. They overspent and are out of the game next year as far as QB goes.
We dont need the 1st overall pick we only need to have a pick next year.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
There *might* be 3 top tier QBs next year.
There might be none, and the only reason one goes high is because he is forced up because of position.
Barkley will have to show me a lot next year for me to want him on my team. There's a reason he went back to school, and it's because he knew that he would be either 2, or more likely, 3 in this draft. He didn't want to be the 3rd best ... so he went back to try and come out in a weaker year for QBs.
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: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
There *might* be 3 top tier QBs next year.
There might be none, and the only reason one goes high is because he is forced up because of position.
Barkley will have to show me a lot next year for me to want him on my team. There's a reason he went back to school, and it's because he knew that he would be either 2, or more likely, 3 in this draft. He didn't want to be the 3rd best ... so he went back to try and come out in a weaker year for QBs.
Im more on Landry Jones but I get what your saying they all have to continue to step up their games. I have a feeling it was more of a why go againt Luck then being behind RG3. More to your point though if that was their mindset I can see being worried.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Riff's Rumbling Ramblings--Enter
at own sanity
|
|
