|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189 |
OK. The Josh McDaniels to the Browns as head coach rumors are out there. Now comes this: http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnor...ecome-browns-next-qbHonestly I find Mallett intriguing. First off he was drafted by the Patriots. That alone is a strong credential. I have major respect for Belichick. In addition Mallett has demonstrated that he has every physical ability needed. Although mobility is hardly a strong suit. What scared most off Mallett in the draft in a best case scenario could be nothing more than maturity. After watching Brady and learning under Belichick for two years he may have ripened on the vine. Worst case maybe he is a head case. However, I would doubt he would have remained on the Pat's roster if he did not show value over the last two years. At this point I do not want to discuss Josh McDaniels. Other than saying if he was the brain behind drafting Tim Tebow in the first round; his brain may be a concern. For right now looking at the options at quarterback it is clear to me the Browns have to bring in more competition for the position. To put the future of the team solely in the hands of Brandon Weeden would be a colossal mistake. Mallett's skill set and his two years of grooming are attractive. Other options include Alex Smith and the draft. Smith is an upgrade over Weeden but there are reasons behind the quarterback decisions SF has made. I really like Tyler Wilson in this years draft but of course he would be a rookie and all draft picks and rookies have risk and a learning curve. Changes are coming. And I believe there will be changes at quarterback.
Last edited by Referee 3; 12/20/12 06:26 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,620
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,620 |
What are you willing to give up for Mallett?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
What are you willing to give up for Mallett?
Brandon Weeden.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
No no no no no no no no no no. I'd rather bring back Tim Couch than trade for Ryan Mallet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189 |
Found this and thought it was interesting:
Patriots backup quarterback Ryan Mallett often flies under the radar, but he is making progress behind the scenes.
This week, Mallett was named one of the team's practice players of the week, which is awarded to those the coaching staff feels best prepared the team in the days leading up to a victory. Mallett joined running back Shane Vereen, safety Derrick Martin and defensive lineman Brandon Deaderick to earn the honor.
On Tuesday, head coach Bill Belichick was asked about Mallett's second season.
"Relative to last year, he’s taken all of the scout team reps that last year he was basically splitting with Brian Hoyer. So, that has given him a lot more opportunity there to take snaps and also to have command of that group and run that offense on a weekly basis and the other guys that are used there. On the opportunities that he’s had to work with the regular offense and again, certainly those have been more frequent too because of his role, when he’s taken plays in there for Tom [Brady] that it’s just given him more experience and more opportunity to run our plays so he’s not always just running the other team’s plays which is the way it was last year. At least this year he’s getting more plays on the scout team and also plays with our offense. I think all those things have helped him. He’s been out there every day, he’s working hard. I guess fortunately for us he hasn’t had to play but I’m confident that if he had to, he’s taken the steps he needs to be ready to go."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189 |
The next question is what does NE want for him??
==================================================
That indeed is a question to ponder.
Mallett's trade value is not an easy question to answer.
A Third rounder with virtually no real game experience outside of pre-season.
Trades are negotiations that begin with an interest from one side and then trying to find what the other side would find acceptable. Maybe it could get done with some combination of draft pick and or players. Hard to say.
At the end of the day the question becomes can Mallett be "the guy"? If it is determined by the new regime that they believe he can be then make it happen.
For me I have seen enough of Weeden. It is nothing personal. He seems like a nice guy. However, I thought he was a reach in the draft. And he has done nothing to make me feel like he can lead a team to a championship. When you break down his performance this year his inabilities are obvious. The worst part for me is I just really doubt that he capable of making the needed corrections.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,447
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,447 |
Wow ! .. I absolutely , positively , have to hear your reasoning for such a statement ??
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
I'm not a huge Mallet fan. I think that he has abbout the same upside as Weeden does ... but I don't think that he's that good right now ...... so I see no need to trade for another of what we already have.
I recall Mallet being quite inconsistent in college. He was inaccurate. Yippee.
Belichick is not perfect as far as drafting. He typically just builds up so many draft picks via trades that he can make mistakes filing the few holes he has each year that his drafting looks better than it might actually be.
Belichick drafted Matt Cassell in the 5th round of the 2005 draft. He drafted Kevin O'Connell in the 3rd round in 2008. He drafted Kliff Kingsbury back in 2003. He drafted Rohan Davey in the 4th round of the 2002 draft. He drafted Tom Brady back in 2000.
He's had one huge success, (and I'm not 100% certain if he was in place in time to draft Brady back in 2000) He had Matt Cassell, who did a good job for the Pats, then a couple of decent years in KC, (and who should be a cautionary tale for those thinking of trading high picks for a guy like Cousins) and then he drafted a couple of 3rd rounders who filled the backup role for a couple of years ...then left. People were enthused about the Pats other backup, Brian Hoyer, at times as well. He was a street free agent recently signed by the Steelers.
Mallet was unimpressive in the backup role in this pre-season.
Against the Saints he went 8-19 for 89 yards with an INT.
Against the Eagles he went 10-20 for 105 yards and a TD.
Against the Bucs, he went 7-13 for 66 yards and 2 TD.
Against the Giants, he went 8-15 for 40 yards.
That's a pretty unimpressive performance against backup players. Hoyer had a similarly bad pre-season, which is probably why they kept Mallet, who they drafted.
Bill Belichick also generally doesn't give away talent, so if Mallet hits the open market, I would be concerned. Just me $0.02.
Bleh.
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: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Bill Belichick also generally doesn't give away talent, so if Mallet hits the open market, I would be concerned.
Belichick loves him some draft picks though. Giving up a back-up QB for a decent draft pick? I think Bill would do it in a second... I'm not saying which pick we should offer him, if any at all, just saying that Bill loves to amass draft picks.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189 |
Mallett was pretty good in college his last year 63.6% with 33 TD 3int's.
If the whole Josh McDaniels happens he would have had direct first hand experience with Mallett.
I have no idea if this all has traction. What I do know is that competition has to be brought in to compete with Weeden.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,632
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,632 |
What have we learned about former patriot players over and over and over again? There's been a few notable exceptions but generally the Patriots give their players a very limited scope to work with and master and they hone them into perfect role players within that specific system. And once they bounce out to a new team with a less engineered or more undefined role... they don't do nearly as well. Like I said, there's been some notable exceptions but the beauty of the Patriots' system is the system. Players are somewhat plug and play after they've been coached into the role.
Any QB's going to go to a new team, with new owner, new front office, new coaches, new playbook, new every-dam-thing is going to find it very tough. Who ever you go with had better be very bright and very stable. Any QB we choose for next year is guaranteed to have a "very challenging" year. As much as I don't think Weeden gets us to the promise land he's bright and stable and one less change in a sea of change that's going to be 2013.
"Team Chemistry No Match for Team Biology" (Onion Sports Headline)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861 |
I'm not at all sure why the pats would trade him at all. If they think that highly of him an knowing that Brady is 36,, wouldn't that be kinda dumb? Just wondering.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
I agree. The only thing Mallett has going for him over Weeden is age. Their game is almost identical.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Disagree with the idea that Weeden's game is the same as Mallett. Despite being a big palooka, Mallett is actually pretty mobile for his size and throws well on the run.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
The only thing Mallett has going for him over Weeden is age.
Isn't that a huge advantage? Mallett is a full five years younger than Weeden. So let's do some simple math, five years from right now Ryan Mallet will be as old as Brandon Weeden currently is. Brandon Weeden will be 34.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
I wanted to compare Ryan Mallet and Brandon Weeden coming out of the draft. The only reliable profile I could find for Mallett was from NFL.com. I got Weeden's from CBS Sports. Mallett: Quote:
Mallett has the arm strength and size of a franchise NFL quarterback but still needs to continue to develop his accuracy and decision-making consistency. Can drive the ball down field and hit the deep out. When drop mechanics are sound, shows the ability to stick the ball into tiny windows. Has played in pro-style systems and understands reads and progressions but is still prone to taking some risks. Release is natural and over-the-top. Exhibits leadership qualities on the field but front offices will want to further investigate his character and ability to take coaching. Mallett's a really enticing package and will likely come off the board in round one.
STRENGTHS
Mallett possesses prototypical size. Has elite arm strength and can make all the throws. Displays smooth mechanics. Fluid, over-the-top delivery. Will fit the ball into tight spots and shows good overall accuracy. Has experience in the pro-style passing game. Good pocket mobility, can buy second chances and keeps his head down field. Fierce competitor and can command the huddle.
WEAKNESSES
Flashes the ability to run through progressions but has lapses in judgment and can force throws when pressured. Accuracy is solid but needs to become more consistent. Ball will sail when footwork gets sloppy. Does not have the athleticism to pick up much yardage with his feet at the next level. Potential maturity/character issues.
It's hard to tell if this is accurate or not because Mallett hasn't played yet in a real NFL game.
Weeden:
Quote:
Positives: Sticks throws into tight windows over the middle, throwing to spot on slant or between zone defenders before receiver is open. Baseball pitcher background translates to NFL arm strength. Sprays the ball anywhere on the field, especially when given a pocket from which to deliver. Shows touch on fades and shorter throws and doesn't overthrow passes to open receivers. Will step up into pocket while looking downfield, reset his feet and deliver. Tough player who takes a hit and bounces back up; played most of the 2010 season with a ruptured tendon in his right (throwing) thumb. Team leader on the practice and game fields.
Negatives: Sails throws to either sideline; receivers make him look good with acrobatic catches. Back-foot throws are not accurate. Sometimes trusts his arm too much, trying to stick passes late in the play or when he is off-balance. Gets lazy with footwork at times; will flip balls into dangerous places. Pats the ball before throwing. Almost always works out of shotgun formation on passing plays. Fails to see blitzers, opening himself up to backside pressure. Tries to avoid pressure by throwing late over the middle. Old for a rookie at 28.
Whoever wrote that deserves a raise.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
I don't ever remember him being mobile. I believe he ran in the 5's at the combine. He is a pure pocket passer from what I remember of him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
He ran a 5.37 at the combine if anyone was curious.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,401
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,401 |
We should definitely get him. I mean, backup quarterbacks from New England always work out, right?
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
j/K
So tired of this type of BS,
Nothing against Mallet, dont want him here, would rather have a Alex Smith
What blows my mind is there is Thousands of coaches scouts player evaluators making good money, some Millions a year and nobody can figure out a way to evaluate a QB, How many has this franchine missed on...but every year we start looking for the next cant miss QB, it's incredible,
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Basing everything we know off of one player is probably not the best way to evaluate things.
Mallett had first round talent, but people had character concerns with him. I don't know if he is the answer to our quarterbacking woes, but he should at least get a look if we hire McDaniels.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
Mcdaniels has done a lot more with Qb's than Schurmur has ever done. I would be ok getting the guy, but I would still keep Weeden, and let the 2 battle it out in camp. I give Weeden a C this year, he has really struggled the past 8 games. But I think it's too early to give up on him. He does have some ability in the right scheme.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
i see no difference b/w the 2 other than we've seen one start in the league and the other hasn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Quote:
Mcdaniels has done a lot more with Qb's than Schurmur has ever done. I would be ok getting the guy, but I would still keep Weeden, and let the 2 battle it out in camp. I give Weeden a C this year, he has really struggled the past 8 games. But I think it's too early to give up on him. He does have some ability in the right scheme.
No offense, but other than Brady, what other QB has McDaniels had who has had any kind of long term success?
McDaniels wanted Tebow badly, and we see how that turned out. Gee, maybe Tebow will be available so we can get him anyway ......... 
He really doesn't give me any real reason to be excited about him possibly becoming head coach here.
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: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189 |
This is a pretty simple equation the Browns need to bring someone in to compete with Weeden. They can not and will not just let things lie where they are. Weeden is not a sure thing even if you are an optimist.
Quite simply they can not afford to go down the Weeden road without a backup plan.
You can not invest three years into this guy and come to realize he is not what you thought he was. Can you say Mark Sanchez?
I am more than sure that Banner and Haslam are looking at this the same way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,401
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,401 |
I'll start out with saying I don't want McDaniels in the slightest.
But what he did with Orton was undoubtedly impressive.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861 |
Quote:
Quote:
Mcdaniels has done a lot more with Qb's than Schurmur has ever done. I would be ok getting the guy, but I would still keep Weeden, and let the 2 battle it out in camp. I give Weeden a C this year, he has really struggled the past 8 games. But I think it's too early to give up on him. He does have some ability in the right scheme.
No offense, but other than Brady, what other QB has McDaniels had who has had any kind of long term success?
McDaniels wanted Tebow badly, and we see how that turned out. Gee, maybe Tebow will be available so we can get him anyway .........
He really doesn't give me any real reason to be excited about him possibly becoming head coach here.
The only QB besides Brady that he's had success with was Kyle Orten. And that wasn't over the top success.
he wanted tebow, he traded for Quinn.. Why would we want this guy?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
Quote:
Quote:
Mcdaniels has done a lot more with Qb's than Schurmur has ever done. I would be ok getting the guy, but I would still keep Weeden, and let the 2 battle it out in camp. I give Weeden a C this year, he has really struggled the past 8 games. But I think it's too early to give up on him. He does have some ability in the right scheme.
No offense, but other than Brady, what other QB has McDaniels had who has had any kind of long term success?
McDaniels wanted Tebow badly, and we see how that turned out. Gee, maybe Tebow will be available so we can get him anyway .........
He really doesn't give me any real reason to be excited about him possibly becoming head coach here.
Orton and Cassel. Both of those guys had career years under Josh.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Mobility is different than straight line speed. Speed demon he is not, but he moves in the pocket nicely, scrambles at appropriate times and can make plays with his feet...albeit maybe not the most swiftly.
I think this is a moot point regardless as this whole rumor is likely without much justification. Patriots arent likely to trade him for anything cheap. The QB crop this year will not be worth where we're picking in the first round so at the very most, we may see the Browns pick up a mid-late round QB and see an open competition with Weeden, McCoy and a lightly regarded rook....to which Weeden will likely win.
Sit back and hope for improvement kids. The Weed is around at least one more season.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Kyle Orton, in his final year in Chicago, threw for almost 3000 yards, 58.5% completion %, and 18 TD/12 INT. His career year the following year in Denver, he threw for 3800 yards, 62.12% completion %, 21 TD/12 INT. Hiw yards per attempt did go up a fair amount, (0.7 yards/attempt) but that was really his biggest area of improvement, and I think that he would have made a similar improvement if he had stayed in Chicago. I don't think that McDaniels had as much to do with Orton's improvement as him having a 2nd largely injury free year in a row as a starting QB did. Orton's rookie year was OK, then he had a couple of years where he traded places with Grossman, and Griese, IIRC. I think that he had some injuries in there as well. I wouldn't overestmate the effect McDaniels had on him. I think that he was already on a path to being a fairly decent QB. As far as his effect on a guy like Brady, I would be hard pressed to look at Brady's numbers and see where McDaniels coached him, and where he didn't. As far as Cassel ..... he had a better year in KC in his 6th year than he did in New England in his 4th year. He did look pretty good in New England though .. for a while anyway. I do have to wonder how much of that was McDaniels, and how much was Belichick performing whatever rituals and sacrifices he performs to make things work.  I'm still not sold on McDaniels. If he winds up here I'll hope for the best, but I'll plan on seeing us change coaches in another 3 or 4 years .......
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: 6,447
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,447 |
You and I must be the young mans only supporters .. I watched him all through College and thought he could make it in the NFL if he landed with the right team ( He did ) .. He is Mobile , and has a cannon arm with a fairly decent release speed .. The ONY reason he droped in the draft was because or Character and maturity issues ! Tough Kid !
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
I think your talking about footwork in the pocket. Tom Brady ran a similar time, but has great feet in the pocket. If that's what you're talking about, that's fine. But I don't think you will see this guy rolling out of the pocket. He's a pocket quarterback, with very little mobility to scramble.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Mcdaniels has done a lot more with Qb's than Schurmur has ever done. I would be ok getting the guy, but I would still keep Weeden, and let the 2 battle it out in camp. I give Weeden a C this year, he has really struggled the past 8 games. But I think it's too early to give up on him. He does have some ability in the right scheme.
No offense, but other than Brady, what other QB has McDaniels had who has had any kind of long term success?
McDaniels wanted Tebow badly, and we see how that turned out. Gee, maybe Tebow will be available so we can get him anyway .........
He really doesn't give me any real reason to be excited about him possibly becoming head coach here.
Orton and Cassel. Both of those guys had career years under Josh.
Where's Orton now,, Cassel lost his job to Quinn
What that proves is he's a solid OC. but as a HC and decision maker on players, he leaves a ton to be desired..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
Well if he comes here, hopefully other guys will be picking the players, so he could worry about coaching and developing players.
I have nothing against Schurmur, and the rest, but those guys are long gone. I expect them to all be fired black monday.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Watch some of his film. He is a pocket QB but is great rolling out and gunning it on the run.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
j/c
A few notes.
People keep mocking McDaniels for the Tebow pick. And all that guy did was go in and win a playoff game. We have any QBs do that lately? (Note: not an indightment to get Tebow)
People mock McDaniels for his player selections. He's not going to selecting players. IMO if he's brought in it'll be as a glorified OC named HC while Juaron runs the Defense.
The only reason I don't want McDaniels is I think he'll find a way to run the ball EVEN LESS than Shurmur does. Making our #3 overall investment even more pointless.
I do think he'd do wonders for Weeden.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
I'm not sure he could get Weeden to throw a decent ball in man coverage. That solely lies on Weeden.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861 |
Quote:
He's not going to selecting players.
Well, FWIW we're hearing that a pairing of McDaniels and Lombardi is possible..So, that would mean that Lombardi would be the brain picking players. I'm honestly not sure which would be worse,
Furthermore, While Banner basically said that his bias is towards the HC making player decisions. he also said that that could change depending on who's here. Paraphrasing of course.
Maybe as a HC only, McDaniels will be good. I really don't know., But I don't want him picking our players..
Unless of course you want Tebow.. Cause I'll damn near guarantee you, he'll be here if McDaniels says so.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
I'm not saying physically.
I'm just saying McDaniels is the kind of guy that would play to Weedens strengths as opposed to trying to make him to other stuff.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Ryan Mallett
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)