|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
You have unrealistic goals and expectations and you are setting yourself up for a very unhappy season as a Browns fan.
Better than not caring if we go 0-16.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
Having a little patience and being able to understand how a rebuilding process works is important for fans, but let's not get this twisted: 5 years or 10 years of having dopes like Butch Davis, Carmen Policy, Dwight Clark, Phil Savage, and Eric Mangini running the show would have yielded the same . results.
Every regime before Holmgren employed a "short term" plan that either worked for the "short term", maybe a year...or failed completely.
The Browns have looked for the quick fix from beginning, never investing a strategy for the long term.
To fix the "mess" Holmgren inherited, is going to take some "special patience" from the fans.
Quote:
We've sucked because the wrong people were calling the shots.
toad...true..the wrong people calling the shots.
The only way we find out if we have the right people this time is to see the plan all the way through.
Quote:
Say whatever you want about rebuilding, but this is going to be Holmgren's 3rd year steering the ship. The consensus in the NFL world is that we are or are very close to the worst team talent-wise in the league. If, after three seasons, we aren't any better than that, then Holmgren is going to have to answer for it.
The 3rd year steering the ship...keeping it on course, primarily building the team via the draft...takes time.
As for this "consensus"...it doesn't matter...everyone is going to have an opinion.
Schedule, experience level and depth are 3 factors that will play a part in the Browns record this season.
Can't do anything about the schedule...
The experience level is what it is...
...rookie at QB, RT and RB
...both OGs with one year starting
...receivers, with Cribbs, MoMass and Little
...TEs Watson and Moore..
On defense, the only position where a rookie might be starting is at DT, only because Phil Taylor went down. The defense is young at some positions but all have at least a year of experience.
As for Holmgren answering for the teams short comings...he has no problem stepping up to the plate and taking the heat, because he knows Randy Lerner has his back.
It's a 5 year plan...not a 3 year plan.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
Better than not caring if we go 0-16.
Going into year 4 of the rebuilding plan the Browns have the #1 pick in the draft...
...how valuable would that #1 pick be for a team that was looking for a QB?
The Browns could begin to put the finishing touches on the rebuild with a draft such that.
You have to look at the positive not the negative...how can I take something bad and turn it into something good?
Remember, it's a 5 yr plan, not a 3 yr plan.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
So you want to go 0-16?
Wonderful.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
mac, 3 years after the Lions went 0-16 and cleaned house, they won 10 games...
2 years after the Colts went 3-13 and cleaned house, they won 13 games...
1 year after going 3-13 and cleaning house, the Saints won 10 games...
2 years after the Giants went 4-12 and cleaned house, they won 11 games...
1 year after going 6-10 and changing coaches and schemes the 49ers won 13 games....
3 years after going 3-13 and cleaning house, the Cowboys won 11 games...
3 years after going 4-12 and cleaning house, the Jets won 11 games...
3 years after going 5-11 and changing staffs, the Chargers won 11 games...
3 years after going 4-12 and changing the staff, the Bears won 11 games...
1 year after going 4-12 and changing the staff, the Falcons won 11 games...
3 years after going 6-10 and changing staffs, the Rams won 13 games....
mac if you have the right people in place, it doesn't take 5 years to be competitive, no matter how bad you were when you started, .... what it really takes is the right 3 or 4 moves (draft picks, free agency, or hiring the right coach)..... and in pretty much every one of those examples, there was a QB change that played a real big part in it... let's hope we fixed that one this year because if we didn't, take the 5 year plan, crumble it up and toss it in the trash...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,197
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,197 |
Toad,
As far as talent on a roster of 53 I have no idea where the Browns are. I doubt that any of the people doing the ranking knows either.
The Browns are ranked where they are because of where they have been for the last three or more years. That is understandable. The record says it all.
The true measure of the Browns will be after this season. Drafts are more than first round selections. Draft picks are first depth and development and then contributors. In addition the obvious elephant is the quarterback.
The Browns have upgraded their lines. They have key players at all different levels:
DL - Rubin, Sheard, ( Taylor second year will see)
OL- Thomas, Mack, (now Schwartz)
LB - DQ ( new guy JMJ)
DB - Haden, Ward
RB - Richardson
WO- Little (debatable but young and with talent) (Benjamin who knows)
Depth will be very telling as later round picks get more playing time and guys develop over time and coaches learn what they can do.
The question of course is Weeden. Actually I am still stunned that Holmgren let Griffin get away.
But hey, they have hitched their wagon to Brandon Weeden and we will see how that turns out. Weeden deserves to get his day in court. And that day will come.
How Weeden performs when facing live bullets will go a long way in how the team "ranks".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
I am less concerned with our record next year than with how they play. I want to see substantial improvement in the on-field performance. If we go 0-16 but lose every game on a last second FG then I have absolutely no problem with the job the administration is doing. Even though our record is worse, we would be demonstrating improvement.
However, if we average losing by 14+ points per game and look like a high school team then I would agree that yes somebody needs to be fired. Whether that is Holmgren or Heckert or Shurmur or all of them I don't know but in my mind that would be unexceptable.
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678 |
I understand that and in a way agree, however, if we make substantial improvements, wins will come.
But there are limits on just seeing improvements and allowing a few extra losses. I mean you have to hold that standard to the other side....what if we looked bad in every game we played but went undefeated and won the SB?? Would anyone be disappointed?? No, so in the end, record does matter no matter that some claim they don't care about the record. That's idiotic.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
As far as my not caring about our record, that only applies to this particular conversation regarding whether or not our front office should be fired.
As for the rest of your post, yes if we make substantial improvements more wins should come but perhaps we get a few bad breaks. Just enough to turn the tide of a few games. So we could improve on the field and not improve record wise. I would not be happy with that but that would be enough for me to say let's stay the course.
As for playing poorly but winning, firstly there is a difference between playing ugly and playing poorly. But if we truly play poorly but go undefeated and win the SB then I make sure we keep these guys and probably try to hire them for the Indians and Cavs in some kind of consultant role because they are into some deep VooDoo.
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
As for the rest of your post, yes if we make substantial improvements more wins should come but perhaps we get a few bad breaks. Just enough to turn the tide of a few games. So we could improve on the field and not improve record wise.
If we are playing significantly better, then those should even out and we should force some bad breaks on other teams and perhaps win a couple games we wouldn't have otherwise won....
Look at last year, had our defense not totally fallen asleep we probably would have beaten the Bengals... going into this season we would be the exact same team whether we had 4 wins or 5 wins or 6 wins last year, wouldn't have mattered (well other than we probably wouldn't have Trent Richardson)... but you see what I'm saying... Our record from last year, if you use that as a benchmark, already has a couple bad break losses built into it... in fact, if we are to transition to becoming a good team, those are the games I expect to become Ws FIRST... stop giving games away. We aren't yet going to be good enough to dominate people, so we have to get rid of the stupid little mistakes that cost us close games... To me that will be one of the leading indicators of whether or not we are making progress.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
mac if you have the right people in place, it doesn't take 5 years to be competitive, no matter how bad you were when you started, .... what it really takes is the right 3 or 4 moves (draft picks, free agency, or hiring the right coach)..... and in pretty much everyone of those examples, there was a QB change that played a real big part in it... let's hope we fixed that one this year because if we didn't, take the 5 year plan, crumble it up and toss it in the trash...
DC...you can look up as many teams as you want and we will find that each team's situation was different than the Browns.
Some teams had far more talent on their roster when they began their turnaround than the Browns had when Holmgren took over.
Some teams had an established and experienced front office and/or scouting department and/or executive leadership at the highest level. Holmgren's 5 yr plan rebuilt all of the above.
Let us not forget, as many fans wanted and as Holmgren personally believed, he did not fire Mangini and the entire coaching staff when he took over in 2010. Holmgren gave Mangini a year to prove he could be the HC of the Browns.
DC...of the teams you mentioned, how many told their fans they were beginning a 5 yr rebuild plan?
The Browns franchise was a mess when Holmgren took over...and he told everyone the franchise would be rebuilding the roster via the draft, not free agency.
At this time, the rebuild is about 50% completed with the 3rd season yet to be played and the 2013 and 2014 drafts ahead.
DC...It is a 5 year plan...not a 3 year plan...remember that?
Everyone was told up front what the plan was going to be...but now that the plan is half way completed and it doesn't look like the Browns are headed for the playoffs this year, some Browns fans are trying to shorten that 5 yr plan down to a 3 yr plan, looking to fire people if the Browns don't win X number of games this season.
It doesn't matter how many games the Browns win in 2012...Holmgren and Heckert need to finish what they started...it has always been a 5 yr plan.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,678 |
I am a reasonable and balanced person. Sure, we get all the bad bounces, I have no problem taking that in to account.
The thing is bad bounces tend to even out over a season, but sure, we lose on a 66 yard field goal, I can look at that as a fluke thing.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
I want to see quality and some consistency. I dont want a 7-9 win garbage season. I think those do more damage than a 2 or 3 win season and it isn't improvement. Just give us some quality football and record be damned.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 269
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 269 |
This year I want to see this team improve to where they can consistently play at an average-to-high NFL level. That means beating weaker teams solidly, and taking it to the elite teams. Either way, I don't want to see games where this team looks unprepared and plays sloppy.
Last year was dismal. They were incredibly hard to watch with that anemic offense with absolutely no explosive scoring potential. I think they've made nice improvements, and though this is optimistic, I think we'll have a much better product on the field. Hopefully, I'll be excited to watch them for the entire 16-game schedule.
Barring injury, 8-8 or 9-7 is realistic and what I'm expecting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
Quote:
I don't want to see games where this team looks unprepared and plays sloppy.
Amen
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,207
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,207 |
j/c
I think with a rookie QB, a rookie RB and a rookie RT, those looking for vast improvement or else, already have "or else" in their sites.
To see improvement as the season progresses? Sure. But to expect a better record "or else" is unrealistic at best. So many preached continuity and I can see some light at the end of the tunnel. But that won't help if you blow up the tunnel when you get half way through it.
You can't lump this FO with the ones before it. But people have become so impatient they do anyway. We'll never have a winner here if every time we get compitant people to run things, we run them out of town before they have the chance to complete the job. Sad really.......
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,850 |
Just because they are rookies doesn't mean they wont do well. We can still expect a better offense. I mean we drafted talented guys with two first rounders and a second. They are not scrubs.
Only thing I fear is the amount of INTs, and how they will effect our win loss column.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 269
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 269 |
Trent should come in and be effective immediately. RB is one of the few positions that see rookies come in and do well. He has all the talent to do just that.
Weedon will struggle and will probably throw more INTs than we'd like, but I still think he'll be an overall improvement from last year for this offense.
Schwartz it's harder to say. Some OL come in an do just fine their first year. JT tore it up. Mack came in a did just fine as a rookie. Based on his experience level, I expect him to hold down the starting job, but struggle on occasion throughout this first year. He, along with Weedon, will certainly improve next year... but both will be comparatively better than their counterparts from a year ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
You can't lump this FO with the ones before it.
While true, you also cannot give them a pass just because they are not the previous regimes.
I can be patient as I believe in Heckert because of his track record. I'm far less confident in Holmgren who has a very sketchy record as an executive. Holmgren has already made two critical mistakes so his honeymoon of faith based on nothing has come to an end. First, he left Mangini in charge for a year. That was a mistake. Second, he handed us McCoy. That was also a mistake. Now, I am reading rumblings that suggest he got involved in forcing Heckert to draft Weeden. I haven't seen enough proof to say that's factual, but if it's true, and Weeden fails, Holmgren may not deserve a five-year plan.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
DC...you can look up as many teams as you want and we will find that each team's situation was different than the Browns.
Right.. woe is us, we must just accept sucking longer... nobody else has ever been where we are and got out of it in less than 5 years.. woe is us... allow us to continue to make excuses... If excuses could play LB, our depth chart would be full.
Quote:
DC...of the teams you mentioned, how many told their fans they were beginning a 5 yr rebuild plan?
Most of them... at least the ones that just hired a new FO with a 5 year contract. If they were hired with a 3 year contract, they had a 3 year plan..
Quote:
DC...It is a 5 year plan...not a 3 year plan...remember that?
And I'm willing to give him all 5 years.. heck when Holmgren went to Seattle he inherited an 8-8 team and it took him 5 years to get to 10 wins... By year 3 of a 5 year plan I expect to see some significant improvement.. I don't have a hard number on what that means for wins, but if we look even remotely close to as bad as we looked last year, I will have serious doubts on this 5-year-plan.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Pretty much my opinion on H&H and as much as 2009 set us back, those 2 decisions by Holmgren delayed the rebuilding process considerably
Not sure Heckert got forced into Weeden....Holmgren clearly came out and said he pulled rank on McCoy and a fresh GM might have no problem with that pleasing his boss, but I'm not sure he would risk a top 50 pick and his reputation on a QB he didn't believe in....Heckert and especially Shurmur look like they have a boner erverytime they speak about Weeden, pre and post draft
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Pretty much my opinion on H&H and as much as 2009 set us back, those 2 decisions by Holmgren delayed the rebuilding process considerably
Not sure Heckert got forced into Weeden....Holmgren clearly came out and said he pulled rank on McCoy and a fresh GM might have no problem with that pleasing his boss, but I'm not sure he would risk a top 50 pick and his reputation on a QB he didn't believe in....Heckert and especially Shurmur look like they have a boner erverytime they speak about Weeden, pre and post draft
I'm not sure Walrus pulled rank again or not, but I'm also not sure he didn't pull rank.
Here's the article that prompted me to start looking around. Yes, it IS ambiguous, but it also does call into question the possibility that Holmgren pulled rank...again. Here's the quote from NFL.com: Quote:
Holmgren relayed a backroom conversation he shared with general manager Tom Heckert during the draft. Holmgren didn't specify the exchange was over Weeden, but ESPN Cleveland connected those dots. Did the trade up for running back Trent Richardson at No. 3 lead to this chat? Possibly. It sure doesn't sound like the preamble to selecting tight end Brad Smelley with the 247th pick.
"I said, 'Tom, do you want to do this?' " Holmgren said after the draft. "He said, 'I don't think I do. I think it's too much or too strong or whatever.'
"Then I said, 'Well, we may have to.' Then he goes, 'Well, if we have to, then you have to tell me because I won't do it.'
"I said, 'OK, then I might have to tell you.' "
Now before people take this and run off in one of thirty directions, what I'm about to say has nothing to do with my impressions of Weeden or how he's going to do. This is about Holmgren possibly playing the Big-Boss Card and forcing Heck to take Weeden.
If Holmgren DID force us to take Weeden and Weeden bombs, I'm not so sure Holmgren should get his 5 years. The Litmus test would be to look back at history to see how many team Presidents ever survived having their first two hand-picked starting QB's fail.
Basically, I don't know if Holmgren should survive if he goes 0-3 on two of the most critical positions in running a professional football team: Head Coach and Quarterback. Of course the reality of the situation is that if he were to miss on Weeden, that number would actually be 0-4 as Shurmur wouldn't survive Weeden either.
The Walrus is out of Mulligans.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
I remember reading that quote the first time and get the same impression this time. That impression was that the reference was in regard to the trade up offer to get RGIII.
Just by the way he worded it. Using "too much" rather than too high.
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
I doubt that Holmgren had to force Heckert into anything regarding Weeden. Heckert loved the guy leading up the the draft, and just raved about him.
It reminded me a lot about how he spoke about Haden prior to that draft.
I think that there's one guy that Heckert tends to really love in a draft, and he can't help but talk him up a lot.
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: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
Heckert was planing on taking Weeden at 37 and after kenny wright came off the board, Holmgren asked if he wanted to go ahead and grab the QB at 22 . They have explained it a few times.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 817
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 817 |
Quote:
Heckert was planing on taking Weeden at 37 and after kenny wright came off the board, Holmgren asked if he wanted to go ahead and grab the QB at 22 . They have explained it a few times.
Yeah, but we need to gin up some moral outrage over something.
I can't wait for football to really start.
"Let people think this is a dumpster fire," - Mike Pettine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
I'm pretty sure that quote you are talking about was in reference to trading up to #3 to get Richardson. For weeks Heckert was saying we weren't trading up and we would get one of the guys we wanted at #4. I believe that's where his hesitancy came from.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,520 |
Quote:
Quote:
Pretty much my opinion on H&H and as much as 2009 set us back, those 2 decisions by Holmgren delayed the rebuilding process considerably
Not sure Heckert got forced into Weeden....Holmgren clearly came out and said he pulled rank on McCoy and a fresh GM might have no problem with that pleasing his boss, but I'm not sure he would risk a top 50 pick and his reputation on a QB he didn't believe in....Heckert and especially Shurmur look like they have a boner erverytime they speak about Weeden, pre and post draft
I'm not sure Walrus pulled rank again or not, but I'm also not sure he didn't pull rank.
Here's the article that prompted me to start looking around. Yes, it IS ambiguous, but it also does call into question the possibility that Holmgren pulled rank...again. Here's the quote from NFL.com: Quote:
Holmgren relayed a backroom conversation he shared with general manager Tom Heckert during the draft. Holmgren didn't specify the exchange was over Weeden, but ESPN Cleveland connected those dots. Did the trade up for running back Trent Richardson at No. 3 lead to this chat? Possibly. It sure doesn't sound like the preamble to selecting tight end Brad Smelley with the 247th pick.
"I said, 'Tom, do you want to do this?' " Holmgren said after the draft. "He said, 'I don't think I do. I think it's too much or too strong or whatever.'
"Then I said, 'Well, we may have to.' Then he goes, 'Well, if we have to, then you have to tell me because I won't do it.'
"I said, 'OK, then I might have to tell you.' "
Now before people take this and run off in one of thirty directions, what I'm about to say has nothing to do with my impressions of Weeden or how he's going to do. This is about Holmgren possibly playing the Big-Boss Card and forcing Heck to take Weeden.
If Holmgren DID force us to take Weeden and Weeden bombs, I'm not so sure Holmgren should get his 5 years. The Litmus test would be to look back at history to see how many team Presidents ever survived having their first two hand-picked starting QB's fail.
Basically, I don't know if Holmgren should survive if he goes 0-3 on two of the most critical positions in running a professional football team: Head Coach and Quarterback. Of course the reality of the situation is that if he were to miss on Weeden, that number would actually be 0-4 as Shurmur wouldn't survive Weeden either.
The Walrus is out of Mulligans.
Toad, You mis-heard or mis-read or was mis-leaded by this artical. If you go back and listen to the presser after the draft concerning this, it was about trying to move back up after we got TR, to get a receiver before we picked Weeden. Holmgren thought it was possible with some multiple later picks but Heckert had plans for those picks AFTER Weeden and didn't want to spend them unless his boss told him to.. Had NOTHING to do with IF they would take Weeden. God, I wonder how reporters ever get jobs with the crap they come up with....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Actually, here's the article. It's very vague in terms of what they are talking about. You obviously want people to believe it's about Weeden since you don't like him. I thought it was about Richardson since it was in a Richardson article. There's a possibility neither of us are right, but you definitely have an agenda. http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/04/mike_holmgren_disputes_that_cl.htmlAnd for all the Holmgren bashing, let's not forget he brought us Heckert. Heckert has been the best thing to happen to this franchise since the return. You know it's easy to question Holmgren's retaining of Mangini now, but at the time the guy finished the season on a 4 game win streak. It's not like we went 1-15. I'm not a Mangini fan at all, but you can't tell me there was no logic in Holmgren's decision. Granted they come from different schools of thought, but Holmgren's job isn't necessarily to put people in place that are like minded ... and although he end up doing that ... there is more than one way to skin a cat. Maybe he thought Mangini could get it turned around. Turns out he was wrong...at the time it was a flip of the coin decision. I think these guys are getting things turned around. Whether their relationship and their roles are clearly defined or not ... and whether Holmgren butts in once in awhile, the pros outweight the cons by a mile, IMO.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Just a little off track here but this comment cracked me up Quote:
CLEVELAND -- Browns President Mike Holmgren disputed a report that the Browns got fooled into trading up to No. 3 with the Vikings to draft Trent Richardson.
Mike Freeman of cbsports.com reported Friday that several team executives told him the Vikings were bluffing in regards to multiple teams trying to trade up to No. 3 to draft the Alabama running back
It's the opening lines from the article Rish just posted..
Anyway,, last year, we got swindled for trading down, this year we got swindled for trading up.
I dare say if we'd have stayed at 4, we'd have been thought of as fools for not trading up or down..
Sometimes, when it comes to the media,, you just can't win.
#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: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
"I said, 'Tom, do you want to do this?' " Holmgren said after the draft. "He said, 'I don't think I do. I think it's too much or too strong or whatever.'
"Then I said, 'Well, we may have to.' Then he goes, 'Well, if we have to, then you have to tell me because I won't do it.'
"I said, 'OK, then I might have to tell you.' "
Clearly Holmgren wanted the extra large 4 topping pizza but it was $34.. Heckert thought that was too much and wanted to go with a couple meatball subs but thought they might be out of meatball subs... but he was willing to get the pizza if that's what Holmgren told him to do.
Problem solved...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Just get the meatball pizza from Belleria ...... delicious! 
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: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
"I said, 'Tom, do you want to do this?' " Holmgren said after the draft. "He said, 'I don't think I do. I think it's too much or too strong or whatever.'
"Then I said, 'Well, we may have to.' Then he goes, 'Well, if we have to, then you have to tell me because I won't do it.'
"I said, 'OK, then I might have to tell you.' "
Clearly Holmgren wanted the extra large 4 topping pizza but it was $34.. Heckert thought that was too much and wanted to go with a couple meatball subs but thought they might be out of meatball subs... but he was willing to get the pizza if that's what Holmgren told him to do.
Problem solved...
Dude, on Thursday the meatball subs are 1/2 price if you buy a large pizza. Go big and get 'em both.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"I said, 'Tom, do you want to do this?' " Holmgren said after the draft. "He said, 'I don't think I do. I think it's too much or too strong or whatever.'
"Then I said, 'Well, we may have to.' Then he goes, 'Well, if we have to, then you have to tell me because I won't do it.'
"I said, 'OK, then I might have to tell you.' "
Clearly Holmgren wanted the extra large 4 topping pizza but it was $34.. Heckert thought that was too much and wanted to go with a couple meatball subs but thought they might be out of meatball subs... but he was willing to get the pizza if that's what Holmgren told him to do.
Problem solved...
Dude, on Thursday the meatball subs are 1/2 price if you buy a large pizza. Go big and get 'em both.
So you're saying that Holmgren and Heckert got swindled out of 2 half price meatball subs? Can they get ANYTHING right? 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"I said, 'Tom, do you want to do this?' " Holmgren said after the draft. "He said, 'I don't think I do. I think it's too much or too strong or whatever.'
"Then I said, 'Well, we may have to.' Then he goes, 'Well, if we have to, then you have to tell me because I won't do it.'
"I said, 'OK, then I might have to tell you.' "
Clearly Holmgren wanted the extra large 4 topping pizza but it was $34.. Heckert thought that was too much and wanted to go with a couple meatball subs but thought they might be out of meatball subs... but he was willing to get the pizza if that's what Holmgren told him to do.
Problem solved...
Dude, on Thursday the meatball subs are 1/2 price if you buy a large pizza. Go big and get 'em both.
So you're saying that Holmgren and Heckert got swindled out of 2 half price meatball subs? Can they get ANYTHING right?
obviously not. their complete lack of knowing the specials for their food consumption shows their complete lack of fiscal responsibility when it comes to the Browns
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
God, I wonder how reporters ever get jobs with the crap they come up with....
Always...if you can spin, twist, manipulate or flat out lie about the facts of a story, in order to fit your (the reporter's) agenda or to fit the agenda of the publication that employs you, "you are qualified to be a reporter"...just look at Grossi... 
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
To be fair... they also have to know how to use spell check. sometimes.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
How mike freeman has a job is beyond me. His stuff is total nonsense 50% of the time and the other 50% is copy and paste from someone else.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
How mike freeman has a job is beyond me. His stuff is total nonsense 50% of the time and the other 50% is copy and paste from someone else.
that's simply not true. he changes the byline.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
You obviously want people to believe it's about Weeden since you don't like him.
I thought it was about Richardson since it was in a Richardson article. There's a possibility neither of us are right, but you definitely have an agenda.
Jeez, Rish, pull your head out of the tunnel-vision hole and read what I wrote.
Stop. Clear your head. And THINK! 
My point has absolutely ZERO to do with Weeden. It's about the Walrus.
When Holmgren took McCoy, I was shaking my head over TWO things, not just one:
I didn't like McCoy. That IMHO was mistake #1.
I HATED the fact that Holmgren played the Big-Boss card and forced Heckert to take McCoy. That was CLEARLY mistake #2.
TWO mistakes. TWO issues I had.
So...again for you and anyone else that can't appear to put the concept together, my comments in this specific matter revolve around whether or not Holmgren should get more time if he blew this thing again.
I DON'T KNOW if he forced Heckert's hand. I never said he did. I said it's POSSIBLE, but that I DON'T KNOW.
It's like talking to brick walls around here at times. I mean clearly it's hard to understand what I'm trying to express because I never give my honest opinion 
So...AGAIN...Here's where I'm at:
If Holmgren forced Heckert's hand and Weeden falters, Holmgren will have missed on several key decisions:
1) He kept Mangini. FAIL.
2) He forced Heckert to take McCoy: FAIL.
3) He forced Heckert to take Weeden: FAIL. (pay attention people, this one is an IF!
4) And if Weeden fails Shurmur will have been fired as well.
If that happens, I think there's no freakin' way Holmgren should get 5 years. Not only will he have micro-managed the franchise, which often is a downfall of most management structures, but he'll have shown a severe level of incompetence when picking coaches and quarterbacks.
Something else I wanna say to everyone in general. Please don't tell me that "Holmgren and Heckert said" as proof of something. It would cause me great consternation to hear how fans are STILL taking them at their word when they say something. If you people have learned any lessons after how they claimed McCoy was the guy not only before the trade attempt to get Griffin but also after, then you people never will.
And since I'm at it, don't tell me that in retrospect that a decision was sound because "there was a certain amount of logic behind it" because that means jack-squat if the decision fails.
There was logic behind the McCoy pick, but he failed so the decision failed. Having logic behind a decision doesn't give the mistake a free pass against judgment of right or wrong .
Now if anyone wants me to talk about Weeden specifically I will, that's an entirely different conversation not germane to this topic...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Heckert comments on QB competition
and Phil Taylor news
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
