|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
3. The only 2 winning seasons The Browns have together in the past decade are the ones where we had multiple receivers over 1000 yards or 3 or 4 over 500 (which would be 2 over 1,000) generating over 2000 yards of combined results
And had nothing to speak of at QB.
Glad to see someone else who truly gets it. 
Lately I was feeling like I was living in the year 10,000 BC. Or 1986 
Thinking in terms of next season is short sighted and we need to be thinking past this year, because I doubt we will have all of the peaces in place this year, but we have a good chance to narrow them down a bit with this Draft.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 03/27/12 06:44 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,226
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,226 |
I do what I can...  im just sick of the RB talk... the QB talk when it really should be the OL/WR talk 
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,226
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,226 |
Quote:
A great RB can help make a bad team competitive.
they also have mass talent at WR and the rest of the entire team is solid plus they had over 2000 yards of receiving as a group.
Quote:
Look at the Jaguars.
look at them how? they went 5-11 last year? and I'm just talking about the Browns.
Quote:
As far as using the Browns as an example of anything ...... when is the last time we had even just a professional passing game in Cleveland. Other than the one anomaly by Anderson, I would argue that you have to go back to the days of Kosar.
exactly my point... it has to do with WR's getting open and running good routes and catching the ball
the years that we had winning seasons.... we had good wr production.
Quote:
That year Jamal Lewis ran for 1304 yards and 9 TDs for the Browns.
look at the rest of the years I laid out there for you... there were tons of 1,000 yard seasons if not most with injuries included
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Some people are just scared that with a real #1 WR Colt will do well/avg then believe we will not ever again address the QB position which is hardly the truth. Now I see some of them jumping to the RB pos as a great thing to draft and as your post points out we have had no problems getting to 1,000 + yds from that position and the lacking part is the WR position producing.
Some of us see that and understand what that means even if we dont currently have our Franchise QB here yet.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
Some people are just scared that with a real #1 WR Colt will do well/avg then believe we will not ever again address the QB position which is hardly the truth.
Unfortunately, I think you are correct.. sorry to say it.
Holmgren has a history of always tinkering with the QB position. ALWAYS.. Even when he had Favre and even when he had Hassleback. He always went out to find the next guy.
And as everyone saw, the team just went out and tried to land the second pick in the draft to get which ever of the two top QB's would be there.
Swing and a miss.. that sort of thing happens.. But they took the swing...
IF McCoy fails, they'll find another.
#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:
Some people are just scared that with a real #1 WR Colt will do well/avg then believe we will not ever again address the QB position which is hardly the truth. Now I see some of them jumping to the RB pos as a great thing to draft and as your post points out we have had no problems getting to 1,000 + yds from that position and the lacking part is the WR position producing.
Some of us see that and understand what that means even if we dont currently have our Franchise QB here yet.
This is what I have been saying ... We have had decent RB's sense 99 and look how far that took us.
We had good Wr play in 2007 and a couple of not so great QB's, just think how good we could have been that year with a real live franchise QB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520 |
So to TRY and figure out which is best..
Put Colt on the Packers and bring Rodgers here. What team shows the biggest change, the one with a bunch of good receivers or the one with the good QB ?
Whats the net gain gain/loss ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,656
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,656 |
Quote:
So to TRY and figure out which is best..
Put Colt on the Packers and bring Rodgers here. What team shows the biggest change, the one with a bunch of good receivers or the one with the good QB ?
Whats the net gain gain/loss ?
I'd say the Browns improve and the Pack declines. I'd also say that McCoy's #s improve, while Rodgers decline.
There may be people who have more talent than you, but there's no excuse for anyone to work harder than you do.
-Derek Jeter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
It's not even close. Great players can make one QB better, but a great QB can make numerous players better.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560 |
Quote:
Quote:
So to TRY and figure out which is best..
Put Colt on the Packers and bring Rodgers here. What team shows the biggest change, the one with a bunch of good receivers or the one with the good QB ?
Whats the net gain gain/loss ?
I'd say the Browns improve and the Pack declines. I'd also say that McCoy's #s improve, while Rodgers decline.
This would absolutely be true but I think Rodgers would have struggled under the same conditions Colt came into last year. No offseason, no weapons, rookie head coach, no offensive coordinator to help game plan, and at least another excuse I am forgetting about. Rodgers would have been better but the Browns wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs. More than likely Seneca would have been playing anyway because James Harrison would have knocked his head off.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
It's not even close. Great players can make one QB better, but a great QB can make numerous players better.
No matter how you slice it,, a GREAT QB like Payton Manning can't make a guy catch a ball that lands in his hands.. At GREAT QB like Payton Manning can't make a RB hit holes faster.
There is no doubt, a great QB can have a significant effect. I'll never deny that. But when you are playing with crappy players, the best QB on the planet still isn't going to get them to the playoffs alone.
Look at Washington. They did what they had to do to get what they felt was an elite QB.. then went out and broke the bank to get him some receivers. I really don't expect it to all come together thier first year. That might be asking a lot, but by the middle part of the season we should begin to see the skins looking better.
Thats if RG is the guy everyone seems to think he is (I'm on that trian,,I think he's gonna a good one) But if he's not, it's gonna be ugly.
#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: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
No, but what a great QB like Peyton Manning does is create those big plays that ordinary QBs fail to create. A great QB like Peyton Manning finds those throws for TDs that other QBs miss completely.
The Colts went from scoring 435 points with Manning, to 243 without. Who did they lose, besides Manning, to account for this dropoff?
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: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
Quote:
No, but what a great QB like Peyton Manning does is create those big plays that ordinary QBs fail to create. A great QB like Peyton Manning finds those throws for TDs that other QBs miss completely.
There's gotta be someone on the other end of those plays for them to happen, too.
Quote:
The Colts went from scoring 435 points with Manning, to 243 without. Who did they lose, besides Manning, to account for this dropoff?
Their OC, effectively.
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 |
They kept almost every other offensive player ....... but their production dropped like a rock. Some guys still had OK looking stats ..... but the team overall fell through the floor. The offense died, and the defense followed suit.
All for want of a QB.
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: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
No, all for want of a particular QB... the one that team was built for, the offense was designed for and the one that everything started with. They were the epitome of a team built a round a specific player. And if you don't think that there was a little intentional "Suck for Luck" going on, I'd say that you're also borderline delusional
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
No, all for want of a particular QB... the one that team was built for, the offense was designed for and the one that everything started with.
They were the epitome of a team built a round a specific player.
And if you don't think that there was a little intentional "Suck for Luck" going on, I'd say that you're also borderline delusional
I think that could be a factor for sure, but I think that they where already on a downward spiral (for them).
In 2010 they where 10-6. They haven't had a worst record for almost a decade.
They lost their wild card contest to the Jets and imo they where getting old and in need of re loading anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
They kept almost every other offensive player ....... but their production dropped like a rock. Some guys still had OK looking stats ..... but the team overall fell through the floor. The offense died, and the defense followed suit.
All for want of a QB.
Yeah,, that's absolutly true,, without Manning, they had most of the same guys on O, and lost a bunch of production.. No question about it,
But look what they went with.
Look Ytown,, NOBODY on this board is ever going to argue successfully that a great QB doesn't make a team better.. I don't think there is any doubt about it. NONE..
What I'm saying is, if you look at a Manning, compared to just about anyone else... WOW..
McCoy isn't a Manning. I don't really expect him to ever be one. But I think he's better than what the Colts put on the field last year. I will even go as far as to say that if he'd of had a chance to see the Offense run (as a back up to Manning) for a year, he'd of been way better than anything the Colts put out on the fiield because the Colts simply had more talent on O then the Browns did.
I know you already know what I'm gonna say next..... Give Colt McCoy a chance with the right people around him, an OC to spend the time, and off season to work with his teammates, a RT and RB and another REAL WR... Then if he don't do it.... I swear to whatever you find holy, I'll be right there with you yelling and screaming to get someone else... I PROMISE.... and you can hold me to it if you like....
#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: 7,288
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288 |
Quote:
They kept almost every other offensive player ....... but their production dropped like a rock. Some guys still had OK looking stats ..... but the team overall fell through the floor. The offense died, and the defense followed suit.
All for want of a QB.
Note: The Colts also recently cut a bunch of those offensive players as well.
Were those players diminishing in skill and abruptly cut...or were they only ever good because of Manning?
I get a kick out of the Colt v Manning or Colt v Rogers rants...putting a 3rd Rd guy - after two years in the league - in that company is really silly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
You can look at any number of teams who lose their starting QB ...... even teams build around the run game and defense, like the Texans, lose major chunks of offensive production when their starter goes down. The Bears went from playoff team to schlub as soon as Cutler went down. The Chiefs went from playoff contender to broken team when Cassell went down. (and he wasn't even having a good year)
Great QBs have a huge, huge impact on all of the players around them. Hell, even the defense plays looser because they know that one mistake won't kill them. This same impact cannot be replicated with any other player at any other position.
As far as McCoy, as I have said a hundred plus times ..... it's not just his results, but it's all of the little things he does. (or really, doesn't do) Last year showed a guy who has very few true NFL skills. His accuracy is spotty at best, His ball placement is atrocious. He has trouble reading a defense, especially from the pocket. I think that he has trouble finding lanes from the pocket. He cannot lead a receiver. He has trouble hitting a moving target. He is afraid to make a mistake, so he takes no chances whatsoever down the field, allowing his receivers a chance to make plays. (even though someone put up an article showing that those guys make plays more often than most down the field ... it was meant to show that McCoy was capable of throwing deep ..... but what it really showed is that the receivers we have can make plays, when they are given a chance)
If I had to note his strengths, he is average in the short passing game to stationary targets. He is decent on the roll outside the pocket. He can run, although he sometimes runs himself into, instead of out of trouble. His arm is probably average, but he plays much weaker than that. He appears to be better playing from the shotgun than from under Center.
I would say that the biggest difference between 2010 and last year was that in 2010, the Browns staff tailored the offense with McCoy to what he could do best. They kept him 100% in hos comfort zone. They helped him win games without being anything close to the focal point, even though that's how it was portrayed in the media. They ran the ball, played special teams, and played defense ....... and worked in specific favorable situations for him to throw in.
That all went to hell when Hillis got hurt. McCoy was exposed, and the Browns had no way to cover up his weaknesses, and limit him to favorable situations. Thus he played the Steelers and Ravens, and had something like 0 TD and 5 or 6 INT.
Anyway ....... people will still have excuses if he flops badly this year. I remember people saying "aha!" back when Frye had a decent game as a Raider. "Oh what a mistake we made letting him go .........."
The reality set back in again ...... and it was "Oh ...... never mind."
Need I remind anyone that the guy who was initially going to turn Chuck into a star was none other than our own Mike Holmgren, when Seattle traded for him. That lasted a year, then he went to the Raiders .........
Same thing with Quinn ...... he was going to show everyone in Denver .... he'd be the starter .......
Then he did nothing.
There are certain traits that I consider vitally important if a QB is going to be successful in the NFL. I have outlined them in detail on too many occasions. I have shown why I feel that McCoy does not have these traits, and yet all I hear is that I am wrong ..... but rarely does anyone offer up a detailed explanation of why. "More time" is not a good reason to keep a QB. "More time" by itself, for a bad QB, delays or derails the development of every other player on offense. I don't want that to happen, although I fear that it has already.
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: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Show me a rookie qb - or 2nd year qb - that "shouldered" the team and took them places. As in "wins and losses". So, leave newton out. (plus, the book is out on him anyway - give him 3 or 4 years and we'll know if newton was the "answer").
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
Show me a rookie qb - or 2nd year qb - that "shouldered" the team and took them places. As in "wins and losses". So, leave newton out. (plus, the book is out on him anyway - give him 3 or 4 years and we'll know if newton was the "answer").
If you want wins, we might as well talk playoff wins, and Flacco, Ryan, and Sanchez come to mind. Strictly going by wins and losses is misguided though, IMO.
Cam should absolutely be in the discussion. I'm not a stats guy but this is pretty enlightening. The 2010 Panthers were 2-14, ranked 32 in offense and ranked 18 in defense.
The 2011 Panthers were 6-10, ranked 7 in offense (!) and ranked 24 in defense. What was the biggest difference between a dead last offense and a top 10 offense?
Sometimes you have to look past the absolute win totals and apply a little critical analysis.
Another example.. take the '07 Pats who went 16-0 and then fell to 11-5 with a very raw Cassel. Of course that was the same year that the rookie Chad Henne Dolphins won the division, despite going 1-15 the year before. People want to use that as an example of how a great QB isn't needed and it never fails to make me laugh. Put a healthy Brady on that '08 Pats team and I think they would have been by far the most likely team to win the Super Bowl.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Neat.
At the end of the day - or season - a team is judged by wins and losses. Nothing more, nothing less. Cam did not lead his team to wins. While he fits what some want to argue for - I would posit this: In the past (think D.A.), people have said "oh, he was great until other teams got the book on him, then he sucked since they learned how to defend against him." (which makes me laugh, as a q.b. is but 1 person on the offense - an important person of course, but just 1 of 11)
So, you think it would be an improvement to go 6-10 next year if our offense was ranked # 1?
Or, would it be better to not give a rat's hind end about rankings other than W's?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
well, we'd go 8-8 next year if we improved by the same 4 wins that Cam helped improve the Panthers.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
So, you think it would be an improvement to go 6-10 next year if our offense was ranked # 1?
I can't imagine a scenario under which that could happen but..... Yes, I think that would be a HUGE improvement.
Quote:
Or, would it be better to not give a rat's hind end about rankings other than W's?
The whole is the sum of its parts.. you win consistantly by having a good offense, defense and special teams.. right now we are horrendous on offense and better but still far from dominant on defense.. so if we see a significant improvement in either offense OR defense next year though it doesn't translate into many more wins, then we will know there is one less thing we have to focus on improving as we try to improve all of the parts, which will translate into more wins and consistently better records..
Do you know why draft threads spend page after page debating whether we should take QB, RB, WR, DE, OLB, CB, S, RT in the draft and which combination would have the greatest net positive effect? BECAUSE WE NEED ALL OF THEM. They are all parts to building what we need to build. Do you know why nobody says we should draft somebody to play LT? Because we have one that is very good. That is a part that we have which does not need to be improved.. Would you rather have a 4 win team with Joe Thomas or without Joe Thomas?
I think it is foolish to focus solely on the number of W's and ignore the improvement of the parts.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Excellent post!
And when we need so many positions it pains me to hear the talk of "If we don't have x amount of wins this season it's time to clear house on the FO".
The other comment that pains me is "If we get Colt some new weapons then we'd better see a lot of improvement from him because there will be no excuses". Just who will these "new weapons" be? Veterans who've played in this offensive scheme for three or more years? No. They will be rookies. New, inexperienced, rookie weapons. There are never excuses but there is the reality that it will still take some time for these kids to get the hang of everything.
There's a lot of rebuilding to do on this team and it's going to take time. Last season was a perfect storm of unfortunate with the lock out and all that brought with it. Just having an offseason should result in a better performance than last season. The new rookie weapons will help once the light begins to come on for them. But who knows how long that will take with each individual? And how long will it take for the whole offensive unit to gel? The first three games before we start hearing the boo birds?
This is going to take time. Improvement is all we can hope for. I've taken this same stance before. But the difference this time is that the FO and coaching staff will get the time to finish what they started rather than tear it all down in a few years.
Improvement should be all we expect. Unfortunately those who are "tired of losing" will unrealistically expect to see improvement in leaps and bounds simply because they, as fans, "deserve" it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
Quote:
So, you think it would be an improvement to go 6-10 next year if our offense was ranked # 1?
I can't imagine a scenario under which that could happen but..... Yes, I think that would be a HUGE improvement.
Quote:
Or, would it be better to not give a rat's hind end about rankings other than W's?
The whole is the sum of its parts.. you win consistantly by having a good offense, defense and special teams.. right now we are horrendous on offense and better but still far from dominant on defense.. so if we see a significant improvement in either offense OR defense next year though it doesn't translate into many more wins, then we will know there is one less thing we have to focus on improving as we try to improve all of the parts, which will translate into more wins and consistently better records..
Do you know why draft threads spend page after page debating whether we should take QB, RB, WR, DE, OLB, CB, S, RT in the draft and which combination would have the greatest net positive effect? BECAUSE WE NEED ALL OF THEM. They are all parts to building what we need to build. Do you know why nobody says we should draft somebody to play LT? Because we have one that is very good. That is a part that we have which does not need to be improved.. Would you rather have a 4 win team with Joe Thomas or without Joe Thomas?
I think it is foolish to focus solely on the number of W's and ignore the improvement of the parts.
While your post makes it sound like you are disagreeing with me - you are, in my opinion, agreeing with me.
However, a # 1 ranked offense means nothing if you don't win games, correct?
Regardless - my post was a response to those that say "the qb, the qb the qb...........he's to blame". You stated yourself - we have needs everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
As far as McCoy, as I have said a hundred plus times ..... it's not just his results, but it's all of the little things he does.
I"m gonna stop you right there,, It's not just the results?
OK, then, All the problems you point out about McCoy,, let's say they are spot on....
We add a RB like Richardson,, a Strong RT (take your pick) and add in another starting WR in the Draft.
Colt McCoy still throws for a 7 yard or so average, still misses a few here and there, but in the end, because we have a better line, a better RB and our receivers actually catch the balls thrown to them, he ends up with 2200 yards (passing yards on 385 or so attempts with let's say 240 or so completetions. Throw in about 9 to 14 INT's.
We win 12 Regular season games, get into the play offs.....
Because he still has those flaws, would you want him gone?
#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: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
Neat.
At the end of the day - or season - a team is judged by wins and losses. Nothing more, nothing less. Cam did not lead his team to wins. While he fits what some want to argue for - I would posit this: In the past (think D.A.), people have said "oh, he was great until other teams got the book on him, then he sucked since they learned how to defend against him." (which makes me laugh, as a q.b. is but 1 person on the offense - an important person of course, but just 1 of 11)
So, you think it would be an improvement to go 6-10 next year if our offense was ranked # 1?
Or, would it be better to not give a rat's hind end about rankings other than W's?
A team is judged by its wins and losses-- sure. You know what Bill Parcells used to say.......
However, since starting quarterbacks never play on defense and very rarely contribute on special teams (only sometimes as a holder), I think it's very noteworthy that the Panthers under rookie Cam Newton (an actual rookie at that), went from the 32nd ranked offense to the 7th ranked offense, and tripled their win total while the other units got worse.
You think 6 wins is indicative of the team's promise at the quarterback position. I don't agree with you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
Quote:
As far as McCoy, as I have said a hundred plus times ..... it's not just his results, but it's all of the little things he does.
I"m gonna stop you right there,, It's not just the results?
OK, then, All the problems you point out about McCoy,, let's say they are spot on....
We add a RB like Richardson,, a Strong RT (take your pick) and add in another starting WR in the Draft.
Colt McCoy still throws for a 7 yard or so average, still misses a few here and there, but in the end, because we have a better line, a better RB and our receivers actually catch the balls thrown to them, he ends up with 2200 yards (passing yards on 385 or so attempts with let's say 240 or so completetions. Throw in about 9 to 14 INT's.
We win 12 Regular season games, get into the play offs.....
Because he still has those flaws, would you want him gone?
Still throws for a 7 yard average? He averaged 5.9 yards/attempt last year.  7 yards/attempt would be a revelation from him.
If McCoy winds up throwing for 2200 yards and 9-14 INT, then he probably isn't driving the team, he's riding along.
2200 yards with 7 yards/attempt would be about 315 attempts for the year. That would be about 19-20 pass attempts per game, and about 138 yards/game. If his contribution is that small, then I would guess that the team has decided that the only way to win with him is to minimize his play on the field, and we had better be getting huge contributions from someone in the run game.
What you propose would look an awful lot like the Texans with their rookie QB at the end of the year, following the injuries to Schaub and Leinart. Yates hit 61% of his passes for 7.08 yards/attempt, and threw for 949 yards in 6 games. (5 starts) He threw 3 TDs and 3 INTs.
Projecting that out would be 2528 yards on 61.2% passing, 7.08 yards/attempt, 8 TD, 8 INT ........ and not one person in Houston would be anywhere near happy with that.
It's one thing to be OK with modest results when you bring your rookie 3rd string guy in.
Anyway ..... getting back to your premise .... let's look at the Niners as a comparison.
The Niners parlayed a strong running game, a strong defense, and an incredibly weak division into a 13-3 record, and a playoff run.
They were able to manage with a minimal contribution from Alex Smith ...... playing "just don't screw it up" football. He threw for 3100 yards, 17 TDs, and only 5 INTs in 445 attempts. (that's 27 attempts per game, something like 35th in the league ...... although that does include some guys who only played limited starts)
Your scenario would be only about 3/4 of an Alex Smith. I don't see that winning 12 games and getting us to the playoffs, no matter how good the defense and running game are. The AFCN is too good, and we aren't going to beat teams in our division by throwing for 140 yards and 1/2 a TD per game. (or even 1 TD per game) The Niners hit a perfect storm of being able to play "mistake free football" to win their division, because the rest of their division is just awful. They play the Rams, Seahags, and Cardinals twice per year each. Those teams scored 19.5, 20, and 12 points per game. Play it safe, run the ball, and win 6 games is pretty easy out there, especially when you consider how bad the defenses out West are.
That's not a recipe that's going to work in the AFCN. It's not going to allow us to win 12 games. The QB must be a playmaker in this division, or your team (and mine) will be relegated to last place.
In the end, your premise is deeply flawed to the point of not being logically feasible. I see no way that the QB could have that minimal an impact on the game and still lead a team in this division to 12 wins. Can you maybe expound on how this could be accomplished?
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: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Really,, I think you need to look at Joe Montanas numbers..
Joe had those kinda stats.. YPC we higher, but otherwise, those were Montanas average stats over 14 years (yes, he was in the league for 15 years, but one of those years, he played only one game)
the point is, when you use stats as criteria, there is almost always someone that defies them.
Was the difference Montana, or that he had Jerry Rice, Roger Craig, Dwight Clark and a host of very talented guys around him most of his career?
#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: 10,226
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,226 |
what are his stats compared to the average?
what may have been amazing and over the top 20 years ago isn't relevant any longer.
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Still throws for a 7 yard average? He averaged 5.9 yards/attempt last year. 7 yards/attempt would be a revelation from him.
or, 7.1YPA would be McCoy's rookie numbers.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
Quote:
Still throws for a 7 yard average? He averaged 5.9 yards/attempt last year. 7 yards/attempt would be a revelation from him.
or, 7.1YPA would be McCoy's rookie numbers.
Whatever the number,, it's all on McCoy according to some folks... Apparently it no longer takes two players to make that work... you know,, one to throw and one to catch..
#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: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
what are his stats compared to the average?
what may have been amazing and over the top 20 years ago isn't relevant any longer.
I'll buy into that argument that what was pretty darn good 20 years ago, may not be as good by todays standards.. that I buy. (I think that's what your saying)
My real purpose behind some of my comments is to refute all this talk that a GREAT QB without a receiving corp and a Running game can some how turn a sows ear into a silk purse...
If that were the case, then Payton Manning and Troy Aikmans first years in the league wouldn't have been so damn awful... Once they got some talent around them,,, they really blossomed.. was it thier talent, was it the talent around them, was it that they matured in the system? the answer is, all of the above..
1 or 2 win seasons are awful today,, they were awful 10 years ago,, they were awful 40 years ago..etc...
AND BEFORE SOMEONE SAYS IT, I AM NOT COMPARING MCCOY TO ANYONE...
#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: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
P.Manning really is an awful comparison as his team went to hell without him and has the 1st overall in the draft...you know, the same team that was a SB contender with P.Manning Manning didn't "blossom" because of better talent around him, he blossomed because HE had talent.... The argument is crap anyway as it cherry picks the examples...guys like Manning/Aikman are the exception, not the rule...for every one of them there are 10 Frye's, A.Smith's, Harrington's, Carr's etc etc...it's the "Tom Brady" argument: "you can find your franchise QB in the 6th"....so follwoing that logic: Colt McCoy can still be a franchise QB...sure, but that also applies to Clausen, Stanton, Clemens, Whitehurst, Dixon etc ...hey, we haven't seen enough of them, right? They should all get 3 season's worth of starts....McCoy is incredibly lucky he got 20 starts...and he could luck into even more starts to show something/anything....he really is the new Gladstone Gander of NFL QBs after Tebow got traded..."oh look, I played like crap and still found gold"....I just gotta wait another year, I endured 2 seasons of Eric Mangini...now a 2nd season of a Hobbitt pitching the football...it'll pass
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
So what receivers changed from McCoy's rookie season to his 2nd season?
We added Little and Norwood. We lost Stuckey. We cut Robiske. That should be a big upgrade.
If those players could all catch during McCoy's rookie season ...... then why and how did they all forget how to do so in his 2nd season?
Like I said earlier, go back and look at the first could games of last year ..... then look at games near the midpoint. Go look at how defenses changed their approach. Look at how we had receivers who were able to make plays early in the year, yet those same guys were stymied later in the year because of the way teams played the Browns on defense. I bet that you'll see a lot of single coverage on the outside receivers.
I remember when Robiske was dumped, and how people said that things were going to be so much better because finally he was gone. Of course, the passing numbers never improved.
I look at the 3 games in which McCoy finished up the year, against Cincinnati, Baltimore, and Pittsburgh. He went a collective 51-104 for 552 yards, 3 TDs and 4 INTs.
People say "Yeah, but he didn't have Hillis!". Well, he doesn't have Hillis now either. He has to be the focal point. He has to be engine and driver. He's more passenger than anything right now.
Further, I have NEVER said that it is all McCoy, but it is mostly him. It't mostly him by definition of the position he plays, and especially because of the focus on the QB in the WCO. The QB MUST be excellent in the WCO or the whole operation falls apart. If the QB can't complete 60% (or preferably, today, 65%) of his passes, and get the ball to open receivers so they can run with it, then he is useless in this offense, period. He is not doing that. I honestly don't know how anyone can even try to argue that if they watched the games. He throws late to receivers ..... he does not throw his receivers open ..... he just kinda chucks it in their direction, and whatever happens, happens.
It will be interesting to see what happens if he is again the starter next year. It will, most likely, be horrifying to see what happens if he is the starter again as well ..... because the things that limit him right now are not WCO specific, but rather elemental parts of playing the QB position. I don;t see him becoming more than a backup/spot starter type guy based on what I saw last year. He does too many things that starting QBs simply do not do, and fails to do the simplest things that they must do.
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: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
So what receivers changed from McCoy's rookie season to his 2nd season?
We added Little, started to use Norwood and cut Robo..
But what really changed between the two seasons is the system, coaches and no time to learn it.
But of course, that doesn't matter. right
#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: 27,363
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,363 |
Quote:
The QB MUST be excellent in the WCO or the whole operation falls apart. If the QB can't complete 60% (or preferably, today, 65%) of his passes, and get the ball to open receivers so they can run with it, then he is useless in this offense, period. He is not doing that. I honestly don't know how anyone can even try to argue that if they watched the games. He throws late to receivers ..... he does not throw his receivers open ..... he just kinda chucks it in their direction, and whatever happens, happens.
Now how much worse will the QB look if the WR's are never open, wrong the wrong routes, get to much or not enough depth on their routes, or can't get off the line? How much worse is he going to look IF there are 10 defenders in the box and all the routes are being run IN the box?
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
But how do we know that every single WR is not running the right routes, not getting open, and so on .....
I mean .... every one of them? Really?
Well, we'll see what happens. I sincerely hope that you guys are right about this guy if he winds up being our starter. I would much rather win than be right. In fact, I would LOVE to be wrong if that means we win.
I don't think I will be wrong though. The mounting evidence is just piling up too high as far as I'm concerned.
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: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
But how do we know that every single WR is not running the right routes, not getting open, and so on .....
The problem isn't what we know or think we know, it's what we don't know that brings into question all the stuff you and others blame on McCoy.
Hey,, Ytown,, for all I know, you maybe be right.. afterall, it sure looks like the Browns went whole hog after that 2nd pick in the draft to make sure they could get a Franchise QB... So that must mean they aren't entirely enamored with McCoy... pretty clear right.
Or, was it that they think they could win with McCoy but looked very hard at Upgrading the position, which as it turns out, is a mantra they've been preaching since day one.
Take your pick..
#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
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns reportedly outbid for
Pierre Garcon and Josh Morgan
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
