|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,228
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,228 |
With all of these rookies, there's only one realistic expectation. Watch the first four games of this season and compare them to the last four games of his season.
If you don't see marked improvement, this experiment is a failure.
What you have been posting is little more than a message board tantrum.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
I'll keep it simple.
Weeden is better than Wallace...the position was upgraded.
As much as I dislike Wallace and his capabilities, I'm not convinced that Weeden is an upgrade even there. But, let's say that he is, the position that we're talking about is 'starting QB' (since Weeden has been named that and McCoy held that job last year) and not backup QB (which seems to have been upgraded with McCoy this year over Wallace last year). The Magic 8-ball says, 'Try Again'.
Quote:
Weeden is a better option than Hasselback, McNabb, Kold, Flynn et al.
Why? He's younger than only two of them and I'm not sold that he's an upgrade of either one of those who are his elders.
Quote:
Weeden - by most accounts - is better than McCoy. (Yes...some may think that remains to be seen.)
I don't think so and I'm afraid because know that we'll find that out soon enough.
Quote:
It's ok by me that you think McCoy is/will-be better than Weeden. I want McCoy to succeed as a starter in the NFL.
You're right. I do think that McCoy is better than Weeden. I hope to be proven wrong. If Weeden proves that I'm wrong and that I was foolish, I'll gladly be called as such. If Weeden succeeds and the Browns are perennial contenders, then I'll forget McCoy's name.
Quote:
But the FO is 'all-in' with Weeden...and they know a little about the NFL...it's not an unreasonable stance by them to take the shot at Weeden and/or to believe that he is better than McCoy.
The fans overwhelmingly rejected the choice of Weeden when it was made and the comments from the draft had the other teams front offices and fans laughing at the Browns. The write-ups about picking Weeden were all negative. Did this front office really know more than 31 other teams' front offices on Weeden?
CBS Sports comments: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/18843965/grades-2012-nfl-draft-round-1
Fox Sports comments: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Czar-NFL-Draft-grades-per-team-042812
The Bleacher Reports comments: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/11634...ort-card/page/9
TBR upgraded (for preseason) comments: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1317083-re-grading-the-2012-nfl-draft-at-preseasons-end
And the reaction of Browns fans to Richardson's selection: http://www.youtube.com/v/nATIhowlvpQ
And the reaction of Browns fans to Weeden's selection: http://www.youtube.com/v/coJnEpgeFoo
Sorry man, but nobody - and I mean NOBODY, thought that selecting Brandon Weeden was a good idea. I'll say this much, the front office knows jack-diddly-squat about building a winning franchise. They don't know anything. You can be a Holmgren - Heckert - Shurmur apologist all you want, but that isn't going to make Weeden a quality NFL QB in any lifetime.
Weeden had better be the savior of the team, because if he isn't, he'll find himself out of a job next year (and no team will pick him up) and he'll join Holmgren and Heckert and Shurmur holding the same pink slip that he has.
Here are the comments that these morons had in regards to the selection of Weeden: http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x206661218/First-round-stunner-Hecker-picks-quarterback-Brandon-Weeden
You couldn't cover this with enough chocolate to make it palpable without the team making the playoffs, this year, because that's all he'll have and all that the Browns front office will have.
If that weren't enough, incoming owner Jimmy Haslam inquired about it too. It was reported to be the first question he asked. Apparently, judging his own eyes on the matter, that he wasn't convinced about Weeden. I still don't think he is. Anyhow, the link about it: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...on-weeden-play/
So, what gives all you jokers faith that Weeden is worth a damn? Seriously! He'll be gone after this year (if he actually survives unscathed) because the current regime will be replaced from the top down.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
We should put you and Ytown in a padded room, and watch the results.
Me, despite the signature, I will watch a few game even before forming a preliminary opinion.
You're entitled. Take as much time as you can stand before coming to a conclusion. I suspect that it won't be more than a couple of weeks.
As for me, I'm only stating my own opinion on the matter. As for the original topic, I'll stand by my initial statement: Good riddance to bad rubbish.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
With all of these rookies, there's only one realistic expectation. Watch the first four games of this season and compare them to the last four games of his season.
If you don't see marked improvement, this experiment is a failure.
What you have been posting is little more than a message board tantrum.
I'll determine it the easier way. I'll simply tally up the wins and the losses. I truly believe that the losses will tally up to be much more than the wins.
I'll expound on it though. I think that there is a better than 50-50 chance that the Browns will have fewer wins this season that they had last season. Just so everyone is clear about it, I think that the Browns will have fewer than 4 wins.
I would put the chances that they win no more than 2 games at little more than 1 in 3. If they win 3 games, I'll be mildly surprised. If they win 4, I'll be flabbergasted.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288 |
You may be right...you may be wrong. We shall see.
You certainly need to relax a little.
For the sake of the team and its fans, I hope you are wrong and that Weeden becomes the guy that the FO thinks he is... and not the guy that you think he is.
At the time of the draft, I did not want us to take him...at least not there.
Today, I think he WILL be better than McCoy.
Again...we shall see.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,228
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,228 |
Quote:
You're right. I do think that McCoy is better than Weeden.
Which pretty much expains the rant.
Quote:
I hope to be proven wrong.
Since you set such a high standard for success with 15 rookies in the line up, your posts would suggest otherwise. According to what you have stated, no matter how good Weeden looks, if we don't make the playoffs drafting him was a failure, not a success.
Quote:
If Weeden proves that I'm wrong and that I was foolish, I'll gladly be called as such. If Weeden succeeds and the Browns are perennial contenders, then I'll forget McCoy's name.
So let's suppose this OL can keep Weeden standing upright for 13 out of 16 games. Colt started 8 games in 2010 and 13 in 2011. If Weeden looks far better than Colt after 13 starts, will you say you were wrong?
Or are you still insisting it's "playoffs or he's a failure"? See, to know wheather you are wrong or not, first we must know exactly what your definition of wrong is.
Quote:
So, what gives all you jokers faith that Weeden is worth a damn? Seriously! He'll be gone after this year (if he actually survives unscathed) because the current regime will be replaced from the top down.
He has a much better skil set than Colt McCoy. He is an upgrade in terms of overall talent. You keep acting like everyone is calling weeden the second coming?
Not so. Most posts I've seen have said he has the raw talent and skill set to succeed but as with any rookie, we have to see how he develops.
Most of us are in agreement with the FO about Weeden to some extent. McCoy didn't have the skill set to be the answer and we had to move on. Weeden has a superior skill set and has the potential to be very good.
That's all that any rookie has......potential. How he progresses and how develops, how he adjust to the speed on the NFL game, how he adjusts to reading D's and taking advantage of those things is anyone's guess........ Even yours.
And if he is playing well by the end of the season, there is no evidence "he'll be gone" either.
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: 75,228
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,228 |
Quote:
I'll determine it the easier way. I'll simply tally up the wins and the losses. I truly believe that the losses will tally up to be much more than the wins.
Last year we averaged 13.6 points per game I think it was. Somehow we won 4 games with that disturbing number.
So if this year, our O averages 21.4 points per game and still only wins 3 games, you won't consider Weeden and this O better?
Shouldn't putting more points on the board equate to an improved offense? Your defense can be held accountable for losing games just as much as your offense can.
So if this offense averages seven more points per game than last years offense, just because we win the same or fewer games, you still think Weeden and this offense is a failure with all those rookies starting?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
Weeden isn't the only addition to the line up. I would probably say Richardson would have more of an impact on that outcome.
Ppl keep saying we drafted him so they must felt we needed and upgrade. Everybody forgets he was our second choice for 22. You do draft positions for depth and quality. Weeden was a reach. Thera a lot of pressure since he was a first rounder so FO gave him the reigns and I think they are pushing him so quick this year, to see if he has what it takes. And if he can handle it. So they can get who they want next year, if need be. A lot of good qb's coming this year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Which pretty much explains the rant.
Whatever floats your boat. I just don't think that Weeden is now, or ever will be any better than Colt McCoy.
Quote:
Since you set such a high standard for success with 15 rookies in the line up, your posts would suggest otherwise. According to what you have stated, no matter how good Weeden looks, if we don't make the playoffs drafting him was a failure, not a success.
So, 15 rookies will be the new excuse for failure? I'm not going to pretend that 15 rookies on the roster means that the team shouldn't succeed and to accept it as an excuse for failure. You see, you're already expecting a losing season before the games even begin and are creating excuses for it. I'm not. I expect them to succeed. I expect them to win and as a fan, I'm not going to accept more pitiful excuses.
As for Weeden's performance (all of which remains to be seen), if the team sucks canal water again, yeah, I'll consider it not only a failure, but a complete failure. I don't think that Weeden will look good. I don't think he'll look good at all. Will he adjust to it? Maybe. I doubt it though. He didn't do so as a baseball player and failed at it. I fully expect that he'll be the same in the NFL.
Quote:
So let's suppose this OL can keep Weeden standing upright for 13 out of 16 games. Colt started 8 games in 2010 and 13 in 2011. If Weeden looks far better than Colt after 13 starts, will you say you were wrong?
No, because Weeden was drafted in the 1st round and McCoy was selected in the 3rd. Furthermore, McCoy wasn't drafted to be the starter in the first season. Weeden was.
McCoy was supposed to sit and learn behind Delhomme & Wallace (who we've since found out wouldn't - or couldn't - teach McCoy anything). McCoy was thrust into the job in his first NFL season and performed better than the starters that he eventually replaced.
Quote:
Or are you still insisting it's "playoffs or he's a failure"? See, to know wheather you are wrong or not, first we must know exactly what your definition of wrong is.
I'm insisting that Weeden leads the Browns to the playoffs or he's been a complete failure. I'm pretty sure that Haslam isn't going to accept 4, 5, 6 or even 7 wins as enough for Holmgren & Co. to keep their jobs. If the team doesn't win early and often, I fully expect that Holmgren & Co. will be fired before the bye week.
Quote:
He has a much better skill set than Colt McCoy. He is an upgrade in terms of overall talent. You keep acting like everyone is calling weeden the second coming?
Says who? No, I'm not acting like Weeden is the second coming. What I am saying is that Weeden's ability to get wins for the Browns is Holmgren's, Heckert's and Shurmur's only way to keep their jobs. Extending their jobs further than this season will require, in my estimation, that the Browns make the playoffs. Just my take on it. I have serious doubts that he's up to the job. I have serious doubts that he'd be up to the job if this wasn't the NFL but NCAA - Division II or even Division III.
Quote:
Not so. Most posts I've seen have said he has the raw talent and skill set to succeed but as with any rookie, we have to see how he develops.
Who's supposed to develop him? When? Raw talent and skill set? Nick Foles had been lighting it up. Kirk Cousins too! Russell Wilson played lights out in Seattle too! All of them were drafted well after Weeden, are much younger than Weeden and all of them are BETTER than Weeden.
Quote:
Most of us are in agreement with the FO about Weeden to some extent. McCoy didn't have the skill set to be the answer and we had to move on. Weeden has a superior skill set and has the potential to be very good.
You see though, the Browns front office isn't even 'moving on' from McCoy. He's the backup to Weeden. McCoy is one injury or horrible start to the season away from being the Browns starting QB.
Still using the "skill set" garbage. I haven't seen this "skill set" that you're talking about and I'm not sure about this "potential" either. I think Weeden's potential is closer to Chris Weinke than to anyone else.
Quote:
That's all that any rookie has......potential. How he progresses and how develops, how he adjust to the speed on the NFL game, how he adjusts to reading D's and taking advantage of those things is anyone's guess........ Even yours.
And if he is playing well by the end of the season, there is no evidence "he'll be gone" either.
I'd take almost any other rookie in the 2012 NFL draft over Weeden.
Sure, if you want to go there, about how Weeden reacts to those aspects of the NFL game, but some guesses are more accurate than others.
If Weeden is "playing well" by the end of the season, it won't matter unless it translates into wins. Besides all that, who are you expecting will be teaching him these things? The Browns coaching staff or the defense of opposing teams? The latter, from what I can ascertain, will be the ones teaching Weeden (or any other Browns QB) how to be an NFL QB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'll determine it the easier way. I'll simply tally up the wins and the losses. I truly believe that the losses will tally up to be much more than the wins.
Last year we averaged 13.6 points per game I think it was. Somehow we won 4 games with that disturbing number.
So if this year, our O averages 21.4 points per game and still only wins 3 games, you won't consider Weeden and this O better?
Shouldn't putting more points on the board equate to an improved offense? Your defense can be held accountable for losing games just as much as your offense can.
So if this offense averages seven more points per game than last years offense, just because we win the same or fewer games, you still think Weeden and this offense is a failure with all those rookies starting?
I don't care if we average 2 points a game if the opposing teams average fewer points per game.
Also, you have a huge 'qualified' IF in your statement. To answer it, the answer is NO. We have to improve the number of wins, because that's all they play for. They don't play the games to determine who has better stats. They play them to determine which team wins.
So, now, if the Browns lose games and the defense is the one that let up the winning points, they are now the scapegoats? Well, that's enlightening! Could be that the defense let up more points than the offense scored all these years where the Browns have had losing seasons with the cavalcade of QBs that started the games.
I'll consider Weeden a failure because he can't get the job done. In my opinion, will he responsible for it? Probably not. He should never have been drafted #22 overall and the coaching staff and front office have been total failures as well. I'll have considered that he didn't have the skills to do it and that he was set up for failure by the failure of those that brought him to Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,683
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,683 |
War and Peace is a shorter read than your diatribe on this thread.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
So that's the reasoning that you're going to use to make yourself feel better about another crappy season.
No, that's the reason why your unrealistic expectations are so outlandish.
Quote:
I don't think it's unrealistic at all to expect the playoffs.
That's pretty much the definition of unrealistic as it pertains to a team with 15 rookies making the roster, including the starting QB and RB.
Quote:
Oh, the Browns will be that bad.
Then you have a dilemma: Temper your expectations or admit much of this is a horse-and-pony show to shovel dirt on Weeden and the FO.
It's a free country. You don't have to hide behind semantics and a podium-banging show to state you think the entire thing should be wiped clean and a new regime brought in.
I certainly haven't with my criticism of Holmgren and Lerner before he did us all a favor and bailed out, and I certainly don't need an excuse to state I think we reached badly on Weeden.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
How is it unrealistic to expect the playoffs in the third year if this regime? 2nd for the coach. They are the ones who have all these rookies n the 3rd year of a 5 year rebuild. That's their choice. But being 3 of 5, I would expect the team to be pushing the playoff picture. And in two more, pushing super owl contention. H&H have brought some talent here, but I also question many moves/passes that they did or didn't do. I.e we could of picked up Decastro at 22 and still gotten Weeden in the 2nd. Or Russel/Cousins who I've said all along I thought was better and no age issues.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 560 |
Quote:
we could of picked up Decastro at 22 and still gotten Weeden in the 2nd. Or Russel/Cousins who I've said all along I thought was better and no age issues.
I would not feel more comfortable with Decastro and Russell/Cousins. I think you watched too many preseason games. Let's see how Wilson does in the regular season.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
Wilson will do fine. He's a winner.
But we could of very easily took decastro and moved lavao or pinkston to tackle. They both played tackle b4. Or picked up FA. I thnk that line would of been better inside and in depth. Then maybe, just maybe we could cut O. Cousins.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
War and Peace is a shorter read than your diatribe on this thread.
If you're going to read something that long, you should pick up Atlas Shrugged instead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
No, that's the reason why your unrealistic expectations are so outlandish.
Sounds like an excuse for expected failure to me.
Quote:
That's pretty much the definition of unrealistic as it pertains to a team with 15 rookies making the roster, including the starting QB and RB.
Sounds like more excuses. There is only one group of people able to come us with more excuses for their failures, the Obama administration.
Quote:
Then you have a dilemma: Temper your expectations or admit much of this is a horse-and-pony show to shovel dirt on Weeden and the FO.
I won't temper my expectations and I'll admit that it's shoveling dirt on the front office. I don't blame Weeden at all. He's completely unprepared for what's he's being asked to do.
Quote:
It's a free country. You don't have to hide behind semantics and a podium-banging show to state you think the entire thing should be wiped clean and a new regime brought in.
I'm not hiding behind semantics. I want this regime gone and I think it's abundantly clear. I think that Haslam will replace them anyway and Holmgren might be gone as soon as Haslam has the deed to the team in his possession.
Quote:
I certainly haven't with my criticism of Holmgren and Lerner before he did us all a favor and bailed out, and I certainly don't need an excuse to state I think we reached badly on Weeden.
Drafting Weeden, especially where he was selected and making him the starting QB, was a disaster for the Browns season. What you're making the excuses for are the anticipation for another disastrous season for the Browns. You fully expect another disaster this season and using the '15 rookies' as the excuse. All I'm doing is not accepting that excuse from you or anyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
How is it unrealistic to expect the playoffs in the third year if this regime?
Don't lose sight of exactly what is being discussed here.
There is a fundamental difference between defining where a team should be in the third year of it's existence under one President and what the expected number of wins should be given X-amount talent which exists.
Example:
Fact: In the third year of regime I find it unacceptable to be anything less than a .500 team.
Fact: With 15 rookies and some 12 more players who will be in their second year, I find it exceedingly unrealistic to expect a .500 winning percentage.
Two VERY different conversations.
***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: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
I'm not hiding behind semantics. I want this regime gone and I think it's abundantly clear.
So it took 25,000 words and 42 posts for you to finally say that. "Abundantly clear" isn't exactly the term I'd have used. It just took a bunch of prodding for you to actually say it.
See...was that so hard? 
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Quote:
How is it unrealistic to expect the playoffs in the third year if this regime?
Don't lose sight of exactly what is being discussed here.
There is a fundamental difference between defining where a team should be in the third year of it's existence under one President and what the expected number of wins should be given X-amount talent which exists.
Example:
Fact: In the third year of regime I find it unacceptable to be anything less than a .500 team.
Fact: With 15 rookies and some 12 more players who will be in their second year, I find it exceedingly unrealistic to expect a .500 winning percentage.
Two VERY different conversations.
You bet your bottom dollar they are.
Trouble is is that some (a few) here can't separate the two.
Having said that (if) we had gone the more traditional route, then I could see them having a real beef.
Since we have chosen to build with the bottom up approach, then 'realistically' it's going to take a little longer, but one that might/should see us with a more sustainable course moving forward.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,683
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,683 |
Quote:
Quote:
War and Peace is a shorter read than your diatribe on this thread.
If you're going to read something that long, you should pick up Atlas Shrugged instead.
Not really much into fantasy like you.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,228
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,228 |
Thanks for proving that no matter how good Weeden plays, you'll still call him a failure. Even if he puts a lot more points on the board and the D loses the game, you will call Weeden a failure. Even if he improves over the season you will call him a failure. You base that he's "worse" on pre season only. You have your mind made up already and you are jaded and determined to call him a failure. I really appreciate your respone because it has shown everyone your true colors and total lack of objectivity concerning Weeden. Carry on...... 
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not hiding behind semantics. I want this regime gone and I think it's abundantly clear.
So it took 25,000 words and 42 posts for you to finally say that. "Abundantly clear" isn't exactly the term I'd have used. It just took a bunch of prodding for you to actually say it.
See...was that so hard?
I didn't think that it had to be stated. It was obvious to everyone but an ignoramus. And, no, I'm not accusing anyone of being one or calling anyone names. If it wasn't obvious to any specific person here, then I can't help that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,007
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,007 |
Quote:
It was obvious to everyone but an ignoramus. And, no, I'm not accusing anyone of being one or calling anyone names.
Nice way to contradict yourself. If someone doesn't see it your way they are an ignoramus. Nice.....
Joe Thomas #73
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Don't lose sight of exactly what is being discussed here.
There is a fundamental difference between defining where a team should be in the third year of it's existence under one President and what the expected number of wins should be given X-amount talent which exists.
Example:
Fact: In the third year of regime I find it unacceptable to be anything less than a .500 team.
Fact: With 15 rookies and some 12 more players who will be in their second year, I find it exceedingly unrealistic to expect a .500 winning percentage.
Two VERY different conversations.
I don't think that you can necessarily separate the two.
Fact #1: If it was Holmgren's plan to bring in his own guy, then why did he let Mangini remain? Mangini should have been fired. Holmgren admitted that this was a mistake that set the team back. Mistake #1.
Facts #2 and #3: When Mangini was released, the decision was Holmgren's to hire Pat Shurmur, nobody else's and he referred to last year as 'the second first year'. It was also Holmgren's decision to allow Shurmur to go the initial season without hiring an OC and for Shurmur to make the calls himself. Holmgren admitted this too! Mistakes #2 and #3.
Fact #4: Holmgren stated, upon Mangini's firing, that one of the reasons was that 5 wins was not enough and that we'd win more games in 2012. The team won four games and that is now magically enough wins? Mistake #4
Fact #5: It was Holmgren's job, through Shurmur, to get rid of players that can't cut the grade. Why is Massaquoi still on the team? Mistake #5
Fact #6: A Cleveland comic made a video posted on Youtube referring to the stadium as a 'Factory of Sadness' and fans (including myself) had a laugh because it's all we can do.
This team is in shambles, from the front office down to the field, and we're expected to care about the product they put forth. Some of us have had enough. We're hopeful that Haslam clears things up - but I think it's another lost year and that he's going to take it as such and use it to evaluate who he wants to bring in as the next GM and the next HC.
Let's face it - this team will be lucky to win 4 games next year. Holmgren may be gone before the ink dries on the contract that transfers ownership officially to Jimmy Haslam. Heckert will likely follow his boss out the door (maybe as soon as the same time) and Shurmur will probably be gone before New Years' Day, even if he makes it through the season. The season ends Dec. 30, 2012, barring a miraculous playoff appearance.
We'll be starting off fresh next season and we could see many (not necessarily all) of the new pieces (yeah, those 15 rookies) you see now gone before the 2013 season begins or in diminished roles on the next team.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
War and Peace is a shorter read than your diatribe on this thread.
If you're going to read something that long, you should pick up Atlas Shrugged instead.
Not really much into fantasy like you.
Not sure if you knew this but War & Peace was a piece of historical fiction, so maybe you are into "fantasy" after all. Are you sure you're not mixing your genres and sub-genres?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Thanks for proving that no matter how good Weeden plays, you'll still call him a failure.
Can we wait until he's accomplished something? My measure of whether he's a failure is going to be different from yours (and everyone else's on this message board). It seems to me that you're defending Weeden before he's accomplished anything.
Quote:
Even if he puts a lot more points on the board and the D loses the game, you will call Weeden a failure.
If, if, if? Maybe Weeden gets sacked, fumbles the ball deep in Browns territory and the Browns D is back on their heels trying to keep opposing teams to 3 points. I've seen that a few times in the preseason while Weeden was in the games.
In my view, Weeden isn't even nearly ready for the NFL.
Quote:
Even if he improves over the season you will call him a failure.
Improves from what? Where he began? Maybe you'll be able to blame it on Schwartz going down with an injury or Thomas or one of his key targets or Richardson's knee will blow up. Give it a rest. We'll get our chance to see what he can do in less than a week.
Quote:
You base that he's "worse" on pre season only.
I base it on his performance in the preseason, his age, his immobility, the talent level around him, the head coach, the front office, the fans, the man peddling beers down the aisles.
Quote:
You have your mind made up already and you are jaded and determined to call him a failure.
I'm certainly more skeptical than you are about Weeden's abilities. I didn't want him drafted at #22 or anywhere else but the front office, which are more intelligent than I am (but not so of the other 31 teams in the NFL, which laughed at them).
Tell me, how many wins are predicted to be won by the Browns this season? I know, these mean next to nothing, but it gives you an idea of what's expected of the Browns.
CBS Sports: 4-12 (link)
ESPN: 1-15 (link)
TSN: 4-12 (link)
Of course, there is an anomaly among the group.
WhatIfSports: 7-9 (link)
Quote:
I really appreciate your response because it has shown everyone your true colors and total lack of objectivity concerning Weeden.
Objectivity? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
It was obvious to everyone but an ignoramus. And, no, I'm not accusing anyone of being one or calling anyone names.
Nice way to contradict yourself. If someone doesn't see it your way they are an ignoramus. Nice.....
Not quite. If someone can't see that I'm not a fan of the Browns front office, then they're an ignoramus. What would have to happen? Would they actually have to be hit in the face with a newspaper for it to finally register that I don't like them?
Pay attention! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Just for clarification, why do you not like the front office?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692 |
Quote:
Wilson will do fine. He's a winner.
But we could of very easily took decastro and moved lavao or pinkston to tackle. They both played tackle b4. Or picked up FA. I thnk that line would of been better inside and in depth. Then maybe, just maybe we could cut O. Cousins.
This right here. Line would be in better shape and whomever was behind center or in the backfield would have had an easier time against this gauntlet of a schedule. But we have Weeden now to blame for our woes now. I hope he can take criticism from media and fans of Cleveland! 
If Weeden can survive his own growing pains (literally behind this line) and going through another front office change next year with most likely a new system brought in (God, I hope  the West Coast offense sucks!) then he's a keeper! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692 |
Quote:
Just for clarification, why do you not like the front office?
I can answer this one! 
When Mike Holmgren gets involved with player acquisition, hardly any good can become of it. He sucked as an executive in Seattle and I don't see any improvement. Just because you are a good HC doesn't make you a great evaluator of talent. I think we all hated the selection of Pat Shurmur as head coach. While Heckert is the best GM we've had in a long time, I think he folds sometimes to Holmgren's desires (i.e. McCoy/Weeden). Don't get me started in Shurmur either! LOL. That man has the worst game management I've seen from a HC. I hope for the sake of going through another blowup from the FO down that he show's some resemblance of game preparation, play calling (as he won't let go of that hat), and management with his players.
I'm good now! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
When Mike Holmgren gets involved with player acquisition, hardly any good can become of it. He sucked as an executive in Seattle
and yet nearly the entire offense for the Seattle SB team was Holmgren drafted or brought in.
he just ignored or whiffed on defense. well, he's not the one putting his hand in on defense, is he?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Not really the greatest example. That offense was 99% Shaun Alexander having an MVP season, and while its true that he was drafted during Holmgren's time as GM, getting 1st round picks right in the NFL draft is akin to spelling your name correctly on a math test: if you can't do it, you probably don't have any business being there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
If Weeden sucks that bad, why does it matter who the fanbase is clamoring for?
Hot mess QB contraversy in Cleveland no later than week four.
PM me if you'd like to wager...
Only from the unknowing and talk boy radio fan base. Real fans I highly doubt it we will be sitting here preaching stay the course like always.
So Ill take your bet no PM needed
Condition 1- Weeden looks like a rookie should look like
Condition 2- People here are calling for him to be replaced by week 4 by either of our back up QB's
Condition 3 - Not talking about the du masses on the air waves I dont listen to them anymore they are only about causing a stir. Im talking here.
Condition 4- we can both make a game together.
If we can meet those conditions then yeah Im in if I lose Ill buy the tickets if you lose you buy the tickets.
Gentlemans bet taken.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
But, Nick, Pit is no gentleman
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
But, Nick, Pit is no gentleman
Lol fun as I sit here and listen to Robin Trower Bridge of Sighs. Time for some buddy guy. 
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692 |
Quote:
Not really the greatest example. That offense was 99% Shaun Alexander having an MVP season, and while its true that he was drafted during Holmgren's time as GM, getting 1st round picks right in the NFL draft is akin to spelling your name correctly on a math test: if you can't do it, you probably don't have any business being there.
Exactly. I find it very difficult to miss on a RB pick in the first round. Missing on a QB in the first round is entirely different because of variables that determine a QB's success outside of ability (i.e. the team around him). I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see Weeden succeeding this year at all. He will fumble a lot, take a lot of sacks, and throw a lot of picks because of a poor OL.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
Not really the greatest example. That offense was 99% Shaun Alexander having an MVP season, and while its true that he was drafted during Holmgren's time as GM, getting 1st round picks right in the NFL draft is akin to spelling your name correctly on a math test: if you can't do it, you probably don't have any business being there.
Exactly. I find it very difficult to miss on a RB pick in the first round. Missing on a QB in the first round is entirely different because of variables that determine a QB's success outside of ability (i.e. the team around him). I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see Weeden succeeding this year at all. He will fumble a lot, take a lot of sacks, and throw a lot of picks because of a poor OL.
well, he also drafted Hutch, brought in Hasselbeck, D-Jax, Engram, etc. That offense was Holmgren's baby. I love how he gets no credit for building a SB capable NFL offense around here like it's just an easy thing to do.
and, 1st round RBs don't always become Shaun Alexander. wish it did after drafting Richardson but:
2011 Mark Ingram
2010 Spiller, Mathews, Best
2009 Moreno, D.Brown, Wells
2008 McFadden, Stewart, Felix Jones, Mendenhall, *Chris Johnson
2007 *A.Peterson, Lynch (might be the best class on this list)
2006 R.Bush, Deangelo, Maroney, Addai
2005 R.Brown, Benson, Cadillac
2004 *S-Jax, C.Perry, K.Jones
2003 McGahee, Larry Johnson
2002 William Green, TJ Duckett
*had a season approaching Shaun Alexanders 2004/05 season (or surpassing).
That is 3 RBs out of 28 RBs drafted in the 1st round the past 10yrs. Another 5-6 would be considered okay to pretty good RBs too, but that still leaves a pretty high bust rate even for 1st round RBs.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
Curious - Of all the season's that Alexander played why did you choose the 2004/2005 season? How do his stats from that year compare to his season averages?
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
well, he also drafted Hutch, brought in Hasselbeck, D-Jax, Engram, etc. That offense was Holmgren's baby. I love how he gets no credit for building a SB capable NFL offense around here like it's just an easy thing to do.
Hasselbeck, Jackson and Engram were all average to slightly above average players (and Jackson missed most of the 2005 season).
I'm not giving him "no credit". I'm just saying that Shaun Alexander is the primary reason they had the season that they did in 2005. I'm also saying that hitting on first-round draft picks doesn't make one a great evaluator of talent. Getting production from late-round licks and UDFAs, along with judicious use of trades and free agency, does.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns part with Seneca Wallace
|
|
