|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
i think its nuts talking about Daniels period.
You're right. I was trying to be nice.
No more nuts than you folks getting all hot and heavy over Matt Flynn. Being in New Orleans would help his development more than being coached up by Shurmur or anyone associated with the former band of thieves that ran the show in Berea.
Again, I digress.
Just to be clear, when you replied with "you folks," you weren't including me, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Jaguars (Gabbert, Henne)
Chiefs (Quinn, Cassel)
Bills (Fitzpatrick)
Jets (Sanchez)
I don't think Weeden would start for even these pitiful teams. McElroy will probably be the starting QB for the Jets next year unless Ryan's erectile dysfunction medication keeps the blood from getting to his brain.
This is classic. You say "name me any team besides the Browns Weeden could start for" and he gave you four...of which I could probably add 3-4 more.
Your response is "I don't think so". Well duh. Obviously YOU don't think so or you wouldn't have said that to begin with. That's fantastic debate. Just because you're on some crazy island all by yourself doesn't automatically make you right though. 
Oh yeah, I should have added the qualifier 'reasonably'. Sure, you could add that Weeden could start for the New England Patriots or the Green Bay Packers, but if he could have been starting for any other NFL team, why was he selected 22nd overall last year by the Browns?
Weeden couldn't realistically start for any of those teams. For starters, the first two teams listed draft before us in the upcoming draft. They would select a QB in the draft before trading for or signing a released Brandon Weeden.
The NY Jets and Buffalo have better QBs on the team already. Fitzpatrick is better than Weeden and McElroy is also better than Weeden. Why would either of these teams sign Weeden?
Now give me your 3 or 4 additional teams.  Since you think that he could start for these teams, indicate what you considered opinion these teams would give for the rights to Brandon Weeden's services.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,754 Likes: 396
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,754 Likes: 396 |
Mcelroy is better than Weeden?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
i think its nuts talking about Daniels period.
You're right. I was trying to be nice.
No more nuts than you folks getting all hot and heavy over Matt Flynn. Being in New Orleans would help his development more than being coached up by Shurmur or anyone associated with the former band of thieves that ran the show in Berea.
Again, I digress.
Just to be clear, when you replied with "you folks," you weren't including me, right?
Not specifically noted at any particular poster. Were you hot and bothered over Matt Flynn? I honestly can't recall and it doesn't matter. I am sure, however, that a number of those getting on my case about Matt Moore and Chase Daniel were all hot and bothered for signing Matt Flynn for umpteen millions.
Of course, I don't expect any of them to come out and say that they fell in love with Matt Flynn after the gawdy numbers he put up in a couple of games, but I'm sure they all know who they were and others that weren't also know who they were.
I think the Matt Flynn vs. Matt Moore or Matt Flynn vs. Chase Daniel comparisons are valid in any case.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Mcelroy is better than Weeden?
I would suggest that he is. He's not worse than Weeden but he was on an even more dysfunctional team than the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
I highly doubt McElroy starts for the Jets next year, same for Sanchez. How many years experience do those guys have.And the only one that might start over Weeden is Fitzpatrick.
Well, McElroy, Sanchez or a draft pick will be starting for the Jets next season. Weeden could probably start over Sanchez but that's not high praise for Weeden but an indictment of Sanchez. But if it was McElroy or Weeden in a legitimate competition for the job, I have little doubt that McElroy would earn the job.
But, I'll concede that you a considered opinion with the Jets, only because they are so pathetic and Ryan is the HC there. I'm not sure what Woody Johnson was thinking in keeping Ryan around.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
I was a proponent of looking at Flynn for a deal in the 4-year, $20 million range or somewhere thereabouts, for the same reason you think Chase Daniels is good: learning in a good system under an elite QB. Only difference is Flynn had actually thrown a pass in an NFL game at the time. But I'm not heartbroken that we didn't pursue him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 32
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 32 |
Quote:
But if it was McElroy or Weeden in a legitimate competition for the job, I have little doubt that McElroy would earn the job.
Hah man it's obvious Weeden kicked your dog or rode his bike across your front lawn, but geez...this is just insane talk.  . No other way to put it.
By the way I gave you 8 teams who have a worse QB situation and would be better off with Weeden.
But no, please carry on with your blind hatred of the man. Greg McElroy...hah!
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/GraffZ06/browns_factory_sig.jpg) Fear us, for we are the BROWNS, led by the mighty BM! Only in Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
No way anyone with a sound mind would take Weeden over Bradford.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 32
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,459 Likes: 32 |
I could give you a few reasons
1) He's injury prone. See: Oklahoma and 2011.
2) His contract is RIDICULOUS for the performance they are getting.
3) His career comp% is 58%. Weeden as a rookie in Shurminator's offense was 57%. I think Weeden will get better, so advantage Weeds.
4) His career yds/att is 6.2. Weeden as a rookie was 6.55. Again I think Weeden will get better so advantage Weeds.
5) His career TD% is 3.00. Weeden as a rookie was 2.71. See points 3 & 4.
6) His career QB rating is 77. Weeden as a rookie was 72.6. Pretty close.
7) St Louis has averaged 18.1, 12.1 and 18.7 points per game under Bradford. This year the Browns averaged 18.9 with Weeden, more than any season with Bradford.
8) The Rams are 16-31-1 with Bradford for a .340 winning pct. The Browns are 5-11 for a .313 winning pct with Weeden..again pretty close.
You look at these #s and in all of them Weeden is about equal to Bradford, or just a bit better...and that's as a rookie in a mis-fit offense for him with a crappy play caller. Throw in the injury history and cost?
Yeah I'd take Weeden over Bradford.
Fear us, for we are the BROWNS, led by the mighty BM! Only in Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 293
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 293 |
Weeden will be 30 next year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Quote:
1) He's injury prone. See: Oklahoma and 2011.
I can't fault a guy for being injured after getting crushed between the turf and a 250 pound man. He started 16 games in his first and third seasons. In 2011 he played behind a terrible offensive line getting sacked 36 times in 10 games (Weeden was sacked 28 times in 15 games).
Quote:
2) His contract is RIDICULOUS for the performance they are getting.
His contract is ridiculous.
Quote:
3) His career comp% is 58%. Weeden as a rookie in Shurminator's offense was 57%. I think Weeden will get better, so advantage Weeds.
Bradford won't get better? Who was Bradford's offensive coordinator his rookie year? How bad has Bradford's offensive line been his whole career compared to Brandon Weeden's only year? Who has he had to throw to? All questions that have not been answered by your simple comparison of completion percentage.
(Yes. Shurmur. Horrible. Less than Weeden.)
Quote:
4) His career yds/att is 6.2. Weeden as a rookie was 6.55. Again I think Weeden will get better so advantage Weeds.
Bradford's yards per attempt were brought down by Shurmur his rookie year. In 2012, Bradford's first fully healthy year without Shurmur he averaged 6.7 yards per attempt. Also, who has he had to throw deep to? Weeden had Gordon. Bradford has had...Brandon Gibson?
Quote:
5) His career TD% is 3.00. Weeden as a rookie was 2.71. See points 3 & 4.
I like how you assume the #1 overall pick will not get better and Weeden will. And when Bradford's numbers are better you just kind gloss over them.
Quote:
6) His career QB rating is 77. Weeden as a rookie was 72.6. Pretty close.
Gloss over.
Quote:
7) St Louis has averaged 18.1, 12.1 and 18.7 points per game under Bradford. This year the Browns averaged 18.9 with Weeden, more than any season with Bradford.
The Rams receiving core is probably the only one that been worse than ours the past couple of years. This probably has nothing to do with them scoring less points.
Quote:
8) The Rams are 16-31-1 with Bradford for a .340 winning pct. The Browns are 5-11 for a .313 winning pct with Weeden..again pretty close.
I like how you include the six games Bradford did not play in in your argument against him. Bradford's record is 15-26-1. Bradford also went 7-9 in his two healthy seasons (one with Shurmur as his offensive coordinator). He went 1-9 in the season where he was playing on one leg because his offensive line couldn't protect him.
Quote:
You look at these #s and in all of them Weeden is about equal to Bradford, or just a bit better...and that's as a rookie in a mis-fit offense for him with a crappy play caller. Throw in the injury history and cost?
Wait, what!?!? Did you forget something? How about the fact that Brandon Weeden is four years older than Sam Bradford. That wouldn't affect anyone's opinion at all, would it? Or the fact that Weeden has thrown more interceptions that Bradford ever has. Your omission of information to pad your argument is hilarious.
Hypothetically, if you called the Rams right now and offered them Weeden for Bradford and they got to swap contracts with no penalties they would hang up the phone laughing.
I agree with your overall point though. Yes, there are a few teams that Weeden would start for. Does that make Weeden good? No. It means that there are other teams that have crappy quarterbacks as well. (It is also hilarious that you would take Weeden over Tannehill by the way).
Going off of what we know, Weeden is bad. It will be interesting to see what the new coach can/will do with him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
The age factor is really getting old (pun intended) and thrown in by all Weeden-haters as shutdown point when good points for Weeden are made. If Weeden played 6 years at Okie State? Ok...but fact is his experience level playing QB is that of a 23yo rookie. He was a QB in HS, then 2 years in College and now 1 in the NFL...that's about the norm for any rookie QB in the NFL. In case you missed it: the other 5 years he didn't play football, so if you think breathing and sleeping should make him somewhat better, so be it....I don't. I look at how long he's been a QB and that's on par with 23yo rooks. Put bluntly, it's still an incredibly stupid "argument" to make Since week 2 Weeden has a yds/PA of close to 7, 14/13 TD/INT, 59% comp and a rating of 79. Those are rookie of the year numbers in 8 out of 10 seasons. When Bradford was rookie of the year just 2 years ago his numbers were: 60%, 6.0yds/PA and 18/15 TD/INT and he got sacked more and fumbled more and even ran worse. Even including his 1st game, he had a better rookie season than both Mannings and McNabb This board is going The two best and most exciting QBs since our rebirth in DA and Weeden are HATED to the bone by the homers on this board....and losers like Frye, Quinn and McCoy were all loved and defended to death. It's hilarious and incredibly irrational
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Quote:
The age factor is really getting old (pun intended)
Good one.
I agree that the age is no longer a factor when talking about Weeden. As of right now he is a 29 year old player on our roster. But when comparing him to other players at his position it becomes a factor just as it would with any other QB. Weeden is 29, Bradford is 25. That is something comes into play in that argument.
Quote:
thrown in by all Weeden-haters
I am not a Weeden hater. I am a Weeden realist. I hope he does well. I think he could thrive in the new offense. He was bad last season.
Quote:
when good points for Weeden are made.
Good points were not made in the post I responded to.
Quote:
If Weeden played 6 years at Okie State? Ok...but fact is his experience level playing QB is that of a 23yo rookie. He was a QB in HS, then 2 years in College and now 1 in the NFL...that's about the norm for any rookie QB in the NFL. In case you missed it: the other 5 years he didn't play football, so if you think breathing and sleeping should make him somewhat better, so be it....I don't. I look at how long he's been a QB and that's on par with 23yo rooks.
When discussing Weeden's development his age must be taken into account. How much do you want to invest in a player who might be good? If that player is 22 you will want to invest more than if that player is 25. . .or 29.
Quote:
Put bluntly, it's still an incredibly stupid "argument" to make.
I don't think anyone is making the argument that he should be better because he is older. That is certainly not the argument I am making. I agree with you that he has followed the normal QB playing time of a 23 year old QB, no one disputes that. But like I said earlier, how much time and money do you want to invest in a 29 year old who might be good?
Quote:
Since week 2
What happened week 1? The "let's eliminate the first game" argument is getting really old.
Quote:
Those are rookie of the year numbers in 8 out of 10 seasons.
Huh? You are living in a dream world. Since the Offensive Rookie of the Year has existed (1967) the following QBs have won: Dennis Shaw, Ben Roethlisberger, Vince Young, Matt Ryan, Sam Bradford, and Andrew Luck/RGIII/Russell Wilson. It takes an exceptional season for a QB to win that award. Weeden was nowhere near exceptional.
Quote:
When Bradford was rookie of the year just 2 years ago his numbers were: 60%, 6.0yds/PA and 18/15 TD/INT and he got sacked more and fumbled more and even ran worse.
He got sacked more and fumbled more because his offensive line was terrible. Saying he ran better is irrelevant. Neither QB relies on their running ability. That's like saying Tom Brady has ran better than Peyton Manning. Who cares.
Quote:
Even including his 1st game, he had a better rookie season than both Mannings and McNabb
Huh (again)? Manning had 26 TDs, 28 INTs, and threw for 3,739 yards. Weeden had 14 TDs, 17 INTs, and threw for 3,385 yards. (Weeden did play one less game). 28 INTs is a lot, but I'm still taking Manning's rookie year because of the TDs. Weeden did run for more yards though.
McNabb started only 6 games his rookie year with only 216 attempts. Comparing his rookie season to Weeden makes no sense.
Quote:
The two best and most exciting QBs since our rebirth in DA and Weeden are HATED to the bone by the homers on this board
Exciting does not equal good. There is no bigger Weeden homer than you.
Quote:
and losers like Frye, Quinn and McCoy were all loved and defended to death.
And what are you doing with Weeden, defending him to the near death?
Quote:
It's hilarious and incredibly irrational
What's hilarious and incredibly irrational is your blind defense of Weeden. I don't know if it's because you touted him so much going into the draft or you actually think he is good. Whatever it is, it doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 776 Likes: 28
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 776 Likes: 28 |
Weeden's age does not mean he shouldn't show the typical year two growth of a QB who was forced to start as a rookie. It may mean he is poised to learn even more from the season and develop more. No one is saying he's as good as Luck, RGIII or Wilson, but this year, he had a poor (but potential-laden) receiving corps and a running game doomed by poor run blocking and TR's broken ribs.
He could be a whole lot better next year. In fact, I'd be very surprised if he was not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Blind defense? I'm just defending what should be a no brainer (Weeden getting his 2nd season) and has been contested by over half the board. I'm on record saying that he's a 50-50 boom or bust player and that his 2nd season will seal his fate...what's blind about that? That's being realistic...
You know what's blind? McCoy homers who said "he should strive in that WCO, and it will make or break him"...then, when he failed, even regressed...still defended him and went at lenght to apologize his performance and wanted a 3rd season with the bum. THAT'S blind....you won't see me do that, as I'll be the 1st to call for Weeden's head if he is the same QB next season. I'm a Browns fan, not Weeden, but think it's incredibly irrational to call for his head after 14 and a half games, where he has flashed, which McCoy never did, that's why I wanted him gone asap, he had no upside whatsoever. If you get that "flash" more consistently, you have something to work with. If he still only flashes and remains inconsistent? Go ahead and replace him...what's wrong with that? I'm even ok to draft a QB this season (if it represents value) BECAUSE Weeden isn't a sure bet
This board is FILLED with resentment towards him, partly because of irrational McCoy love and the rest is crying because he's not Wilson, RG3 or Luck. If you want to hold against him that he came out the same year those studs did, go on...I won't. I will see him for who he is and will compare him to a bigger sample size of NFL rookie QBs of past seasons...and compared to them and from what I saw, he's done enough to get a 2nd look. Again, the same performance in 2010 and the media would discuss who would be rookie of the year: Bradford or Weeden
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,839 Likes: 11
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,839 Likes: 11 |
in regards to weeds age.. its not even an issue.. only way it would sort of hurt us is if he turns into this all pro.. and then its like dang.. we only have him for 3-4 more seasons, then we have to find another guy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11 |
How do you take into account Weedz regression the second half of the season. I specifically mean him looking timid, making slow reads, and standing there allowing himself to get sacked? Quote:
You know what's blind?
Your analysis, or lack thereof, on Weedz?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Regression?  Weeden post-bye, 5.5 games: 112/181, 61.88%, 1297yds, 5 TD, 5 INT, 7.17yds/PA....in those games the Browns scored: 20, 20, 20, 31, 21 points, all that with no running help at all, barely over 3ypc...Weeden left the Broncos game with 6p in the 3rd Qtr Yeah, horrible, I know I think all of you just have some bad plays stuck in your minds and go off of that or maybe your expectation level went through the roof when he had some good starts early on and you took it as a given, as if he was a vet QB. Reality though is that he simply was a rook and hasn't regressed at all and just going off those numbers I could make a case that he even improvd some. Now, since stats aren't everything I can agree that he didn't look improved, but regression? He looked bad in areas where he was more decisive earlier on, but that "decisiveness" turned into more INTs early on too, so yeah, he got timid but still made plays and put points on the board...he worked through other things and looked bad while going through it. He adjusted to the league, then the league re-adjusted and now it's up to him to overcome that. If it was for this clueless board, we'd throw in the next rookie QB and came to the same conclusion in 12 months, but with the irrationality of this board he probably would have a shrine built for him because he was 23yo and not 29. Ask any Dolphins fan if he wants to get rid of Tannehill after his rook season, which was a carbon copy of Weeden's. They'd give you the same I'm giving you
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,195 Likes: 209
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,195 Likes: 209 |
I blame Weeden's timidness and indecisiveness late in the year on Shumur. I honestly believe that Shurmur got in his head about not throwing interceptions and screwed Weeden up royally. I only hope that the damage done isn't irreversible.
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown.
Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,608 Likes: 89
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,608 Likes: 89 |
Quote:
Weeden will be 30 next year.
Didn't hear about that
How does a league celebrating its 100th season only recognize the 53 most recent championships?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
Quote:
Weeden will be 30 next year.
Didn't hear about that
Funny how that stuff works...if it was a young rook QB with the same upside left, the same people would probably say "and he just turned 23". You can hear the spin direction of a simple, meaningless fact just from the wording.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805 Likes: 1
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
I blame Weeden's timidness and indecisiveness late in the year on Shumur. I honestly believe that Shurmur got in his head about not throwing interceptions and screwed Weeden up royally. I only hope that the damage done isn't irreversible.
BINGO!!!
Django. U r correct. I've always said that when Weeden gets that Completion % at or above 65 and the YPA over about 7.3. That is when he will take off. It's the same for virtually every good QB in the NFL. Just look at their 1st thru 3rd years. When those 2 stats rose that is when they took off.
U don't just lose 70% completions when u get drafted. U lose it for a reason. And Shurmer was a huge part of it.
Weeden has got to be the man in 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,132 Likes: 134
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,132 Likes: 134 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Chase Daniel's ... just happened to be drafted by a team that didn't need a starting QB.
lol
Oh yeah, my mistake. He didn't get drafted.
Well, when the crux of your argument is that he isn't playing because he was drafted by a team that didn't need a starter, when the reality is that 1) he wasn't drafted, and 2) got cut when he couldn't earn a spot on a roster who's QBs were Jason Campbell and Todd Collins, then yes, absolutely your mistake.
He's thrown 9 passes in four years in the NFL.
Yeah, and he's been the backup to Drew Brees. Again, convince me that Weeden would start on any other team in the NFL other than one coached by Pat Shurmur. I have to tell you that you'll have a near impossible task if you try.
Nice switch up there.. we were talking about who's available that is better than weeden and you switch it up with where would weeden start other than a Pat Shurmur coached team..
As of today, I'd say he'd start over whoever is in KC. Who knows what moves they'll make, but he's better than anything they got right now.
I'm not certain that he wouldn't be able to start for the jags.. that's a possible.
Right now, who do the jets have.. Sanchez who they benched for their third stringer and couldn't find a way to use Tebow (well, that one isn't much of a surprise). Right now, I'm not sure he's not better than Sanchez.
He's a hair away from being better than Carson Palmer,,, barely but that's not because Weeden is all that, it's because Palmer just isn't the QB he once was.
Those are just my opinions,,
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,513 Likes: 1024
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,513 Likes: 1024 |
Toad:
Have you watched Tyler Wilson? If so what is your opinion?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,607 Likes: 239
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,607 Likes: 239 |
j/c imo we will trade for a QB like Alex Smith or draft another QB in the early rounds. Top FA Quarterbacks Joe Flacco (BAL) - Into the final year of his rookie contract, the Ravens were hoping Coach Harbaugh's "Just pay him" would have materialized into something other than a source of laughter and controversy. Still not knowing what type of quarterback they have, Baltimore should still be hesitant to commit to Flacco for more than a season. Seeing several young quarterbacks on the cusp of surpassing him in ranks, there will be nothing but a cloud of uncertainty this offseason, bringing the franchise tag well into play. Jason Campbell (CHI) - After a rough outing against San Francisco on a nationally televised game this year, Campbell left a bad taste in the mouths of America. However, if organizations can look beyond a performance where he was running for his life for 60 minutes, they'll find a solid back-up quarterback in the right situation. Tarvaris Jackson (BUF) - In a weak crop of free agent quarterbacks, Tarvaris Jackson could find a nice little market. There's too much talent at the position now where he'll even have an opportunity to compete for a starting gig, but with the success of the read-option this year, he could have a handful of suitors interested in bringing him in as a back-up to maintain continuity in the playbook if the starter goes down. Matt Moore (MIA) - As a leftover from the previous regime, it seems unlikely that Matt Moore will remain in Miami through the next offseason. He's a fairly reliable game manager with the capability of making just enough plays to scrape out a win or two here and there, as he did against this Jets this year when Tannehill missed a start to injury. After Jason Campbell, Moore may be a top option for many teams looking for clipboard guys. Drew Stanton (IND) - Though he's failed to log a single pass over the past two seasons, Stanton was fairly impressive for a couple games in Detroit in 2010. There was definite interest in Stanton last offseason, but another year without throwing a pass should mean diminished opportunity. With his limited playing time, Stanton displayed leadership and enough playmaking skills to warrant serious looks as a back-up. Seneca Wallace (FA) - Wallace has long been a personal favorite of mine off the bench, embodying a back-up quarterback to its fullest. With enough accuracy and mobility to convert 3rd downs, he's a player that can get a team through a game with a defensive effort. There are better options, but to me, he's among the 64 best quarterbacks in the game. However, finishing the season as a free agent, it's obvious that most NFL teams disagree. Here is another list: QB Derek AndersonNew player news! UFA Carolina Panthers Free Agent QB Charlie Batch UFA Pittsburgh Steelers Free Agent QB Matt Blanchard Re-signed Chicago Bears Chicago Bears QB Jason Campbell UFA Chicago Bears Free Agent QB David Carr UFA New York Giants Free Agent QB Kellen Clemens UFA St. Louis Rams Free Agent QB Chase Daniel UFA New Orleans Saints Free Agent QB Joe FlaccoNew player news! UFA Baltimore Ravens Free Agent QB Bruce Gradkowski UFA Cincinnati Bengals Free Agent QB Rex Grossman UFA Washington Redskins Free Agent QB Tarvaris Jackson UFA Buffalo Bills Free Agent QB Mike Kafka Signed Philadelphia Eagles New England Patriots QB Byron Leftwich UFA Pittsburgh Steelers Free Agent QB Matt Leinart UFA Oakland Raiders Free Agent QB Josh McCown UFA Chicago Bears Free Agent QB Luke McCown UFA Atlanta Falcons Free Agent QB Matt MooreNew player news! UFA Miami Dolphins Free Agent QB Curtis Painter Signed Baltimore Ravens New York Giants QB Jordan Palmer UFA Jacksonville Jaguars Free Agent QB Brady Quinn UFA Kansas City Chiefs Free Agent QB Zac Robinson Re-signed Cincinnati Bengals Cincinnati Bengals QB Matt Simms Re-signed New York Jets New York Jets QB Drew Stanton UFA Indianapolis Colts Free Agent QB Nick Stephens Signed Tennessee Titans Dallas Cowboys QB Tyler Thigpen UFA Buffalo Bills Free Agent QB Adam Weber Re-signed Tampa Bay Buccaneers Tampa Bay Buccaneers Read more: http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features/freeagents/fa.php#ixzz2Hy56BdOo
Blocking those who argue to argue, eliminates the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517 |
Quote:
I have been thinking about this for a long long time.
Does 4 days constitute a long, long time nowadays? Seriously?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
Funny how that stuff works...if it was a young rook QB with the same upside left, the same people would probably say "and he just turned 23". You can hear the spin direction of a simple, meaningless fact just from the wording.
You say that like it's a surprise or like people wouldn't admit it or it is this big revelation that people are hiding their feelings..... it's not hard to admit... I would be a lot more excited about Weeden if he was under 25.. A LOT. He is fairly raw, he has some physical skills, but he has holes in his game... so yea, if had that extra 7 years left in his career to work on them, it would be a lot easier to get behind building the franchise around him, even with the risk that he may never turn into what we all want him to become... But you just keep believing its a meaningless stat..
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
You can add Mike Vick to that list as the Eagles will release him. Matt Flynn could be available, but the Seahawks will take a cap hit if they cut him. If Carson Palmer doesn't renegotiate his contract the Raiders could cut him. I think the Bills and Jets would like to get rid of their QBs but because of their contracts they can't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Jaguars (Gabbert, Henne)
Chiefs (Quinn, Cassel)
Bills (Fitzpatrick)
Jets (Sanchez)
I don't think Weeden would start for even these pitiful teams. McElroy will probably be the starting QB for the Jets next year unless Ryan's erectile dysfunction medication keeps the blood from getting to his brain.
This is classic. You say "name me any team besides the Browns Weeden could start for" and he gave you four...of which I could probably add 3-4 more.
Your response is "I don't think so". Well duh. Obviously YOU don't think so or you wouldn't have said that to begin with. That's fantastic debate. Just because you're on some crazy island all by yourself doesn't automatically make you right though.
Oh yeah, I should have added the qualifier 'reasonably'. Sure, you could add that Weeden could start for the New England Patriots or the Green Bay Packers, but if he could have been starting for any other NFL team, why was he selected 22nd overall last year by the Browns?
Weeden couldn't realistically start for any of those teams. For starters, the first two teams listed draft before us in the upcoming draft. They would select a QB in the draft before trading for or signing a released Brandon Weeden.
The NY Jets and Buffalo have better QBs on the team already. Fitzpatrick is better than Weeden and McElroy is also better than Weeden. Why would either of these teams sign Weeden?
Now give me your 3 or 4 additional teams. Since you think that he could start for these teams, indicate what you considered opinion these teams would give for the rights to Brandon Weeden's services.
So you asked what teams could he start on right now then add in disclaimers like well they draft before us, or what would they give up for him.
Your statement was no one could name an NFL team Weeden could possibley start for except the Browns. Someone did and now you change direction.
If your reason is now because he was drafted 22nd then I guess Wilson also couldnt start for any teams in the NFL having been drafted in the 3rd round. Alot of teams passed on him not once, not twice, wait for it, but 3 times. 
Simply put Weeden isnt anywhere near as bad as you make him out to be and no one is saying hes great yet, just a rookie who showed promise.
You are starting to look bad esp when you state your only point is you want Weeden to compete for the starting job which I dont think anyone here thinks isnt going to happen because as has been stated the new coach/FO has no tie's to Weeden and as such no need to stick with him if he/they dont like what they see.
If Chud does play him next year its because he thinks he can win with him (same as any player on the team) and that my fellow dawg talker is all I care about. Even if we replace him (Weeden) the year after that.
I know you'll try to change my meaning on that last part but no matter the statement remain's true.
I expect to contend if not make the playoffs this upcoming year with or without Weeden. 
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
Funny how that stuff works...if it was a young rook QB with the same upside left, the same people would probably say "and he just turned 23". You can hear the spin direction of a simple, meaningless fact just from the wording.
You say that like it's a surprise or like people wouldn't admit it or it is this big revelation that people are hiding their feelings..... it's not hard to admit... I would be a lot more excited about Weeden if he was under 25.. A LOT. He is fairly raw, he has some physical skills, but he has holes in his game... so yea, if had that extra 7 years left in his career to work on them, it would be a lot easier to get behind building the franchise around him, even with the risk that he may never turn into what we all want him to become... But you just keep believing its a meaningless stat..
There is no way the majority of people would give any QB 7 years to mature without winning here including the new owner. None. His age doesnt matter 1 bit what so ever. He either progresses in a reasonable manner and puts up victorys or he will be replaced.
If hes replaced by a 23 yo qb or a 400 yo qb their time to show progress and get it done will be exactly the same.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
Your statement was no one could name an NFL team Weeden could possibley start for except the Browns. Someone did and now you change direction.
While it is his opinion that he couldn't.. it is your opinion that he could.... there is no right or wrong in this, just opinions. My own opinion is that the Chiefs is probably the only lock for Weeden to start this past year then there are a few where he would have had the opportunity to compete.. I won't get into who I think would have won those competitions and I will leave next year out of it, at least until after FA and the draft.
Quote:
If Chud does play him next year its because he thinks he can win with him (same as any player on the team)
Technically it just means he's the best option he's got.. same as any player on the team... Now if they don't make any kind of move to bring in somebody who may be better to compete with him, then you might be right... either they think they can win with him or they don't see a better option available... and what the coaches say on this is pretty irrelevant, they are going to say they have faith in whoever ends up the starter.. that's what coaches do.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Hah man it's obvious Weeden kicked your dog or rode his bike across your front lawn, but geez...this is just insane talk. . No other way to put it.
No, Weeden did nothing. My anger about Weeden is really aimed at Holmgren, Heckert and Shurmur. Those fools wasted a first round pick that could have been used on someone useful.
Quote:
By the way I gave you 8 teams who have a worse QB situation and would be better off with Weeden.
How can that really be? The Browns are drafting #6.
Quote:
But no, please carry on with your blind hatred of the man. Greg McElroy...hah!
Whatever. Weeden...ha! And you feign being upset with 5 wins.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
Your statement was no one could name an NFL team Weeden could possibley start for except the Browns. Someone did and now you change direction.
While it is his opinion that he couldn't.. it is your opinion that he could.... there is no right or wrong in this, just opinions. My own opinion is that the Chiefs is probably the only lock for Weeden to start this past year then there are a few where he would have had the opportunity to compete.. I won't get into who I think would have won those competitions and I will leave next year out of it, at least until after FA and the draft.
Quote:
If Chud does play him next year its because he thinks he can win with him (same as any player on the team)
Technically it just means he's the best option he's got.. same as any player on the team... Now if they don't make any kind of move to bring in somebody who may be better to compete with him, then you might be right... either they think they can win with him or they don't see a better option available... and what the coaches say on this is pretty irrelevant, they are going to say they have faith in whoever ends up the starter.. that's what coaches do.
Well said DC, you summed up my feelings on the matter quite well.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Sometimes I swear you didnt watch the same season I did. Even in Weedens worst game which was his first game if little doesnt tip a sure TD into int and the defense (just like in the Dallas game) doesnt fold faster then an origami master at the end of the half we could have had 2 more victorys.
You had the sure TD dropped in Indy.
Ignore losing Haden and Taylor for extended amounts of time.
The list goes on. There are many reasons we are drafting 6th and Weeden isnt the sole one.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
j/c Quote:
Who will be the QB?
all these comments and noone has mentioned Philip Rivers.
hey, it's not likely given that SD would have to trade him to us and we don't have a 2nd round pick (and are not giving up our #6 overall selection). but, it should have been thrown out there as a possibility given that SD is getting a regime change and that most regimes want their own QB (and Norv may be our OC giving us a connection).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361 |
Out of all of the names thrown around, the most realistic, as far as fitting Chud's scheme, is Carson Palmer. However, the Raiders just finished giving up a pair of first round picks, are only about $4.5 million over, and have no other QB worth half a damn other than Palmer. I mean ... really .... Terrell Pryor? Matt Leinart? Palmer just got done throwing for 4000+ yards in 15 games. I doubt that he goes anywhere. Alex Smith's name keeps coming up, but he really doesn't fit this offense. He really started to shine when the pressure was removed from him ...... when the offense started running through the run game, with him able to throw in favorable situations only. In 2012, Alex Smith played in 10 games (9 starts) and threw for 1737 yards. That's 174 yards/game. This is the very definition of taking the ball out of the QB's hands. Kaepernick threw for 1814 yards in 13 games ...... only 7 starts though. They used Kaepernich running the ball a great deal more than they did Smith, but they really protected him somewhat less than they did Smith. If a team with a top 5 defense, and a top 5 run game, still can't afford a limited game manager like Smith ..... then how could we hope to? I still think that we will go into this year with Weeden at QB ..... and maybe a 4th-7th round pick as the 3rd string guy. That's just my gut feeling anyway ...... and with the way my gut has grown lately, I have learned to listen to it. 
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 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,986 Likes: 361 |
I don't know about Mike Vick. He wouldn't be my preference ...... and I don't know if Chud would look at him and see a guy who could run his offense or not. He does have a decent arm, even today ..... but I honestly don't know how Chud would look on a guy like him.
He has declined over the past 3 years, and has not finished a season since he got out of jail ...... and he's definitely not my preferred candidate ....... but I really don't know if there is a good candidate out there. (unless it's a current backup somewhere who Chud liked in a draft somewhere)
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
j/c
Quote:
Who will be the QB?
all these comments and noone has mentioned Philip Rivers.
hey, it's not likely given that SD would have to trade him to us and we don't have a 2nd round pick (and are not giving up our #6 overall selection). but, it should have been thrown out there as a possibility given that SD is getting a regime change and that most regimes want their own QB (and Norv may be our OC giving us a connection).
Like you said it would cost way to much to even entertain the idea. I've always wondered why Rivers didnt do better in his career. I dont watch SD games at all but always rooted for him because of the whole Manning crap.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Who will be the QB
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
