|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Just saying. Vick easily has enough arm to make all the throws. He could also allow Chud to incorporate some of the read option stuff he did with Newton. If he gets hurt we still have Weeden as a backup. Maybe draft a guy like E.J. Manuel and sit him for a couple of years.
Vick is not my preferred choice either. But I think it is something we have to at least consider. He also has a connection with Banner. And if the conspiracies about Haslam and Banner being all about money are true, what will generate more interest than Vick?
It would be nothing if not interesting to see what Norv Turner could do with Michael Vick.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Watching Rivers last I felt like he had aged 10 years since 2011. He could hardly throw the ball deep and could barely move. Weird. His decision making also went down the crapper.
I wouldn't touch Rivers with a ten foot pole, especially if we had to give up something to get him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
so, you are saying yes to Michael Vick but no to Philip Rivers. I think I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you on this one (and yes, Rivers had a terrible year but even then it was better than Vick's year).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
For the offense we will likely be running? Yes. Vick still has a lot of his athleticism, but just can't stay on the field. I don't know if what's wrong with Rivers is fixable, while Vick mistakes seem to be more mental.
Also, the Eagles' offensive line has been garbage the past couple of seasons. And Rivers would cost us something, while Vick is going to be a free agent.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Watching Rivers last I felt like he had aged 10 years since 2011. He could hardly throw the ball deep and could barely move. Weird. His decision making also went down the crapper.
I wouldn't touch Rivers with a ten foot pole, especially if we had to give up something to get him.
I was just looking at his stats and he had 13 fumbles and 15 ints. He must have been sacked alot. His totals in yds and attempts are close to Weedens.
I think you may be right and hes on the decline for whatever reason.
His completion % is solid his whole career, and his QB rating has never been below 82 so hes very accurate. Behind our line and with our young WR's he may do better but then I have to look at what he did against us here and take into account he would be playing in our weather (along with Balt/Pitt/cinci) all year.
I'll agree and have to pass on Rivers given what it would cost us to obtain him.
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:
There are many reasons we are drafting 6th and Weeden isnt the sole one.
You are correct... but let's not act like every team behind us in the draft didn't have injuries, bad bounces, and tipped balls as well.. they all did, they just overcame them better than we did.
It's easy for you to show me how a couple plays could have made us a 7 or 8 win team but I can just as easily show you how a couple of plays could have us as a 2 win team....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,608 Likes: 89
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,608 Likes: 89 |
Quote:
For the offense we will likely be running? Yes. Vick still has a lot of his athleticism, but just can't stay on the field. I don't know if what's wrong with Rivers is fixable, while Vick mistakes seem to be more mental.
How fixable are mental issues? Especially someone who has been in the league as long as Vick?
How does a league celebrating its 100th season only recognize the 53 most recent championships?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,113 Likes: 134
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,113 Likes: 134 |
Quote:
What about Mike Vick?
5 years and a half dozen injuries ago,, sure. Now? I doubt it
#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: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
What about Mike Vick?
5 years and a half dozen injuries ago,, sure. Now? I doubt it
TBH Ive never really been impressed with Vick. He had skills for sure but I dont want a beat up old prototype of the Chip Kelly offense. RG3 model .001 as you would.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Quote:
How fixable are mental issues? Especially someone who has been in the league as long as Vick?
He played pretty well in 2010. So he has done it recently. I'd rather have a guy who still has ability that you can teach than a guy who is declining and can't physically perform.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1 |
Vick behind our Pass Blocking Oline with Benjamin, Little, and Gordon?
Not bad IMO.
Not Preffered.
But not bad.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Except that its tough to pass block for a guy who doesn't like to stay in the pocket.
I don't think Vick would get killed behind our Oline. It's when he's not behind it that I'd get very worried.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1 |
He actually stayed in the Pocket very well in 2010.
Then his Oline slowly went to crap and he had to scramble more.
If you give him the time he has the arm to get it just about anywhere, and we now have the WRs for him to throw to..
Just saying, again, not preferred, but not "crazy"
The PR hit of bringing Vick to the "Dogpound" is a bit interesting, also is teaming Vick up with Weeden (SO MANY INTERCEPTIONS)
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
He had 108 rushing attempts and 708 yards in 13 games in 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
J/C
For all of those bashing Weeden, he had a higher completion percentage than Luck. Luck ended the season with a 54% rate, I think Weedens was 57. Also Luck threw the same or more INTs.
Now, IMO Luck is the better QB, but, they both were rookies, and that's what happens to rookies Tannehill was about the same. Wilson and RG3 were theexceptions. Luck gets the hype because he was the first pick, and the success the team had. He had a couple good game winning drives and that made the difference.
I honestly can't believe Vicks name is even being mention, e ha become a turnover machine.
IMO, Weeden suffered from playing in the wrong kind of offense. I truly believe that with an offense that uses his strengths, and better playcalling, you will see a much better QB next year. That, and the fact that, and the fact that he will have a year under his belt will help.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Quote:
Now, IMO Luck is the better QB
Way to go out on a limb.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
Luck gets the hype because he was the first pick, and the success the team had. He had a couple good game winning drives and that made the difference.
That is absolutely the difference... Weeden had no real defining moments this year and there was nothing about his skill set that people went WOW...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,182 Likes: 209
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,182 Likes: 209 |
jc
Rivers - No
Vick - Hell No
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown.
Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195 |
Quote:
Quote:
Luck gets the hype because he was the first pick, and the success the team had. He had a couple good game winning drives and that made the difference.
That is absolutely the difference... Weeden had no real defining moments this year and there was nothing about his skill set that people went WOW...
Now I don't know about that, every time he had another one batted down, I went, "wow, really"...
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
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.
Those things happen to all teams so I give nothing to the Browns for those 'what ifs'.
Weeden wasn't the sole reason why the Browns are drafting 6th, but he's more of a part of it than any of the other QBs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Weeden wasn't the sole reason why the Browns are drafting 6th,.
Thank you, Im glad you agree.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
So you asked what teams could he start on right now then add in disclaimers like well they draft befre us, or wht would they give up for him.
You're the one claiming that he would start for these teams. Not me. If he would start for these teams, then he would be an improvement for their QB situations, by your own measure. It goes to follow that thought process that they would then give something for him to be their starting QB. I'm curious to follow your reasoning as to why you would say that these teams would be willing to start Weeden over their existing (or future) QB situation. If you wanted to make it their past QB situation, then it begs to be asked why the teams that would start him over their other QBs didn't draft him.
Quote:
Your statement was no one could name an NFL team Weeden could possibly start for except the Browns. Someone did and now you change direction.
Not quite. I asked someone to name a team that he WOULD (not could possibly start) for other than the Browns. Teams were named. I don't necessarily agree, but I'm curious to know why they believe that Weeden would start on these teams. It's a logical progression.
I could give you a number of reasons, but I'll name the obvious one why he wouldn't. He's nearly 30 years old and will be next season with only a single season of NFL experience (and I wouldn't say it was a positive experience either) under his belt. Why would an NFL team start him over a younger QB with sufficient skills at the position? They wouldn't. Furthermore, I contend that Weeden wouldn't have even started for the Browns except that there was no other way that the previous regime could proceed based upon Weeden's age and draft position. The former regime put themselves in that situation. I further contend that Weeden most likely will not be the starting QB of the Cleveland Browns next season. It appears to me that there's a fairly decent chance that he won't even be on the roster.
Quote:
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. 
That's not my point at all. Russell Wilson is 24, not 29 and he EARNED his job as the starting QB. Weeden was APPOINTED the job and did not earn it.
Quote:
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.
It's possible that he's even worse than I make him out to be. It's not his fault that he's in that position. I put all the blame for his situation on the former regime. He didn't show me any promise. We won 5 games last years and three of those were against him going against the two worst teams in the league and a rusty Charlie Batch led Putzburgh team. If we had faced Charlie Batch the following weekend like BallsNoMore did, the Browns would have likely LOST.
Quote:
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.
Oh, I think the vast majority say that Weeden will be the QB because he's the 'only legit QB' on the Browns roster. That has been stated in this very thread. I would suggest that the majority of the posters in this message board would appoint Weeden the starting QB without him earning it if we could turn back time and be heading into the first preseason game last August.
Quote:
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 think that Chudzinski is smarter than most of you here. I would hazard to say that most NFL fans (no matter what their team) are smarter than most of the posters here. I dare say that my wife, a mostly uninvolved Dallas Cowboy fan knows more than most of you.
Quote:
I expect to contend if not make the playoffs this upcoming year with or without Weeden. 
What does that mean 'expect to contend'? Contend for what? A playoff spot? Were you one of those that expected the Browns to 'contend' last year?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Weeden wasn't the sole reason why the Browns are drafting 6th,.
Thank you, Im glad you agree.
But I don't agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 129
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 129 |
I am the new starting QB. I talked to Haslem today and he said it was cool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Just want to add one little point to your discussion with Django. He said that the two most exciting QBs since the return have been DA and Weeden. I'm not sure if he meant for Browns fans or opponents. I thought that Tim Couch was pretty exciting to watch when he wasn't getting pummeled by opposing defenses and then there was all the Kelly Holcomb devotees. Of course, they became devotees on the strength of one game (a playoff game that Couch led the Browns to) with a 429 yard passing performance. Weeden's exciting? DA was exciting?  About as exciting as a Romeo Crennel or Pat Shurmur post-game press conference.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,113 Likes: 134
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,113 Likes: 134 |
Quote:
I am the new starting QB. I talked to Haslem today and he said it was cool.
Congrats 
#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: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
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.
It's not a switch. It's a legitimate question about who is available to push Weeden for the job as the Browns starting QB next season. The reference to Weeden starting only on a Pat Shurmur coached team is just an observation on my part.
Quote:
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 think that a healthy Matt Cassel is the starting QB in KC over Brandon Weeden. Crennel sucked so bad as the HC that the Chiefs ended up with the #1 overall pick. It'll be interesting to see what Andy Reid does with that selection.
Quote:
I'm not certain that he wouldn't be able to start for the jags.. that's a possible.
I'm pretty sure that Chad Henne would win the job there.
Quote:
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.
Hell, you'd be better than Sanchez, but I'm not sure Weeden would be better than Tebow or McElroy.
Quote:
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,,
You might have a point there, but could he beat out Terrelle Pryor or Matt Leinart?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
So you asked what teams could he start on right now then add in disclaimers like well they draft befre us, or wht would they give up for him.
You're the one claiming that he would start for these teams. Not me. If he would start for these teams, then he would be an improvement for their QB situations, by your own measure. It goes to follow that thought process that they would then give something for him to be their starting QB. I'm curious to follow your reasoning as to why you would say that these teams would be willing to start Weeden over their existing (or future) QB situation. If you wanted to make it their past QB situation, then it begs to be asked why the teams that would start him over their other QBs didn't draft him.
Quote:
Your statement was no one could name an NFL team Weeden could possibly start for except the Browns. Someone did and now you change direction.
Not quite. I asked someone to name a team that he WOULD (not could possibly start) for other than the Browns. Teams were named. I don't necessarily agree, but I'm curious to know why they believe that Weeden would start on these teams. It's a logical progression.
I could give you a number of reasons, but I'll name the obvious one why he wouldn't. He's nearly 30 years old and will be next season with only a single season of NFL experience (and I wouldn't say it was a positive experience either) under his belt. Why would an NFL team start him over a younger QB with sufficient skills at the position? They wouldn't. Furthermore, I contend that Weeden wouldn't have even started for the Browns except that there was no other way that the previous regime could proceed based upon Weeden's age and draft position. The former regime put themselves in that situation. I further contend that Weeden most likely will not be the starting QB of the Cleveland Browns next season. It appears to me that there's a fairly decent chance that he won't even be on the roster.
Quote:
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.
That's not my point at all. Russell Wilson is 24, not 29 and he EARNED his job as the starting QB. Weeden was APPOINTED the job and did not earn it.
Quote:
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.
It's possible that he's even worse than I make him out to be. It's not his fault that he's in that position. I put all the blame for his situation on the former regime. He didn't show me any promise. We won 5 games last years and three of those were against him going against the two worst teams in the league and a rusty Charlie Batch led Putzburgh team. If we had faced Charlie Batch the following weekend like BallsNoMore did, the Browns would have likely LOST.
Quote:
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.
Oh, I think the vast majority say that Weeden will be the QB because he's the 'only legit QB' on the Browns roster. That has been stated in this very thread. I would suggest that the majority of the posters in this message board would appoint Weeden the starting QB without him earning it if we could turn back time and be heading into the first preseason game last August.
Quote:
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 think that Chudzinski is smarter than most of you here. I would hazard to say that most NFL fans (no matter what their team) are smarter than most of the posters here. I dare say that my wife, a mostly uninvolved Dallas Cowboy fan knows more than most of you.
Quote:
I expect to contend if not make the playoffs this upcoming year with or without Weeden.
What does that mean 'expect to contend'? Contend for what? A playoff spot? Were you one of those that expected the Browns to 'contend' last year?
Im quoting this only for context.
You are the one saying he couldnt start for any other team. I didnt name those teams but I agree with point that he could start for most those teams.
As someone else said we are both stating opinions and nothing wrong with that but it doesnt make either of us right or wrong.
While you think we had some mystery QB on this team that was better then Weeden I cant agree with that statement. Was he handed the job probably but was anyone better? That is very open to debate.
I hate to break it to you but claiming posters here are not smart while being a poster here and hanging on a less then sturdy thead isnt the smartest thing Ive read here.
I had I us pegged at 5 wins this past year. I have us contending for the playoffs next year. While you may not agree I do stand by what I feel.
I didnt want Flynn, Didnt want to give up a bunch of 1st round picks for RG3 and I dont think the book is closed on Weeden.
I dont see any better options out there in FA and the ones you mentioned are not franchise guys.
Im not going to try to replace someone that actually could have an upside with someone that hasnt shown any upside just because I want to see if they can beat him out.
So keep talking to your wife she can at least debate on a (EDIT: football) subject at your level. That was meant as no insult to her in case you didnt understand that statement either.
Last edited by NickBrownsFan; 01/14/13 10:30 PM.
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:
Quote:
Weeden wasn't the sole reason why the Browns are drafting 6th,.
Thank you, Im glad you agree.
But I don't agree.
Then why type it? You agree with what you wrote or you wouldnt have wrote it. At least thats how us dumber then dirt people tend to read words.
Or is this one of those taken out of context things I like to moan about? 
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Im quoting this only for context.
Good.
Quote:
You are the one saying he couldn't start for any other team. I didn't name those teams but I agree with point that he could start for most those teams.
Great. Now back up that claim. You say this because these teams are obviously horrible teams with bad QBs. I still say, without getting anointed to the job, Weeden would probably not start for any of them. If he has to compete for the job and not handed to him like Holmgren, Heckert and Shurmur did for him last season, he probably isn't starting for ANY other team. Yes, even the NY Jets (who gave the starting job to Sanchez due to his salary) would probably not start him if an open competition is held for the job.
Quote:
As someone else said we are both stating opinions and nothing wrong with that but it doesn't make either of us right or wrong.
I agree. I only suggest if you think that Weeden would start for other teams that you state the reasons why? I simply don't think he's actually better than options that other teams already have.
Of course, it remains to be seen if Weeden will be the starter on a Chudzinski led offense. I fully expect that Chudzinski won't hand the job to Weeden and will make him earn it, unlike Shurmur. If Weeden has to actually earn the spot last season, I'm not convinced that he would have been given the job. That's all.
Quote:
While you think we had some mystery QB on this team that was better then Weeden I cant agree with that statement. Was he handed the job probably but was anyone better? That is very open to debate.
I don't say that, even though I may believe it. I simply point to the fact that Weeden was anointed and had not earned the starting QB job. And if you think it's okay that any player is simply 'handed their job' then it explains why you seem to be accepting of mediocrity (or even less than mediocre play).
Quote:
I hate to break it to you but claiming posters here are not smart while being a poster here and hanging on a less then sturdy thead isnt the smartest thing Ive read here.
I know, it may seem like a fine point, but my words were 'most posters' (not all) and I don't say that I'm smarter than other NFL fans of other teams.
Quote:
I had I us pegged at 5 wins this past year.
Congrats! That's how many wins the Browns had. I had the Browns pegged for 2 wins maximum and had them at probably even odds of having no wins at all.
Quote:
I have us contending for the playoffs next year. While you may not agree I do stand by what I feel.
Interesting. Based upon what? The change in regimes and coaching staff? Our draft picks that haven't occurred yet? Our training camp and preseason? I'll wait to see what happens between now and August.
I didn't want Flynn, Didn't want to give up a bunch of 1st round picks for RG3 and I don't think the book is closed on Weeden.
Good. I hope the book isn't closed on Weeden. I simply hope that we can get something of value for him in a trade. 
Quote:
I don't see any better options out there in FA and the ones you mentioned are not franchise guys.
I only threw out Matt Moore (who I actually like as a QB) and Chase Daniel as possibilities to bring in for competition for the job. Weeden needs to earn his job if he's going to be the Browns starting QB next year. If he doesn't need to earn it, then it says bad things about Chudzinski to me.
Quote:
I'm not going to try to replace someone that actually could have an upside with someone that hasn't shown any upside just because I want to see if they can beat him out.
We simply disagree about Weeden's 'upside' potential. I don't see it. I didn't like the selection when it happened and I honestly say that I didn't see anything from him to dispel that dislike.
Quote:
So keep talking to your wife she can at least debate on a subject at your level. That was meant as no insult to her incase you didn't understand that statement either.
I don't care if it was meant as an insult to her or me. Nothing you could say here could insult me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Then why type it? You agree with what you wrote or you wouldnt have wrote it. At least thats how us dumber then dirt people tend to read words.
Or is this one of those taken out of context things I like to moan about?
Because you didn't quote my full statement. But you're not dumber than dirt. Just a dishonest one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
Then why type it? You agree with what you wrote or you wouldnt have wrote it. At least thats how us dumber then dirt people tend to read words.
Or is this one of those taken out of context things I like to moan about?
Because you didn't quote my full statement. But you're not dumber than dirt. Just a dishonest one.
dishonest????? now there is a reach of epic preportions.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 129
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 129 |
Quote:
Quote:
I am the new starting QB. I talked to Haslem today and he said it was cool.
Congrats
I had a 100% completion percentage last year, all of them touchdowns.
It may have only been 2 passes in a two hand touch pick up game but Haslem knows that stats don't lie.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,266 Likes: 168
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,266 Likes: 168 |
NRTU
I have no idea why this thread was even started, although given the Browns history with QB's it was inevitable.
The simple fact is that Weeden should do better than anyone on the available QB list in a Norv Turner style offense. Most do. Weedens skill set matches up well with the QB play that has resulted in some very mediocre QB's having career years.
So unless there is a really big move involving a trade or something completely off the wall, expect another year of Weeden to develop. The Rivers discussion is a pipe dream, as there is no viable alternative to Rivers in SD.
Now if the Browns decide to look at another QB in the draft, that is fine, I don't really see McCoy as a long term fit in the Turner offense.
There will be no playoffs. Can’t play with who we have out there and compounding it with garbage playcalling and worse execution. We don’t have good skill players on offense period. Browns 20 - Bears 17.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
I dont have to back up my claim because of the same reasons you dont. Neither of us can. Pretty simple. Weeden could start for many of those teams because he is simply put not as bad as you think he is. Im glad you dont feel your smarter then most fans of other teams. Keep bringing us fans of Browns down below their level in your obvious Weeden hate along with your Lerner/Holmgren/Heckert hate. While you are blinded by your spite for them if you cant see that the Cleveland Browns are better in talent then they were when those last 2 got here Im truly sorry. You could really enjoy a fun ride next year. This year was always about the process. Ignoring that you have to go through it doesnt make it easy but you still have to go through it. I hated Shurmur so we can agree on he sucked. Glad you had the Browns winning 2 games. Missed it by <<<<<<<<that much>>>>>>> I have the Browns contending based on the talent on the team. Read my sig on how I feel about the coach and FO. As for the rest of your nonsense I told you before Chud will have a comp for QB which is what you have stated many times is all you really want. Your just scared that Weeden will probably win that said compition because the guy could be (notice the could?) good and that would make by default your villians not so evil. Just in case you care to look it up I said the Browns may draft a QB next year (which would be this year) if Weeden failed. I have never been on his bandwagon but I do see potential in him after watching him play. I was laughed at for saying that but thats fine because I stand by what I say. I dont see anyone better atm in FA and maybe even in the draft to replace the guy because Im not sure he cant be the guy, Unlike you. I can admit when Im wrong but I by no means way shape or form think weeden is as bad as you make him out to be and that would put me in the being wrong camp for sure, if im right. Crap I feel like Toad.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 11
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 11 |
At the risk of getting my 4th of 5 posts deleted i'm going to take a shot anyways.
Realistically this call comes down to Chud but Lombardi's displeasure with Weeden is going to factor in greatly. I wonder if Lombardi tries to trade for his man crush Ryan Mallet.
I know Lombardi also isn't a fan of McCoy, stating that he is to small to last a full season in the NFL.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
If you've had 4 posts deleted, then allow me to possibly say for the 5th time...welcome to the boards
McCoy is too small and delicate to be an NFL starter. He's had his chance and he didn't get it done. He had another last-gasp against the Steelers and admitted he threw some gopher-balls just to give his guys a rest. If he hadn't already punched his ticket to the end of the bench, he did it there. He had zero chance of ever being a starter here, and may have seriously reduced his chances of ever being a starter anywhere.
So now what to do with Weeden?
I think it's safe to say he's FAR less secure with Lombardi on-board. Since we don't have much to talk about until draft time, we might as well get familiar with all the potential college and NFL QB's who may be brought in.
Mallet and Alex Smith are names people need to start considering...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 11
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 11 |
Quote:
If you've had 4 posts deleted, then allow me to possibly say for the 5th time...welcome to the boards
McCoy is too small and delicate to be an NFL starter. He's had his chance and he didn't get it done. He had another last-gasp against the Steelers and admitted he threw some gopher-balls just to give his guys a rest. If he hadn't already punched his ticket to the end of the bench, he did it there. He had zero chance of ever being a starter here, and may have seriously reduced his chances of ever being a starter anywhere.
So now what to do with Weeden?
I think it's safe to say he's FAR less secure with Lombardi on-board. Since we don't have much to talk about until draft time, we might as well get familiar with all the potential college and NFL QB's who may be brought in.
Mallet and Alex Smith are names people need to start considering...
I know it could be a long shot and a stupid idea but the only other real free agent option out there this year is Joe Flacco.
As far as the draft there isn't much worth looking at. Geno and Barkley will be drafted way to high and i doubt Wilson, Bray or Nassib will be worth a shout before the middle or end of the 3rd round.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 776 Likes: 28
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 776 Likes: 28 |
My preference would be to go defense with out first-round pick, and I think that's what we'll do. But this may be the last time for a long time that we have a shot at the top QB in a class. If KC and Philly opt to build their offensive lines, Geno Smith will be there when we pick. He's pretty damn good.
We could also trade back into the second round and likely get Barkley, Glennon or Tyler Wilson. One or two of those three will certainly be there in the second, and maybe even in the third.
I think Weeden can be much better next season, and am not opposed to going with him. But he hasn't done enough for us to stop looking.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,839 Likes: 11
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,839 Likes: 11 |
I think at this point.. you give Weeden another year, and if he doesn't do well... go after someone in next years QB class, which in my opinion will be a lot better.. Aaron Murray, AJ Macarron, and Tajh Boyd will be nice.
|
|
|
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)