|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,402
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,402 |
j/c
The whole Colt v Wallace debate always leaves me considering Lewis.
For instance...if they see Lewis as the backup next year...does that impact which of Colt v Wallace is kept this year?
We are not keeping (4) QBs...I sense that they like Lewis...if so...at some point he needs to get more reps - albeit with the 2s.
I dunno...I'd keep Colt for this year as I think he's better than Wallace.
I'd like Lewis to step up and be the #2 next year...that leaves Wallace out this year and Colt out next year...or vice versa.
In this argument, maybe Wallace takes better to getting #3 reps...giving Lewis #2 reps...even THIS year. I doubt Colt would be agreeable to that.
Who knows? If it's my decision, I'm keeping Colt for one more year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,560
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,560 |
Wallace has 10 years with Holmgren. Weeden praises him for helping him learn this offense.
Colt has a very cheap contract.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,402
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,402 |
Yeah...I'm not going to lose any sleep one way or the other.
I'm curious about Lewis tho...and whether he is thought of as the next #2.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,500
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,500 |
Quote:
Should I do it? Anyone? 
I happen to think that Wallace is better, but I also think that I'd rather keep McCoy.
Board, please feel free to psychoanalyze that one...
No, they are the ones who ignore the other things that are being said.
Like Colt may simply WANT to be traded!
He was promised a chance to compete and he knows he didn't get one.
The FO stated that they were fine going into this season with Colt as our starter before the draft took place.
Reports were that they told Colt they were not going to draft a QB in round 1.
With the lack of time to implement the new system during the off-season last year, nobody was on the same page last year so Colt may very well see that as not getting a fair shot.
With the lack of talent in the running game and WR position, combined with our OL last year, Colt may feel very slighted that he's not getting a shot with better talent. That he was doomed to fail with the team he had to play with.
While this has been presented and is a very logical scenario, people act and say that everyone who wants to see, or feels he should be traded isn't accounting for this.
There are teams in this league that still have not settled on a starting QB. There are teams in this league that he may very well get the oppertunity to have a fair competition.
If Colt precieves these things I have listed, it may be far better for not only Colt, but the Browns as well, if Colt ends up somewhere else....
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,500
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,500 |
Quote:
LOL well as a Journalist, shouldn't he use proper English, so that we who read English could understand what he is trying to say?
He's a Hack!
Supposidy, that's the job of the "editor".
Writers write, editors are supposed to make sure everything is correct before things are printed.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Quote:
LOL well as a Journalist, shouldn't he use proper English, so that we who read English could understand what he is trying to say?
He's a Hack!
Supposidy, that's the job of the "editor".
Writers write, editors are supposed to make sure everything is correct before things are printed.
Meh! He's still a pencil neck geek imo. But there are times I wish I had an editor too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Wallace has 10 years with Holmgren. Weeden praises him for helping him learn this offense.
Colt has a very cheap contract.
If Holmgren wasn't here Wallace would be trying to catch on with a team from the CFL, because his accuracy is only slightly better then DA's. I doubt that he is even a true 5'11" and folks here call Colt a Smurf.
I'm hoping that Lewis shows a little something here in the preseason.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Keeping McCoy makes sense
Posted by Vic Carucci on August 8, 2012 – 4:10 am
By Vic Carucci, Senior Editor
You’ve got questions and comments that you submit to the Browns’ official Facebook and Twitter pages. Here’s what I have to say about what you have to say:
CRANIUM – Will the Browns trade Colt McCoy?
I suppose it’s possible, Cranium, but I don’t think it’s likely.
I think there is a greater chance of McCoy remaining on the Browns as the No. 2 man behind Brandon Weeden than being traded.
For one thing, McCoy provides the best option as a starter should anything happen to Weeden, and that is the first requirement of an understudy.
Second, he’s properly hard-wired to selflessly provide the support that a starter, especially a rookie, needs. He can share the perspective that only a quarterback has from his field-level vantage point and would be willing to give him trustworthy information that could be advantageous. He understands that what’s good for the starter is good for the team.
I know McCoy brought up not getting a chance to practice with the starters in training camp, something Weeden did from the outset, but I wouldn’t read too much into that. Some national analysts have concluded that it should be considered grounds to trade McCoy. However, I think it is more a reflection of his competitive fire and honest-to-the-core nature.
McCoy was hurt by the decision, and that’s understandable. But I don’t expect him to allow himself to be crushed by it.
Another factor is the trade market. Is there one for McCoy? There might not be now. There might not be ever.
It would make no sense for the Browns to give away their second-best quarterback and one who has started for them and understands the offense well.
LAURA – The Browns have been incredibly unfair to Colt McCoy. You need to stick with someone! Rome wasn’t built in a day. Disappointing.
I don’t agree that this team has been unfair to McCoy, Laura.
When the Browns made Brandon Weeden the 22nd overall pick of the draft, they were exercising their judgment that he could upgrade them at quarterback. The people who made that decision were doing what they are paid to do – seek constant improvement. It was the same thought process that prompted them to select McCoy in the third round in 2010.
It wasn’t any less fair then than it was in April.
And since the first time Weeden and McCoy occupied the same practice field, they had equal opportunities to show what kind of talent they have as throwers. Weeden consistently showed he had more.
That’s fair, too.
This still comes down to putting your best players on the field. There are no hidden agendas, no personal feelings one way or the other.
That’s life in the NFL.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Posted by Mike Florio on August 7, 2012, 9:19 AM EDT
The Browns have a new owner. And as truck-stop magnate Jimmy Haslam tries to get his arms around the football business, he’s got a big decision to make — even if he doesn’t realize how big of a decision it is.
Someone needs to tell this idiot how the NFL works.
.
Jimmy doesn't have that authority. yet
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
You know full well from our previous discussions that i feel that what this team has always needed is time. Now i'm not inferring that a crappy organization, be it a president, gm, coach, or player should be given time 'just because', but that has been the main problem that i see since our return.
I fully believe that you can win with a stable front office, good quality drafts, and developing players in a system. History in the nfl has shown that you can accomplish a superbowl win in many ways. 4-3, 3-4, tampa-2 defenses. WCO, strong running game, vertical attack offenses. You name it.
When you say what would colt work on, and then explain his weaknesses in anticipation and accuracy, i see those as possibly problems that are very likely from lack of experience, and time in the system.
This is not to say that you may be dead on, and these are things that he will never be able to improve apon, and he reached his ceiling in the nfl as a backup. Imo we simply do not know at this point.
When I look at the draft I see it from a time standpoint. First and second round picks are the best at there positions, and most likely to have the talent, skills, technique to step in and play sooner rather than later. They are STILL rookies and will have a learning curve. They lack experience, but they have talent.
When I look at the third round on down I see guys that have something to work on to be successful. They may or may not even get a chance to prove themselves because someone with more talent will come along.
Colt was never going to have a strong arm like Farve, or Rogers. Like you have stated he would have to excel in the other areas of anticipation, and accuracy. I have stated that these areas are difficult to judge because of all the constant change of the systems. If we had been running this system for years, and had a veteran crew of receivers, who knew this system inside and out, and were always where they were supposed to be, then yes i would say you could judge his anticipation and accuracy. You can't honestly say that maybe he hesitated a second to see if the receiver was going to run a post or an out.
I would love to also know the breakdown of 3, 5, and 7 step drops. I would be willing to bet that 90% of our plays were 3 step, since we could hardly block for that. We called alot of short passes. Weakness of mccoy? maybe, but i would be willing to bet it was more a weakness of the line. Mccoy can throw it deep, and with timing, reps, and time to throw i'm sure he could do it fine. Is it his strength? I doubt it, but to just say he can't based on last year is improper imo. Add in the running game last year, and it was a disaster.
At the end of the day, colt got dealt a crappy hand. He may or may not have overcome his weaknesses and became a viable starter. Maybe they never intended him to be. Who knows. He was a guy that needed time, and he didn't get it in favorable circumstances.
I'm glad we got weeden, i hold no loyalty to a particular player. I love the browns, and I want them to constantly try to acquire, and develop talent.
Saying a guy didn't cut it at this point is premature. It doesn't even matter really, because we have someone that is more talented in weeden. We should still certainly continue to develop mccoy, and with some experience and time we will know what we have. Then we will see the best that he can be. The kid deserves that much.
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
At the end of the day, colt got dealt a crappy hand. He may or may not have overcome his weaknesses and became a viable starter. Maybe they never intended him to be. Who knows. He was a guy that needed time, and he didn't get it in favorable circumstances.
I'm not going to wade back into the waters of what McCoy does or does not possess. I watched him for four years in college, and I watched him for two season in the pro's. I didn't believe in him coming into the league and never saw anything afterwards that would lead me to believe I was mistaken in my beliefs. However, I want to respond to what has been said by many, which is that McCoy was dealt an unfair hand.
I would argue that McCoy got dealt a GREAT hand by the Browns.
Colt just didn't know it, and still doesn't.
In today's NFL, team President's and GM's don't look at non-first round QB's and go "Yeah, that's the guy that I'm willing to bet my elite NFL Exec job on." When you spend a 3rd round pick on a QB, you're hoping that he gives you some solid work as a backup, and maybe, if you're very lucky, you'll catch lightning in a bottle and wind up with a starter.
We can banter about who was right and who was wrong on predicting where McCoy would be taken, but at the end of the day the Browns took him in the 3rd round. The defining difference between us and the vast majority of the rest of the league was that Mike Holmgren put his reputation on the line as a QB guru by going against the odds and making McCoy his future starting QB. Holmgren set him up with the gig..."handed it to him" if you will (yes, that one is for you, DC. )...when it's highly unlikely that McCoy would have been given that situation anywhere else in the league. Now was the roster great? No, but it was an audition that McCoy could have aced by showing improvement and progress.
That's all any QB can ask for.
I have this saying...in fact it's my #1 proverb...and it goes:
Rule #1 of the Universe: Life is not fair. The sooner one accepts that as a fundamental truth, the easier life will be.
(Yeah, that's the Taoist in me coming out. So sue me  )
Too many people in today's society cry and whine about something "not being fair" and then take it out on the rest of the Universe by either attacking it directly, or creating negative actions and reactions which bounce our world causing us consternation, misery, suffering, and pain, all to varying degrees and increments. In the case of McCoy, it should be realized that the NFL as a league was in the process of taking a pass on him as a viable future starter when Holmgren stepped in and rescued his fate.
In short, people shouldn't bemoan the lack of ideal circumstances for McCoy's team. They should recognize the opportunity he was given which no other team was inclined to offer him.
Colt McCoy got his fair shot. He got more than a "fair" shot. He had an NFL starting QB gig laid out for him to take. He couldn't. What's so unfair about that?
Interestingly enough, that in spite of so many who cannot get past the fact that life isn't fair, another one of my favorite proverbs can then be applied, which is...Life goes on. It didn't just stop because something was deemed to be "unfair", did it?
Amazing, that. 
Reverting here, McCoy can either embrace the fact that he is in a great place from where he can get a second chance, or he can elect to go on the defensive in which case he won't be fully prepared in case that second shot suddenly appears. If I'm any backup QB in the league, the one guy I want to be behind is a 29-year old rookie, and if there's one team, it's the one that has the playbook I'm familiar with, and the players I'm familiar with.
There's alot to like here if I were Colt McCoy. It's just too bad most of the talking heads cannot see it...and, apparently, neither can Colt McCoy.
***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: 51,023
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,023 |
Quote:
When you say what would colt work on, and then explain his weaknesses in anticipation and accuracy, i see those as possibly problems that are very likely from lack of experience, and time in the system.
Except that then we bring in a guy with less overall experience, and no experience at all in the WCO, and he has such far better anticipation of where a receiver will be, and how to put the ball where the receiver will be, (as opposed to kinda where he is) and who was more accurate on day one than McCoy was after a whole year, then I would say that experience wasn't the problem.
Quote:
This is not to say that you may be dead on, and these are things that he will never be able to improve apon, and he reached his ceiling in the nfl as a backup. Imo we simply do not know at this point.
We all make estimations based on what we see on the field. After watching the NFL for a long, long time, we can all make some degree of estimates as to how guys are playing, how they will probably develop, and what we see on the field. It's not rocket science.
Quote:
If we had been running this system for years, and had a veteran crew of receivers, who knew this system inside and out, and were always where they were supposed to be, then yes i would say you could judge his anticipation and accuracy. You can't honestly say that maybe he hesitated a second to see if the receiver was going to run a post or an out.
However, we never saw the receivers coach ripping into guys when they came off the field. Guys would be wide open and ignored. The TV guys would even point them out. You could often see how frustrated receivers were coming off the field. Maybe we don't know it all .... but I do know that when a receiver is running wide open down the field, and the QB appears to look at him, look at him, then throws a 3 yard pass instead ...... there's a problem.
I am of the opinion that McCoy lacks many of the skills (and/or alternate skills) to be a successful NFL QB. He was a very successful college QB. There is a major difference between the 2. He could throw to spots almost exclusively in college. He has to throw both to spots and to receivers in the NFL. Defenses in the NFL will find every flaw in a guy's game .... and they found the flaws in McCoy's game. McCoy was OK at throwing to a spot. If a guy could run 7 yards and stop, McCoy could hit him. Unfortunately, he had problems hitting receivers running routes. A general rule of thumb is that the WCO has routes that run to a spot against zone defense, and runs through the zone against man. A receiver running against man is not going to stop and wait for the ball. Defensive coordinators know this, and saw McCoy's weakness in this area, and stopped running zone defenses and ran man on the outside with an overloaded short zone. Now they did run zone "prevent" defenses at the end of "won" games .... and that is when we would often see McCoy drive the team down the field even when he had been having trouble doing anything for the rest of the game.
Most great NFL QBs look for the man coverage to attack. McCoy seemed to look for zone coverage, and for a spot he could throw to.
I just see far too many problems with McCoy's game to hope that he will correct enough of them to become an effective QB ... even as a backup if forced into duty. He will be able to run plays, and can call the offense, but IMHO, it's highly unlikely that he will learn completely new skills, and unlearn his old skills, as a pro.
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: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Anybody attend the family thingy at the stadium tonight? My cousin texted that Weeden looked really good. If that means anything . . . 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218 |
Quote:
Anybody attend the family thingy at the stadium tonight? My cousin texted that Weeden looked really good. If that means anything . . .
Looking forward to any updates also!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
I would argue that McCoy got dealt a GREAT hand by the Browns.
Your basing this on the fact that you believe him to be a backup. At this point i can't and won't argue with you. A guy with more talent was drafted to upgrade the position.
I certainly can't speak for what Holmgren was thinking when we drafted him other than the fact that he stated, "there is no way he's seeing the field this year". He was developmental, and in no way ready to start if i'm interpreting that right. He needed to sit and learn.
Jake and wallace go down, and colt gets thrust into the game too soon. We rode the back of hillis for much of the season, and saw smart but not spectacular play from colt. Manage the game. He didn't do much, but he didn't screw up too much either.
The following year, new system, no offseason. He's the starter now. We weren't in a position to draft a better qb, and fa's aren't the path to success. I doubt any good available fa would have signed on to this debacle anyway.
Colt was the starter by default as we filled other positions of need. The job wasn't handed to him, unless you feel that wallace should have been handed the job.
My point was that it was a bad year in many ways. Not the best time to be auditioning for your starting role. Either way that ship has sailed and i agree with you 100% that colt just needs to accept his spot as a backup and continue to learn. It may very well be that all he will ever amount to is a backup. it's also possible that given time and another shot for whatever reason he could amount to more.
You didn't respond to the question i posed at the end of my last post as to how colt would have faired with more time for the entire offense in the system. We could have possibly seen a different qb, or maybe we would have just seen a backup.
Like you said, "life isn't always fair"...thats still the same as being dealt a crappy hand.
Holmgren drafted a qb to develop after signing a vet fa. Holmgren always drafted qb's to develop even when he had one. Colt got thrown to the wolves thru injuries. Did it change what he could have become? Maybe, maybe not.
Time for an analogy.
Suppose some team drafts a developmental linebacker. He's got great physical skills, he can tackle, and has the ability to cover the pass. He has one problem....he's stupid...i'm talkin' steeler fan stupid.
So this player can't grasp the playbook, and all the schemes, coverages, ect. He's got talent, but he don't know what to do. Given some time and coaching he can learn his role in the defense. Let's just say 3 years and he'll understand.
If this player is forced by injuries to step on the field before that time he's going to appear lost, screw up assignments, and be attacked. In short he will look like a guy that can't cover, and everyone will say we need a new linebacker. A project that failed, he's a backup, or needs cut.
Take this same player and put him on the field in year 4. Now he knows his job, and dominates. He's a legit starter. Now people will say, we draft well in the late rounds, got a steal, whatever.
Same player, different situation. One is a starter for years, the other jumps from team to team as a backup if he even gets that chance.
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,023
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,023 |
The problem is that those developmental guys who can't grasp a playbook are 50-50 at best, and probably a 10-20% proposition at best.
I would also add that those type of developmental guys are usually guys with fantastic measurables. Guys like Acho for us this year, who has been reported to be flaming out spectacularly thus far in camp. Look at Carlton Mitchell. He has all of the measurables to be great. Unfortunately, he can't run routes or catch the ball.
McCoy might be a guy who needs time to develop ..... but everything a player does is evaluated and scrutinized. Teams planning on trading for a player look at everything they can find on him. How have his skills manifested themselves on the field? How has he handled problems and setbacks? What has he done at an NFL level? What skills has he demonstrated that can be developed and enhanced? Does he have any untapped potential that were suppressed in one system that might flourish in another?
QBs are a very, very valuable commodity. When one with ability and potential becomes available, teams in need of one swarm like locusts. Teams weren't swarming around the Browns when McCoy was reported to be available. Someone may make an offer based on what happens in camp, but can you honestly say that the Browns wouldn't have moved McCoy if they could have gotten a 5th or 6th round pick for him? IMHO, he'd have been packing the night of the draft if they could have.
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: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
I think weeden is a better prospect too. Can we see him do it in a game?  Just one? I don't understand how you can't fathom that some players are naturals, and others have to work at it. They all need experience though. It is what it is. Weeden has a better arm, and appears to be pretty accurate. He's gonna have growing pains to. I don't have the knowledge, or skill to judge a player. I think there is simply too much we don't know to make an accurate judgement. We all have opinions I get that, and i'm not disputing your knowledge either. You appear to be right since colts a backup. I don't look at things that way. I look at situations. We couldn't run for crap last year. We could hardly block for 3 step drops. That means we can only throw short passes, or we are taking sacks. Or we can run it and maybe get a few yards. So in this situation a defense only has to cover short, and stop the run. This leads to 3rd and long, so we have to keep people in to block just to try to get a first down. So now the defense has even less people to cover. We were in bad situations all the time last year. This isn't even considering penalties and drops. How many times last year do you think we were in 2nd and short? Not many i'll bet. Good teams can take a shot down field, because they can block it and get guys open...or they can run it. The defense has to cover the whole field. This truly is beating a dead horse.... Colt's a backup....a whiney sniveling one too....lucky to be drafted....ahhhhh 
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,023
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,023 |
The thing is that McCoy is a very experienced guy though.
He started every year in college at a major program.
He started as a rookie in the NFL.
He started his entire 2nd year, until he was injured.
He's not going to change his entire game at this point in his career. I can't think of a single QB who has been able to do so.
I understand the problems this team had last year. However, the team can evaluate what a player, even the QB, does on his own, regardless of what the rest of the team does.
The team decided that it was better to draft a 28 year old QB than to continue trying to "develop" McCoy. That really says it all. These guys are supposed to be QB experts. They gave up on McCoy, and drafted Weeden to "compete" with him ..... even though anyone with eyes could tell that Weeden was going to be the starter from day 1.
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: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Look at Carlton Mitchell. He has all of the measurables to be great. Unfortunately, he can't run routes or catch the ball.
Pffffffft.
Like THAT's important...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
You didn't respond to the question i posed at the end of my last post as to how colt would have faired with more time for the entire offense in the system. We could have possibly seen a different qb, or maybe we would have just seen a backup.
No, I didn't. Likely 'cause I didn't see it, hehe. Sorry 'bout that.
I think it's reasonable to expect more production from McCoy if he were given more time in any offense, though the amount of improvement brings us full-circle back to a debate I'd no longer care to get involved with. Quote:
Suppose some team drafts a developmental linebacker. He's got great physical skills, he can tackle, and has the ability to cover the pass. He has one problem....he's stupid...i'm talkin' steeler fan stupid.
Hope you don't mind me just using that first part, as the rest isn't required to grasp your intent. While I understand you're still working from the angle of McCoy needing more time to better evaluate him as a QB, I'd reference one of the golden rules of evaluation a QB which is coming from college: If he lacks certain key attributes, he then must absolutely have other attributes which are of elite levels in order to compensate for his shortcomings. To that end, I would argue that your hypothetical linebacker does have elite attributes which give a greater hope that he can become a deserved starter, whereas McCoy hasn't offered concrete evidence that there is an exceptional attribute that exists in his skillset. I'd take it a step further by offering that when you're a lower-round player your window of opportunity is by nature greatly reduced, bringing back in the concept of what is fair and what isn't. By his very nature a guy like Weeden will get more of an opportunity because he has the physical skills. He will then be afforded even more time due to the high investment made in him, meaning the fact he's a 1st round QB.
Even when I did participate in the Colt-bashing I also made it known I felt he would almost have to get better with more time in the league and in this offense. It was always just a question of whether or not his ceiling was good enough, and because of that fact the time afforded him to reach it was decidedly less than that which many would consider "fair."
Weeden gets more opportunity than a guy like McCoy who gets more opportunity than a guy like Ken Dorsey. "Fair" becomes a relative term to the ceiling of a player and the amount invested into him.
Lastly, I'd note that while your points are worthy considerations, they are no doubt considerations that this regime and the rest of the league have made. The Browns have concluded that McCoy's ceiling isn't high enough to warrant more time, and I'm certain that had any other team in the league concluded we were making a mistake that they'd have acquired Colt already. That's something to think about.
If you don't mind, I'd back up to something you'd written sooner just to make a separate point...
Quote:
I certainly can't speak for what Holmgren was thinking when we drafted him other than the fact that he stated, "there is no way he's seeing the field this year". He was developmental, and in no way ready to start if i'm interpreting that right. He needed to sit and learn.
And I believe that Holmgren also made a statement that it wouldn't be fair to evaluate a QB until year 3 in this system, or some such horse-pucky. Either he was lying, or he didn't really mean it and wanted to use that statement to buy McCoy (and by proxy, himself) more time. My point being that just because these talking heads say something doesn't mean we should believe them and stand on their quotes as gospel. Sometimes they gotta tell lies to protect the kingdom. Tell McCoy we're drafting a QB and maybe he leaks the word and we lose out on Weeden. We simply cannot...and should not...tip our hand. Holmgren wants patience with his long-shot draft pick McCoy, so the best way is to make a statement about how long this offense takes to learn.
I'm not sure he's explained that one away voluntarily, has he?
That one isn't about McCoy, it's about taking anything these guys say with a 32-karrot grain of salt.  When we listen to what they say then blast them for lying, it's ourselves we've done a disservice, not the talking heads doing it to us.
***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: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
College experience is not nfl experience. He did have 4 years in that system at texas.
He had a partial season of starts in one system, and a partial season of starts in another.
I don't disagree that you can't evaluate some facets of a players game. I do think its difficult to get a good overall picture with what we had going on last year. You can obviously evaluate arm strength, or if he is correcting technique like a coach asks him to. You can evaluate accuracy when, (as a coach) you see where he threw it when the receiver was in the proper spot. That is not something we can know, but they will. We didn't have some stud receiver that was always open and a defense had to plan for. We had crap. Our best receiver didn't play football the year before was a rook. Mo missed training camp, and cribbs isn't a receiver.
Colt had holes in his game i'm sure...but we are looking at an offense that might be starting 5 rooks.
But nobody can evaluate how a player will perform given time in the system without giving them time in the system. They can speculate and guess, but thats it.
Somebody better fell into their lap and they drafted weeden. I'm glad, and hope they are always trying to improve the team. So far it looks like they did.
I didn't expect a competition either. They have stated in the past that you might look at a quick competition, but then you pick a guy, and back him 100%.
Weeden's stronger and more accurate, and 1 season behind. With his age, he's getting pushed, and getting all the reps. There is no other way to do it.
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I would argue that McCoy got dealt a GREAT hand by the Browns.
There isn't a QB that's been here since 1999 that has been dealt a great hand. A great hand is being set up to succeed, none of them have had that... I'll give you an example of a guy that got dealt a great hand... Matt Flynn. Roughly similar skill set to McCoy, goes to a powerhouse offense behind an established starter, sits a few years in relative anonymity.. coming in at times when he can't help but look good.. finally gets a couple starts with a high-powered offense that is clicking, throws up some great numbers and cashes in for millions... that is being dealt a great hand. Going to a perennial bottom feeder and having people expect you to save it isn't being dealt a great hand.
Quote:
Reverting here, McCoy can either embrace the fact that he is in a great place from where he can get a second chance, or he can elect to go on the defensive in which case he won't be fully prepared in case that second shot suddenly appears. If I'm any backup QB in the league, the one guy I want to be behind is a 29-year old rookie, and if there's one team, it's the one that has the playbook I'm familiar with, and the players I'm familiar with.
There's alot to like here if I were Colt McCoy. It's just too bad most of the talking heads cannot see it...and, apparently, neither can Colt McCoy.
This much I agree with... but I'm still willing to give Colt some time to come to grips with it... But then I'm not at practice and I'm certainly not in the film/training/locker rooms so I don't know what his demeaner is...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
The thing is that McCoy is a very experienced guy though.
He started every year in college at a major program.
He started as a rookie in the NFL.
He started his entire 2nd year, until he was injured.
He's not going to change his entire game at this point in his career. I can't think of a single QB who has been able to do so.
ok, since you can't help yourself but degrade our backup QB who we will likely need to step in and start a few games at least this season if not next season as well.
quick full synopsis:
yes, he beat out a highly recruited/ranked guy (Snead) for the Texas starting spot and won more games in college than any QB in history. that is great and all, but he was running the spread-offense in a manner that isn't done in the NFL. not sure that experience is a direct correlation.
he hurt his shoulder in the Nat'l champ game. that is one reason he dropped in the draft because he wasn't fully recovered. I firmly believe he would have been a 2nd round draft pick had he been healthy (not that it matters because once you step on the field, it's your play that counts).
according to multiple reports, his rookie year he received little to not mentoring/tutoring from Mangini/Daboll and was a pure scout-team only QB. he wasn't really put into a situation where he could "learn" the system. when his time came up to play, he played okay (with some good stuff mixed in).
after his rookie year, the coaching staff was fired and the WCO system was brought in but he had no offseason to learn it from the coaches and Seneca has admitted several times that he wasn't about to help Colt McCoy out. he did what he could going to Favre and such, but that's not the same.
if his second year was just below average, it would have been understandable. but, it was horrid. terrible. seneca was somehow worse when he played (even against the same opponents), but that doesn't excuse how bad Colt played. and, of course, it ended in scandal. so, he deserved to be replaced and noone is questioning that at all.
however, because of all of the crazy circumstances above and what he has been through, I do believe he can play better. not saying it's good enough to start (though Brady Quinn might get another starting shot this year, so Colt likely will get one at some point somewhere), but he shouldn't be a guy we just dump to get off the team either.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
Even when I did participate in the Colt-bashing I also made it known I felt he would almost have to get better with more time in the league and in this offense. It was always just a question of whether or not his ceiling was good enough, and because of that fact the time afforded him to reach it was decidedly less than that which many would consider "fair."
Quote:
Lastly, I'd note that while your points are worthy considerations, they are no doubt considerations that this regime and the rest of the league have made. The Browns have concluded that McCoy's ceiling isn't high enough to warrant more time, and I'm certain that had any other team in the league concluded we were making a mistake that they'd have acquired Colt already. That's something to think about.
I agree with all of this, and I alluded to it in one of my posts, it might have been to ytown. That was the point when I say "crappy hand". Given that he has holes in his game, and the fact that his window of opportunity is smaller, the situation that he was thrust into couldn't have been worse. It doesn't change his ceiling, but if colt was for sure at his ceiling, he might have been good enough to win with. As it stands now, time expired (cause we had a chance to draft another qb) and we still don't know.
He got his window on the abortion that was the browns for the last 2 years.
Your point on his ceiling makes perfect sense, and i agree 100%, you only get a shot as long as the team can't find someone with better skills. The lower the round, the more likely that is.
I have no problem with weeden. He absolutely should get all the reps.
Colt is the backup...and it doesn't matter if they think thats all the skill he will ever have, or if its simply that we have a better prospect in weeden.
Either way i'm watching.
Quote:
And I believe that Holmgren also made a statement that it wouldn't be fair to evaluate a QB until year 3 in this system, or some such horse-pucky. Either he was lying, or he didn't really mean it and wanted to use that statement to buy McCoy (and by proxy, himself) more time. My point being that just because these talking heads say something doesn't mean we should believe them and stand on their quotes as gospel. Sometimes they gotta tell lies to protect the kingdom. Tell McCoy we're drafting a QB and maybe he leaks the word and we lose out on Weeden.
Now this i only partly agree with. You are talking about 2 separate issues.
I 100% agree about the draft. You don't tell players squat. You might start rumors, or feed mis-information. Its all chess and poker. I have no problem with what mccoy was told or not told. Their job is to improve the team. Period.
I do disagree about the time. I don't remember Holmgrens exact quote in regards to this either, but it was something along the lines of 2 years of starts, in the same system, with the same coach. After that you would know what you have.
What he is saying makes sense. Your first year is going to be filled with rookie mistakes. Your second year is going to be gaining more experience, fixing areas of your game, and showing improvement. Then you have a pretty good idea of what that guys ceiling actually is. You don't have to speculate or guess at that point. He's either good enough to continue to start or he's not.
I think qb's especially should sit for at least a year. Economics don't make it likely, but in terms of whats best for them to get comfortable with everything they have to know it makes sense.
I think colt was thrown in before he was ready, which basically sealed his fate. Add running for your life, no running game, and mediocre receivers all playing in a new system...well forget it.
The time issue is what gets me, and its not just the qb. Its the entire offense. Awhile back I looked up the roster of gb in the first year that rogers started. Now mccoy isn't rogers, and i'm not saying he could be. But here is a guy that sat and learned.
I posted an article on how scouts thought that they could draft a better qb like 2 years in a row to replace him before he started, cause he looked lost, was inaccurate ect. The stuck with letting him learn.
Then when he got his shot to start, he stepped on the field with a veteran offense. Ryan grant, and the fb, were with only guys with less than 2 years of games experience, and they were both in their 2nd years.
Rogers was the only guy that lacked in-game experience, but he started knowing the playbook with a fews years of camps, lifting, and practicing timing with those players.
Now his first round status warranted it like you stated, but this was a guy that was put into a position to succeed. Maybe colts draft position and ceiling didn't warrant more time, but he certainly needed a situation like that to have even a remote chance of success.
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
There isn't a QB that's been here since 1999 that has been dealt a great hand. A great hand is being set up to succeed, none of them have had that... I'll give you an example of a guy that got dealt a great hand... Matt Flynn.
Please note that this is a quote from DC, not BrownieElf. Just avoiding confusion but I needed to use it to make a distinction.
DC, yes, absolutely Flynn got a great hand. I wouldn't disagree at all. But the distinction I'm referring to revolves around the odds that a guy like Flynn would have a chance to show his wares versus a guy like McCoy in his situation.
Every year there are mid and late-round QB's like Flynn who come into the league and never even get a shot to do what Flynn did. The percentage of backup QB's who are afforded the chance to do what he did are miniscule. On the other hand, consider that McCoy, who was touted by some as being a sure-fire 1st round pick, was in free-fall down the draft boards to Backup-land and was saved and given the golden path to become a starter.
The difference of view here revolves around how we're describing being given a "great hand."
Take all the non first round QB's coming out of college over the next decade, which is to say all the QB's who aren't viewed as franchise guys, and offer them a choice:
1) Be drafted late and be told you're job will be that of a backup QB on a good team where you'll likely never get starters reps and a shot at the starters job, or
2) Be drafted and have the path laid out for you where the starters job has been handed to you on a silver platter, albeit on a not-so great team
I would argue that the percentage of guys who would choose to be slated as the future starter, no matter what team they are going to, would be rather close to 100%.
This is what I mean when I say McCoy was given a "great hand." I get what you're saying, and in the microcosm of the ideal situation for a long-shot QB to have a chance to succeed, sure, it makes perfect sense. My side is simply that the path to becoming a starter is far easier and better if the job is handed to you. I suppose I could even argue that being on a bad team means winning isn't a requisite for success as it pertains to showing you're a potential starter. All you'd have to do is show moxy and improvement.
That went on a little longer than I intended, hehe.
Quote:
I do disagree about the time. I don't remember Holmgrens exact quote in regards to this either, but it was something along the lines of 2 years of starts, in the same system, with the same coach. After that you would know what you have.
It's possible he may have said two years. To be honest, I've never paid any attention to the things the talking heads say so I didn't bother to fully absorb the quote. In either case, if yours is closer to the truth, then McCoy still didn't get two years in the same system. But I think we've long-since agreed that just because they say it doesn't make it so.
Quote:
I think qb's especially should sit for at least a year. Economics don't make it likely, but in terms of whats best for them to get comfortable with everything they have to know it makes sense.
With exceptions, I agree. The rare player like Luck probably is far enough along to start as a rookie, and in the rare case of a guy like Weeden who is just about to collect social security as a rookie, I think he has to start right out of the box as well. Beyond that, yeah, the economics and pressure don't allow for too many Steve McNair or Jake Locker situations.
Quote:
The time issue is what gets me, and its not just the qb. Its the entire offense. Awhile back I looked up the roster of gb in the first year that rogers started. Now mccoy isn't rogers, and i'm not saying he could be. But here is a guy that sat and learned.
I posted an article on how scouts thought that they could draft a better qb like 2 years in a row to replace him before he started, cause he looked lost, was inaccurate ect. The stuck with letting him learn.
Then when he got his shot to start, he stepped on the field with a veteran offense. Ryan grant, and the fb, were with only guys with less than 2 years of games experience, and they were both in their 2nd years.
Rogers was the only guy that lacked in-game experience, but he started knowing the playbook with a fews years of camps, lifting, and practicing timing with those players.
Now his first round status warranted it like you stated, but this was a guy that was put into a position to succeed. Maybe colts draft position and ceiling didn't warrant more time, but he certainly needed a situation like that to have even a remote chance of success.
Aren't we getting back into the realm of what's "fair"?
I know what you're saying. We naturally are inclined to want to give a person all the best tools in order to help them succeed. That's been engrained into our DNA from the time were were kids. But the NFL suspends rules of what is fair by it's very nature. In a perfect world we'd love to have given McCoy an offense like Green Bay's to work in. In a perfect world he would be given five years in the same offense. Life isn't fair, especially in the NFL. All McCoy could have asked for was a shot as a starter. It wasn't a perfect situation but we gave it to him. He may feel as though he it wasn't fair, but he got the shot here that he wouldn't have gotten anywhere else. That's all a non-first round QB could ask for.
***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: 40,664
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,664 |
J/C
There was nothing unfair about the chance Colt had. He had 2 years to show his stuff and he still couldn't figure out how to throw in front of his receivers.
He's done, and gone IMO.
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: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Every year there are mid and late-round QB's like Flynn who come into the league and never even get a shot to do what Flynn did. The percentage of backup QB's who are afforded the chance to do what he did are miniscule. On the other hand, consider that McCoy, who was touted by some as being a sure-fire 1st round pick, was in free-fall down the draft boards to Backup-land and was saved and given the golden path to become a starter.
Unfortunately Browns fans level of expectations didn't fall with him.... A lot of people still had first round expectations of him.. which were totally unreasonable. The list of 3rd round QBs who come into the NFL and make an immediate impact in their first or second year (especially on a crappy team) is even more miniscule than the number that never really get the chance.
Quote:
The difference of view here revolves around how we're describing being given a "great hand."
Take all the non first round QB's coming out of college over the next decade, which is to say all the QB's who aren't viewed as franchise guys, and offer them a choice:
1) Be drafted late and be told you're job will be that of a backup QB on a good team where you'll likely never get starters reps and a shot at the starters job, or
2) Be drafted and have the path laid out for you where the starters job has been handed to you on a silver platter, albeit on a not-so great team
I would argue that the percentage of guys who would choose to be slated as the future starter, no matter what team they are going to, would be rather close to 100%.
This is what I mean when I say McCoy was given a "great hand."
We are discussing 2 different things then... you are discussing what a 22 year old kid with a big ego and history of success thinks is the best path verses what a rational thinking adult who has seen hundreds of quarterbacks flame out thinks is the best path...
Any kid drafted in rounds 2-4 of the NFL draft at QB was probably a stud in HS, probably a BMOC in college... so of course he THINKS he can start and succeed immediately and that's what he would select. That's what he is wired to think, even though most people know better.
Let me put it this way, if I take most 22 year old boys coming out of college and give them a choice, "You can marry this supermodel, she's not all that bright, she is pretty conceited, and she treats most people like turds... or you can marry this average looking girl with her feet on the ground, good balance in her life and she treats people great"... a lot of 22 year old boys would still choose the supermodel thinking they could make it work, even though almost every experienced man would tell him the other is the better choice for a happy life...
Quote:
My side is simply that the path to becoming a starter is far easier and better if the job is handed to you.
I'm not sure that's a fair thing to judge. How many 3rd round or lower QBs ever have the job handed to them in their first or second year? I would say that the overwhelming number of QBs drafted (in any round) come into the league under 1 of 3 circumstances..
1. Highly drafted QB by a bad team expected to be the savior.
2. Mid level QB drafted by a better team expected to be a back up and potentially someday turn into something.
3. Later round guy drafted as a long shot.
We were a bad team who drafted a mid-level guy and expected him to be the savior... that just defies logic.... and that's NOT a good hand to be dealt, whether McCoy thought it was at the time or not.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
if I take most 22 year old boys coming out of college and give them a choice, "You can marry this supermodel, she is pretty conceited, and she treats most people like turds...
Whoops.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 249
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 249 |
I think Colt got a fair shake, in regards to the fact that he was given playing time he might not have necessarily been given elsewhere.
In his rookie year, he was dicked around by Daboll and Mangini. Tough love? Sure, and he had his two cents to say about that earlier in the year, a lot of fans thought he was whining then. I think he played well, well enough to earn the 'starting QB' label the following year.
Colt had an up and down season last year, I have to agree with Toad that there isn't really any one single aspect of Colt's game that stands out as above-average. Colt got a fair shot, he got a concussion (which was mishandled by Colt and the team, another separate issue but it was ugly) and Seneca Wallace in his play time did nothing to establish that he's on a different 'level' than Colt as far as ability is concerned. That's why there's never really been any serious talk about Seneca starting on this team (unless it's Seneca himself, saying he wants to start, and then being called out for whining by the fans.)
I think the team was wise to move on, they saw all they needed to see and a QB they felt gave them a better chance to succeed was in their reach. Maybe they reached for Weeden, I don't know.
If anything, The Team gets a dirty stink eye for playing their cards close to their chest, but what were they going to do? Come up to Colt and be like "Look... we're thinking of drafting a QB in the first round, just giving you a heads up." What business is it of Colts to know what the team's planning, really? In any job I've ever had, I wasn't entitled to any information my employers were brewing about the company... I would say that for any Football Player on a team, that would be the standard as well. He was told what the team was planning at the time to keep him as the starter, and at that time (pre-Weeden) it was that Colt WAS going to be the starter again. Aka: He had played well enough to earn the job another season, but clearly not well enough that we weren't above considering alternative options, which we did.
Colt got an opportunity very FEW people get in their lifetimes, and really, he's still got plenty of opportunity left. He should just be worried about playing football. I do believe in the adversity argument, in the sense that this is probably the first time in his young life that he's faced any at all. He should be thankful for that, and thankful he's still in the NFL.
From what I've heard, and read, Weeden is showing more than either Colt, or Seneca in camp. Period. That basis alone gives me hope that maybe our offense will show more with Weeden as a rookie, than we did with Colt as a rookie two seasons ago (at times, we looked even worse last year...) so I'm not really sad that we moved on from Colt. I DO think the team could have been a little more respectful toward Colt and their plans but really in the end they didn't have to be and the way it played out is well documented.
Colt is likely to get another opportunity this season, it's what he will do with it that will shape his future. All any Browns fan can want to hope for is that Weeden lights it up and we don't have to see Colt behind center this year, if it happens, it happens though. IF it happens, I hope Colt lights it up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I absolutely don't disagree that Colt SHOULD have been more aware.. perhaps he did have some blinders on... I mean considering how the team went after RGIII.. .then taking Weeden... surely Colt should have known that there was a very good chance he wasn't going to be the starter when the season rolled around. I can understand him being a bit miffed that he didn't get a shot to compete for the job like he was promised, but its time for him to get over that and apply himself to being the back-up and waiting his turn... which if history holds, will be soon. When is the last time we had 1 QB start all 16 games in a season? Well Couch did it in 2001... before that Kosar did it in 1991... so it happens about once every 10 years here.... and we already missed 2011... so 2021 is the next chance we have...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
You pretty much summed up my sentiments on the subject.
I lobbied for Weeden before the Draft, but that's not saying I wanted to kick Colt to the curb either. We who have been around the game for awhile could see that he had limitations. I'm thinking so too did the brass.
I think the root of the problem is some fans now have with keeping him around are do to higher expectation, then they otherwise should have had.
I mean how many times was he being compared to Drew Brees by the fans and media alike.
Also with any competitions players are not necessarily going to be playing with the same group (one's two's or three's), but they are still evaluated just the same and many still can win starting jobs too.
I think that Colt needs to come to terms with that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 249
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 249 |
Quote:
IWhen is the last time we had 1 QB start all 16 games in a season? Well Couch did it in 2001... before that Kosar did it in 1991... so it happens about once every 10 years here.... and we already missed 2011... so 2021 is the next chance we have...
A copy from a blog I wrote a few years ago... but this basically sums it up:
We have had 14 (At the time this was written, now with Delhomme, Colt, Seneca and soon to be Weeden, that number is at 17-18) different Quarterbacks start games for us since returning in 1999, of those 14 QB's only THREE have had over 15 starts for us...
Those three?
Tim Couch (Started 16 games in 2001)
Charlie Frye (Started 13 games in 2006)
Derek Anderson (Started 15 games in 2007)
So you're right, Couch was the last QB we've had start a whole seasons worth of games.
Last edited by Enigmatic Evil; 08/09/12 01:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
But the distinction I'm referring to revolves around the odds that a guy like Flynn would have a chance to show his wares versus a guy like McCoy in his situation.
I do see your point about a guy being drafted with a top qb like rogers in place. Your point is a stretch though because we just signed jake. He was supposed to be the vet qb for 2 years while colt developed. Mangini favored vets, and minimal mistakes. While colts chances of getting a shot eventually are certainly way better than flynn's, he was still rushed due to injuries.
Colt had a path to be a starter, I disagree about it being a "golden path". He was going to get a shot AFTER he had time to develop. Flynn got a shot after he had time to develop. There-in lies what I see to be the difference in possible success.
If mccoy was on gb (drafted when flynn was) and had the time that flynn had do you think he might look like a different qb?
If flynn was drafted when we drafted mccoy how do you think he would have turned out?
It entirely possible that mccoy would have got a sweet contract to start, and people would be clamoring to cut flynn, or giving him a "ytown beatdown"
I see where you are coming from when you say 'great hand', i just think players are destined to develop bad habits, or just plain suck in bad situations. Teams need to win, and most often the qb is the one that gets too much blame, as well as too much credit when they win.
Quote:
It wasn't a perfect situation but we gave it to him
We gave him a chance to hit a hole-in-one on a par 3 for millions, and all he ever played was putt-putt. He did get to spend a few days with john daly for some advice though.
Quote:
he got the shot here that he wouldn't have gotten anywhere else. That's all a non-first round QB could ask for.
Your right that most of those guys never get a shot, but flynn did. Cassel did. Hasslebeck did. I'm sure there are others, and I'm sure they are not in the majority either, so you do have a point, but its a stretch to say he "wouldn't" have.
I'll even go so far as to say its a stretch for me to say that given time he would have been better for sure, because as you point out many never get a shot.
I'm not talking players as much as results. I think players have a chance to develop into successful players given time and the right situations, and players that are thrown into bad situations, or before they are ready, are more likely to fail or not get a shot.
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
He was told what the team was planning at the time to keep him as the starter, and at that time (pre-Weeden) it was that Colt WAS going to be the starter again. Aka: He had played well enough to earn the job another season, but clearly not well enough that we weren't above considering alternative options, which we did.
This hits the nail on the head.
Heading into the offseason colt WAS the starter. If anything I think he has a strong desire to succeed, and a work ethic to back it up. Plus i think he has a ton of heart.
I would be willing to bet that in the offseason he worked on what he needed to do better, and maybe he succeeded. There is no way the front offices or coaches said or did anything but tell him what he needed to improve. I'm sure they encouraged this. No way they said your being replaced, and will likely be the backup.
They didn't have the replacement yet.
Then come the rg3 rumors. At this point it still doesn't mean we are absolutely taking a qb. We took a shot and lost. rg3 could have been the only qb available that they thought was an upgrade.
When we failed to get rg3 i'll wager colt worked even harder.
At this point colt is still the starter, and that would have been all we heard out of the front office. They have no other choice.
There were only so many qb's in the draft that the fo felt were upgrades to colt. rg3 and weeden. (luck obviously too)
Weeden could possibly been drafted by someone else, or we could have had that receiver ranked higher, and colt would have been the starter for another year.
I would be aggravated too. Upgraded line, best rb in the draft, and better receivers. He just didn't see the better qb too.
He does need to just get over it, if its even an issue, and not media created. I hope he gets it all sorted out, cause if something happens to weeden, i think he gives us the best chance to win.
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 745
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 745 |
the one thing that the Browns organization has consistanly done since 1999 is that they've try to "catch lightning in a bottle" with their QBs.
they never drafted a QB for long term intentions.
Couch was the perfect QB to the be the face of a new franchise.
but he couldn't grasp a playbook or mentally disect defenses.
Holcomb and Anderson were castoffs from other teams. Ironically the Browns best performances at QB came from these 2.
Delhomme was done. But leave it to Browns to be the only team to guarentee him a starting job.
Garcia came to a dysfunctional culture. But his best days were gone.
The Brady Quinn era was shrouded by ineptness to the 100th power.
Savage out Mangini in. Coordinators out the door.
all that was learned,was unlearned.
McCoy and Frye were the big heart, pop gun arms draft picks.
But Frye will go down as probally one of the worst QB's since the return.
all in all Browns QBs have had short shelf lives for one reason or another.
But now Weeden is experiencing yet another period since 99 where there is a revolving door.
There is no guarentee he will be the starting QB in 2013.
Haslam/Banner have no ties to him. they invested nothing in him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517 |
i would like to state that Tim Couch never had a chance. his o-line was one of the worst in history. and your leading receiver is kevin johnson? and your running back is .... who? i forget. was it james jackson?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
the one thing that the Browns organization has consistanly done since 1999 is that they've try to "catch lightning in a bottle" with their QBs.
they never drafted a QB for long term intentions.
Couch was the perfect QB to the be the face of a new franchise.
but he couldn't grasp a playbook or mentally disect defenses.
Holcomb and Anderson were castoffs from other teams. Ironically the Browns best performances at QB came from these 2.
Delhomme was done. But leave it to Browns to be the only team to guarentee him a starting job.
Garcia came to a dysfunctional culture. But his best days were gone.
The Brady Quinn era was shrouded by ineptness to the 100th power.
Savage out Mangini in. Coordinators out the door.
all that was learned,was unlearned.
McCoy and Frye were the big heart, pop gun arms draft picks.
But Frye will go down as probally one of the worst QB's since the return.
all in all Browns QBs have had short shelf lives for one reason or another.
But now Weeden is experiencing yet another period since 99 where there is a revolving door.
There is no guarentee he will be the starting QB in 2013.
Haslam/Banner have no ties to him. they invested nothing in him.
All of that points to one thing.. we have never tried to build this the right way because we either blew it up in the middle or we tried to do it with recycled QBs. Spend a couple years acquiring good pieces, go get the QB, then go get a couple more pieces. For the first time since Bernie Kosar, I feel like we have finally done that.
That is why so many people are afraid that this new ownership is going to blow it up again.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
All I will say is this:
IF and thats a big IF Weeden looks atrocious this year, looks no different then any other QB we have had here...what will be the excuse then?
I really hope Weeden comes out of fire right off the bat because if he don't....things are going to be very rough for him.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,500
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,500 |
Quote:
however, because of all of the crazy circumstances above and what he has been through, I do believe he can play better. not saying it's good enough to start (though Brady Quinn might get another starting shot this year, so Colt likely will get one at some point somewhere), but he shouldn't be a guy we just dump to get off the team either.
At every position in the NFL, including the QB position you break down the film of games early in the season and compare them to games late in the season. Yes, there were a "few weeks" of training camp missed, but then there was an entire season to show some progress and to learn the system.
That film is a strong indication of a players ability to grasp a new system and whether he progresses in the areas he is struggling in. That's what Colt and every other player is judged on.
And it's a funny thing, Colt may wish to walk away from this situation rather than be a guy we want to "dump".
We may have a chance to get a LB we so desperatly need in a trade for Colt. Him being traded, may not be simply because anyone "dumped" him.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,449
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,449 |
I kinda look at it this way.
Over the last two years we have aquired some good pieces to the puzzle.
If Weeden blows this season, then I think it is safe to say that we will be picking top 5, perhaps even #1, in which case we may be in a good position to grab a highly rated QB prospect.
Additionally, it will be highly probable, that the Shurmmer era, which many of us didn't like in the first place, will be over.
Despite having to watch another season of bad football, all will not be lost if this season goes up in smoke.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Brandon Weeden named starting QB
|
|
