|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
Manning had 28 and 29 and only 3 wins..
That's my point, beyond saying "it means nothing" because it obviously means something, it means nothing...
Weedens stats last year out of a 24 year old are different than Weedens stats from a 30 year old. it's about long term. Can he learn in time to give us what we need.
Personally, I think his game is suited to what Turner wants to do, so in IMO, he's a good interim until we get THE guy.
Who knows, he may turn out to be the guy for 7 or 8 years.. and that would be damn fine with me.
#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:
Manning had 28 and 29 and only 3 wins..
That's my point, beyond saying "it means nothing" because it obviously means something, it means nothing...
And Manning was 22 years old, not 29 years old.
Manning was destined for the HOF by age 29 but Weeden is destined to be just another failure on the Browns roster of QBs.
Just my sense of the situation (and I'm sure that I'm in the minority) but I think Weeden has less chance of being the starting QB for the Browns on Opening Day than even Colt McCoy does. I think they both have less of a chance than other potential options - specifically, free agency or the draft but it could include a trade - that the Browns could explore.
I would put the probabilities at:
1. New starting QB (50/50)
2..McCoy (30/70)
3. Weeden (20/80)
And the reasoning for it being rather simple and goes as follows:
The new ownership and front office aren't sold on Weeden. It's obvious that even before the ownership changed hands that Haslam wasn't sold on Weeden.
It's been reported that McCoy is in the 'next coach's plans'. He's younger and more mobile than Weeden. He's smarter than Weeden and plays the position more naturally than Weeden does. We don't know what the 'next coach's plans' are, but if McCoy is in them and Weeden isn't then it's likely that a QB more like McCoy is going to be brought in to 'compete with Weeden', when it may be more like a competition to see if McCoy can win the job.
That tells me that the Browns will either bring in a veteran QB to expect to win the job or to draft a QB that will compete with McCoy, not Weeden.
All this talk about the vertical game and throwing the ball deep is all poppycock and gibberish. You don't have to throw the ball 50-60 yards to go vertical. In truth, that rarely ever happens.
Chudzinski only called 22 pass plays last year that wµre of more than 30 yards. That's not even 1.5 such calls per game with Cam Newton (a power arm) as the QB. Norv Turner's San Diego team only asked Philip Rivers (not such a power arm) to attempt such passes only 19 times last season.
Even in Newton's rookie season, Chudzinski only had him throw such passes only 25 times, barely more than 1.5 per game.
Let's look at other QBs. Last year, Aaron Rodgers only made such pass attempts 13 times all season long. Peyton Manning did so only 20 times last season, and only a single attempt of over 40 yards.
You folks need to be sensible and stop listening to the talking heads on the radio that pretend to know what their talking about but really haven't a clue about the subject.
Anyhow, enough of my spiel. Just my thoughts on it, the percentages I give to each possibility (and yes, Thaddeus Lewis has 0% chance for anyone that might ask) and the reasons why.
To summarize, I think it's going to be a new starter for the Browns... again. If the next starting QB isn't someone new to the team, then I think the person on the team with the best shot to be the starting QB is McCoy followed by Weeden.
That's not to say that Weeden won't be the eventual starter because I still think his chances are 1 in 5 of winning the competition for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
It's been reported that McCoy is in the 'next coach's plans'
That report came out before we had a coach.
If you really think Colt has any chance on starting over Weeden in Chud and Norv's offense, I don't really know what to tell you..
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,229
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,229 |
Quote:
Quote:
Manning had 28 and 29 and only 3 wins..
That's my point, beyond saying "it means nothing" because it obviously means something, it means nothing...
And Manning was 22 years old, not 29 years old.
Manning was destined for the HOF by age 29 but Weeden is destined to be just another failure on the Browns roster of QBs.
Just my sense of the situation (and I'm sure that I'm in the minority) but I think Weeden has less chance of being the starting QB for the Browns on Opening Day than even Colt McCoy does. I think they both have less of a chance than other potential options - specifically, free agency or the draft but it could include a trade - that the Browns could explore.
I would put the probabilities at:
1. New starting QB (50/50)
2..McCoy (30/70)
3. Weeden (20/80)
And the reasoning for it being rather simple and goes as follows:
The new ownership and front office aren't sold on Weeden. It's obvious that even before the ownership changed hands that Haslam wasn't sold on Weeden.
It's been reported that McCoy is in the 'next coach's plans'. He's younger and more mobile than Weeden. He's smarter than Weeden and plays the position more naturally than Weeden does. We don't know what the 'next coach's plans' are, but if McCoy is in them and Weeden isn't then it's likely that a QB more like McCoy is going to be brought in to 'compete with Weeden', when it may be more like a competition to see if McCoy can win the job.
That tells me that the Browns will either bring in a veteran QB to expect to win the job or to draft a QB that will compete with McCoy, not Weeden.
All this talk about the vertical game and throwing the ball deep is all poppycock and gibberish. You don't have to throw the ball 50-60 yards to go vertical. In truth, that rarely ever happens.
Chudzinski only called 22 pass plays last year that were of more than 30 yards. That's not even 1.5 such calls per game with Cam Newton (a power arm) as the QB. Norv Turner's San Diego team only asked Philip Rivers (not such a power arm) to attempt such passes only 19 times last season.
Even in Newton's rookie season, Chudzinski only had him throw such passes only 25 times, barely more than 1.5 per game.
Let's look at other QBs. Last year, Aaron Rodgers only made such pass attempts 13 times all season long. Peyton Manning did so only 20 times last season, and only a single attempt of over 40 yards.
You folks need to be sensible and stop listening to the talking heads on the radio that pretend to know what their talking about but really haven't a clue about the subject.
Anyhow, enough of my spiel. Just my thoughts on it, the percentages I give to each possibility (and yes, Thaddeus Lewis has 0% chance for anyone that might ask) and the reasons why.
To summarize, I think it's going to be a new starter for the Browns... again. If the next starting QB isn't someone new to the team, then I think the person on the team with the best shot to be the starting QB is McCoy followed by Weeden.
That's not to say that Weeden won't be the eventual starter because I still think his chances are 1 in 5 of winning the competition for the job.
and I thought I was one of the only sane members on this board.
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Wasn't Colt McCoy in the "next coaches plans" when the coach was thought to be Chip Kelly?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
To summarize, I think it's going to be a new starter for the Browns... again. If the next starting QB isn't someone new to the team, then I think the person on the team with the best shot to be the starting QB is McCoy followed by Weeden.
I wouldn't mind for McCoy to be the starter...
if only to buy stock in whatever company makes the high blood pressure meds that ytown would be taking 
Just think...we could have a dawgtalkers loge...lol
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
Quote:
To summarize, I think it's going to be a new starter for the Browns... again. If the next starting QB isn't someone new to the team, then I think the person on the team with the best shot to be the starting QB is McCoy followed by Weeden.
I wouldn't mind for McCoy to be the starter...
if only to buy stock in whatever company makes the high blood pressure meds that ytown would be taking
Just think...we could have a dawgtalkers loge...lol
II would be stunned beyond words if we brought back McCoy, because he doesn't fit this offense in any way, shape, or form.
I think that the coaching staff would have to be told at gunpoint to start a guy who doesn't fit the offense at all.
I doubt that McCoy makes it through training camp. Every time you hear the coaches and front office speak, they talk about bringing in someone to compete with Weeden. They never even mention McCoy, and there's a reason for that ..... he doesn't fit.
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 2013
Posts: 1,805
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
To summarize, I think it's going to be a new starter for the Browns... again. If the next starting QB isn't someone new to the team, then I think the person on the team with the best shot to be the starting QB is McCoy followed by Weeden.
I wouldn't mind for McCoy to be the starter...
if only to buy stock in whatever company makes the high blood pressure meds that ytown would be taking
Just think...we could have a dawgtalkers loge...lol
II would be stunned beyond words if we brought back McCoy, because he doesn't fit this offense in any way, shape, or form.
I think that the coaching staff would have to be told at gunpoint to start a guy who doesn't fit the offense at all.
I doubt that McCoy makes it through training camp. Every time you hear the coaches and front office speak, they talk about bringing in someone to compete with Weeden. They never even mention McCoy, and there's a reason for that ..... he doesn't fit.
Color me stunned too.
Actually don't because there is zero possibility McCoy is on this team. And I seriously doubt he even sees day one of camp.
Anarchy.
There is so much fundamentally wrong with everything you just said about all of those stats about passes over 30 yards.
Anyone can set up and sling it 50 yards downfield. Yes, even Mr. McCoy can do that.
What he will never be able to do is throw the 2 most important passes in any Vertical type offense. And this includes one Alex Smith.
Vertical Stretch down the middle of the field.
25 yard outs that require the arm strength we all talk about.
That's not even debateable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
To summarize, I think it's going to be a new starter for the Browns... again. If the next starting QB isn't someone new to the team, then I think the person on the team with the best shot to be the starting QB is McCoy followed by Weeden.
I wouldn't mind for McCoy to be the starter...
if only to buy stock in whatever company makes the high blood pressure meds that ytown would be taking
Just think...we could have a dawgtalkers loge...lol
II would be stunned beyond words if we brought back McCoy, because he doesn't fit this offense in any way, shape, or form.
I think that the coaching staff would have to be told at gunpoint to start a guy who doesn't fit the offense at all.
I doubt that McCoy makes it through training camp. Every time you hear the coaches and front office speak, they talk about bringing in someone to compete with Weeden. They never even mention McCoy, and there's a reason for that ..... he doesn't fit.
that's my thought as well.. Nothing against McCoy, but it really doesn't sound like he's a fit for what we're told Norv wants to do...
I'd not be at all shocked if he wasn't dealt before the draft for something.. Pick, player dunno. He's starting off the last year of his rookie contract. Not sure if that's a factor, just thought I"d mention 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: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Just an article.... Quote:
Offseason Forecast: Baltimore Ravens
By Gregg Rosenthal
Around The League Editor
Published: Feb. 12, 2013 at 02:56 p.m.
Updated: Feb. 13, 2013 at 09:04 p.m.
With the offseason officially under way, Around the League will examine what's next for all 32 teams. The series continues with the Super Bowl XLVII champion Baltimore Ravens.
What's Changing
Ravens coach John Harbaugh made his biggest move during last season. Offensive coordinator Jim Caldwell will be back for his first full season calling plays after taking over the offense in Week 15. Linebacker Ray Lewis' retirement is just one big change to a roster in major transition for 2013.
Biggest Free Agents
» Joe Flacco, quarterback: He's not going anywhere, OK? A lot will be written about Flacco in the coming weeks, but the bottom line is he's going to be able to pay his mortgage next year, and there is zero chance he'll be on another roster. Zero. Look for the exclusive franchise tag to be used as a bridge to a new contract.
» Dannell Ellerbe, linebacker: Lewis' retirement makes Ellerbe that much more valuable. He can do a little bit of everything, and do it well. He's probably the team's top priority after Flacco.
» Ed Reed, safety: This is where things get tricky. Reed is valuable, but clearly in decline. It would not be a shock if he got more money elsewhere. (Indianapolis Colts? New England Patriots? Miami Dolphins?)
» Bryant McKinnie, tackle: He might have been one of the five most valuable players on the team during the playoffs. But do the Ravens trust him to keep the weight off?
» Paul Kruger, linebacker: The Ravens probably can't afford to keep their best pass rusher from 2011.
Other key free agents: Cornerback Cary Williams, defensive tackle Ma'ake Kemoeatu, defensive tackle Ryan McBean.
What they need
More than anything, the Ravens need salary-cap space. They will have a hard time retaining their free agents, much less adding new ones, so don't expect anything but bargain shopping before the NFL draft. The most pressing concerns come on defense. Both the safety and cornerback positions are thin and could lose starters. The Ravens lack pass rushers (although a healthy Terrell Suggs will make a huge difference), and Haloti Ngata needs help on the defensive line. The depth at wide receiver also could be improved.
Offseason crystal ball
General manager Ozzie Newsome made it clear the Ravens will not try to keep the band together at the expense of future financial pain, so it's safe to expect a lot of the names above to fly the coop. A new Flacco contract should happen, but he might miss some offseason work before that happens. Look for Kruger and Williams to find deals elsewhere. Wide receiver Anquan Boldin should stay, possibly on a reduced contract. A new long-term deal for tackle Michael Oher or restricted free-agent tight end Dennis Pitta makes sense.
Newsome's comments indicate he won't be sentimental. That's why I think Reed will be wearing another uniform in 2013.
Follow Gregg Rosenthal on Twitter @greggrosenthal.
#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: Sep 2006
Posts: 688
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 688 |
Report: Joe Flacco May Not Receive Exclusive-Rights Franchise Tag From Ravensby Doug Kyed on Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 9:04AM
The Ravens have three options with Joe Flacco: give him a long-term contract, franchise him or give him the exclusive-rights franchise tag.
If they give him the exclusive-rights franchise tag, it would cost the team $20 million, but Flacco could not negotiate with other teams. If he’s franchised, he’d earn $14.5 million, but another team would almost certainly swoop in and offer him a contract. The Ravens would then either have to match the offer or surrender Flacco for two first-round draft picks. If the Ravens give Flacco a long-term deal, his salary would likely fall somewhere in between those two figures.
Unfortunately for the Ravens, they’re already $5 million over the salary cap without Flacco. That’s why Peter King of Sports Illustrated says “Don’t be so sure of that exclusive tag.”
King says the best option for the Ravens would be to sign Flacco to a back-loaded long-term deal with cap-friendly figures for 2013 and 2014. The Ravens have until March 4 to franchise him. Free agency starts on March 12, so no other team would be able to negotiate with the quarterback until then.
King noted that both owner Steve Bisciotti and general manager Ozzie Newsome made comments that hinted at letting certain free agents walk.
“We’ve proven it two years in a row that we can kind of shock the world and disappoint our fans at the same time, by letting some of these guys go, but letting young guys fill in and then going out and getting good values on the free-agent market,” Bisciotti said.
Newsome also mentioned he’d like the Ravens to build around a core group of young players.
“We’re trying to build where we can win Super Bowls more than just one more time. I think our team is structured differently this time also,” Newsome said. “We do have some veterans that will probably be retiring, but we have a great nucleus of young players and players that are just heading into their prime that we’re going to build this team around.”
Of course, Flacco could easily be considered among that group of players just entering their prime. But the Ravens will likely be looking to rebuild in 2013, and giving one player a one-year, $20 million deal may not help that process.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i can't see ozzie mortgaging the farm the day after the super bowl. the day before maybe.........
it'll be interesting to see if our new FO will be players or just build thru the draft.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
lol ytown i'm pretty sure I was making a joke. we could take a look a couch as well....free food and drinks in the loge off of profits from peens meds...  We can speculate all we want about who fits where, but the fact remains that it's equally ridiculous to bash wheeden and mccoy. Both of these guys have 1 year in a system that is no longer here. Until we get some results from the position this circus will go on.
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Speculation at its finest... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...-stay-in-miami/Report: Tannehill, others trying to get Matt Moore to stay in Miami Posted by Josh Alper on February 17, 2013, 4:59 PM EST The conventional wisdom around the league right now is that teams looking for quarterback help in the offseason aren’t going to have much to choose from. There’s no standouts coming out of college, no one’s sure what the 49ers and Seahawks will do with Alex Smith and Matt Flynn and there aren’t any clearcut starters headed for free agency other than Joe Flacco. Flacco’s not getting there, of course, which means that lesser names like Matt Moore could be in high demand due to the dearth of supply on the market. Despite that, Barry Jackson of the Miami Herald reports that Ryan Tannehill and others from the Dolphins have been reaching out to Moore to try to sell him on the idea of staying in Miami. Getting Moore to pass up at least a shot at a starting job will be no easy task, especially if Jackson is right about one of the teams that might have Moore on the radar. Jackson writes that Browns offensive coordinator Norv Turner is a “big fan” of Moore, a theory that has some support in the Chargers’ 2011 pursuit of Moore before he wound up signing with the Dolphins. That scenario is very similar to this one as Moore passed on a chance to back up Philip Rivers so he could play behind a far less secure starter in Chad Henne. With Brandon Weeden’s starting status anything but secure in Cleveland, Moore could wind up trying the same route he took last time he was on the open market.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
It's been reported that McCoy is in the 'next coach's plans'
That report came out before we had a coach.
If you really think Colt has any chance on starting over Weeden in Chud and Norv's offense, I don't really know what to tell you..
Indeed, which tells me that the powers that be like McCoy's development in the game more than they like Weeden's.
You can agree or disagree. Just an observation. There aren't any statements of support from anyone in the organization about keeping Weeden as the starting QB. In fact, you've heard that there will be a competition for the spot - unlike the anointing that Weeden received from the former regime.
Combine that with the recent report that the team is willing to consider trading Weeden before the draft. Nobody is talking about trading McCoy. Of course, the claims will be that you couldn't get anything for McCoy. I think you could get something for him, but probably not the value that he provides for the Browns so they have no desire to send him anywhere else.
Now, you say that you "don't know what to say to" me if I think that McCoy could start over Weeden. Well, I gave you the reasons why I think he has a better chance of being the starter. Now, I'm curious to hear why you think that Weeden has a better chance than McCoy (or anyone else).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Wasn't Colt McCoy in the "next coaches plans" when the coach was thought to be Chip Kelly?
I don't think that the Browns front office was sure who their head coach would be at the time they made the statement.
Chip Kelly was who the media thought that the new Browns ownership and front office wanted. You never heard that from the Browns decision-makers. Just because you think it, doesn't make it so.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
To summarize, I think it's going to be a new starter for the Browns... again. If the next starting QB isn't someone new to the team, then I think the person on the team with the best shot to be the starting QB is McCoy followed by Weeden.
I wouldn't mind for McCoy to be the starter...
if only to buy stock in whatever company makes the high blood pressure meds that ytown would be taking
Just think...we could have a dawgtalkers loge...lol
II would be stunned beyond words if we brought back McCoy, because he doesn't fit this offense in any way, shape, or form.
I think that the coaching staff would have to be told at gunpoint to start a guy who doesn't fit the offense at all.
I doubt that McCoy makes it through training camp. Every time you hear the coaches and front office speak, they talk about bringing in someone to compete with Weeden. They never even mention McCoy, and there's a reason for that ..... he doesn't fit.
Color me stunned too.
Actually don't because there is zero possibility McCoy is on this team. And I seriously doubt he even sees day one of camp.
Anarchy.
There is so much fundamentally wrong with everything you just said about all of those stats about passes over 30 yards.
Anyone can set up and sling it 50 yards downfield. Yes, even Mr. McCoy can do that.
What he will never be able to do is throw the 2 most important passes in any Vertical type offense. And this includes one Alex Smith.
Vertical Stretch down the middle of the field.
25 yard outs that require the arm strength we all talk about.
That's not even debateable.
You know that vertical offenses aren't pass heavy, right? They use the run to draw defenders up and then go over their heads - sometimes deep. If you want to throw 25 outs (which McCoy can throw) then plan it. But you'll see more vertical passes down the middle of the field than along the sidelines.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
Quote:
Quote:
Wasn't Colt McCoy in the "next coaches plans" when the coach was thought to be Chip Kelly?
I don't think that the Browns front office was sure who their head coach would be at the time they made the statement.
Chip Kelly was who the media thought that the new Browns ownership and front office wanted. You never heard that from the Browns decision-makers. Just because you think it, doesn't make it so.
Plus, do we know that this was ever actually stated by anyone in authority with the Browns? I seem to remember that this was reported as someone with the Browns told McCoy that ...
It was never attributed to anyone in particular. And you are right. At the time we didn't have a head coach or a GM or a VP of personnel. So who could have said this? Banner or Haslam. Does anyone believe that one of these two guys would tell McCoy that he was in the next coaches plans? Even if McCoy was truly in the future plans, I can't see either of these 2 actually verbalizing this to anyone but each other.
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
I am sure McCoy is in their plans. They plan on cutting him and saving 2.5 mil in cap space.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,826 |
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
I am sure McCoy is in their plans. They plan on cutting him and saving 2.5 mil in cap space.
That could be, but if that's the case, they wouldn't have to say anything about it. The logic doesn't follow.
Why say anything if that is the plan? If the intent was to increase McCoy's value before trading him, it would seem to cause teams to shy away.
I think you're hoping. Are you one of those that wanted McCoy gone last year but were twarted when he remained on the roster instead of Seneca Wallace?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
And you're not hoping McCoy is the only QB of the current crop still on the roster?  I like the guy but I hold no illusions about his ability. I see no way he's a starter for us other than injury. I also agree with Mourg. I think they'll cut him for the cap addition. Now they MAY try and resign him but who knows how that would go.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
And you're not hoping McCoy is the only QB of the current crop still on the roster?
Actually, I don't care who the QB is. All I care about is that the best player at the position is the one starting. I don't think that Weeden is even better than McCoy. I was upset that we were told that Weeden would be an improvement over McCoy. When we saw the product on the field, it proved that he wasn't any better and in many ways was even worse. The Browns wasted a first round pick on him and I contend that if the previous regime hadn't done so that we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now.
Quote:
I like the guy but I hold no illusions about his ability. I see no way he's a starter for us other than injury.
I have no illusions about McCoy's abilities but having a QB competition is going to happen. Weeden isn't going to be handed the job. We'll get to see what McCoy can do on a level playing field. I think that you'll be surprised at the results.
If it comes down to only the current QBs on the roster in training camp, then I think that McCoy would be named the starter over Weeden after the QB competition was over.
Quote:
I also agree with Mourg. I think they'll cut him for the cap addition. Now they MAY try and resign him but who knows how that would go.
I don't think they'll cut McCoy at all. They have the cap space to keep him, but they might ask him to rework his contract with escalators based on playing time and performance.
Everyone keeps saying that Weeden fits Turner's system but the primary focus is put on his arm strength and nothing else. Not Weeden's football intelligence, his decision making, his ability to take a hit because of his size, etc. The truth is, they want to keep him as the starting QB because a first round pick was used on him.
They don't even consider that despite using a first round pick on him, we are STILL having a discussion about quarterbacks. It has nothing to do with McCoy either. It has everything to do with Weeden and what he failed to show.
The new regime has already said there will be a legitimate competition for the QB position which leads to the discussion. There will be someone brought in (and it's been reported that Norv Turner likes Matt Moore). I remember stating last month that Matt Moore as an option among the free agent QBs and being laughed at and ridiculed for it. He's better than Weeden and would probably win the job if he was brought in. Maybe it's all a ruse and they really are looking towards Alex Smith or someone else. Nobody outside the top tier of the Browns front office really knows anything other than the Browns will have someone else seeking the QB job in training camp.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
imagine if you compared Weeden to the other Manning's rookie year.
i think the comparison is a bit stale. not all QBs are created equally and we need our coaching staff to evaluate what they like and don't like about Weeden and figure out what to do from there.
he did some good things, but he also didn't seem to progress much. we'll see.
I took the time to compare Weeden's rookie year to the "other" Manning's rookie year. I also show Eli's stats for the 3 seasons that followed...
.Rk.....Player.....Comp..Att.....Pct......Yds...Avg...Yds/G...TD...Int...Sck...Rate ..
19.....Weeden... 297...517...57.4...3,385..6.5....225.7...14 ...17.. 28...72.6 ...
.Rk.....Player.....Comp..Att.....Pct......Yds.....Avg...Yds/G...TD...Int...Sck...Rate ..
..3....P.Manning....326...575....56.7....3,739...6.5....233.7...26....28...22....71.2..
The other Manning...Eli
....yr......Rk......Player.......Comp....Att....Pct.....Yds....Avg....Yds/G...TD...Int...Sck...Rate ..
..2004...35....E.Manning.......95......197...48.2....1043...5.29...115.9....6.....9.....13....55.4...
..2005...03........."..............294.....557...52.8....3762...6.75...235.1...24...17....28....75.9...
..2006...06..........".............301.....522...57.7....3244...6.22...202.8...24...18....25....77.0..
..2007...07..........".............297.....529...56.1....3336...6.31...208.5...23....20...27....73.9...
I did notice, no one addressed the issue of the other rookie starters last season, who "were supported" and continue to be supported, by their front office and coaching staff.
In Indy, Andrew Luck is supported...
In Seattle, Wilson is supported...
In Miami, Tannehill is supported...
In DC, Griffin is supported...Griffin had surgery on his knee and the Redskins are still committed to Griffin as their starter in 2013.
But, in Cleveland, even though our rookie starter outperformed the other rookie starters in some areas.
...even though Weeden played with the most "inexperienced" supporting cast of all the rookie starters.
....even though Weeden was placed in an offense that was not tailored to his strengths.
...this Cleveland Browns front office chose not to support Weeden as their starter. Unlike the rest of the rookie starters, Weeden was told that he would have to compete for the starting position.
Those pointing to the fact that this front office did not draft Weeden...that is the absolute "worst" reason a front office could use to defend their choice, to "not support" their starting QB.
When one uses the excuse that Weeden was not drafted by this front office...it means their decision is based on "politics" and on the "personal egos" of those in the front office...and not based on football principles or on Weeden's talent.
Looking at Weeden's skill set and his experience dating back to the offense he played in at Oklahoma State...Weeden is better suited to play in Chud/Turner's offense than he was to play in Shurmur's WCO.
Had Weeden's skill set not fit well in the Chud/Turner offense, I could better understand our front office's lack of support for Weeden.
Not supporting Weeden, is more of a reflection on the quality of the Browns front office than it is on Weeden's rookie performance, IMO.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I did notice, no one addressed the issue of the other rookie starters last season, who "were supported" and continue to be supported, by their front office and coaching staff.
In Indy, Andrew Luck is supported...
In Seattle, Wilson is supported...
In Miami, Tannehill is supported...
In DC, Griffin is supported...Griffin had surgery on his knee and the Redskins are still committed to Griffin as their starter in 2013.
But, in Cleveland, even though our rookie starter outperformed the other rookie starters in some areas.
...even though Weeden played with the most "inexperienced" supporting cast of all the rookie starters.
....even though Weeden was placed in an offense that was not tailored to his strengths.
...this Cleveland Browns front office chose not to support Weeden as their starter. Unlike the rest of the rookie starters, Weeden was told that he would have to compete for the starting position.
Those pointing to the fact that this front office did not draft Weeden...that is the absolute "worst" reason a front office could use to defend their choice, to "not support" their starting QB.
When one uses the excuse that Weeden was not drafted by this front office...it means their decision is based on "politics" and on the "personal egos" of those in the front office...and not based on football principles or on Weeden's talent.
Looking at Weeden's skill set and his experience dating back to the offense he played in at Oklahoma State...Weeden is better suited to play in Chud/Turner's offense than he was to play in Shurmur's WCO.
Had Weeden's skill set not fit well in the Chud/Turner offense, I could better understand our front office's lack of support for Weeden.
Not supporting Weeden, is more of a reflection on the quality of the Browns front office than it is on Weeden's rookie performance, IMO.
In all of that you still don't address that he is 6 or 7 years older than everybody on that list..
Do you realize there are only 12 QBs in the entire NFL that are starting and are older than Weeden? Those QBs are:
Matt Hasslebeck - 37
Peyton Manning - 36
Tom Brady - 35
Drew Brees - 34
Carson Palmer - 33
Eli Manning - 32
Tony Romo - 32
Michael Vick - 32
Philip Rivers - 31
Matt Schaub - 31
Ben Roethlisberger - 30
Ryan Fitzpatrick - 30
Know what that list tells me? If you are 30 or older in the NFL as a QB, either you are producing or you are on the hot seat......
And if you go to the guys that right behind Weeden in age you get:
Aaron Rodgers - 29
Jay Cutler - 29
Joe Flacco - 28
Kevin Kolb - 28
Chad Henne - 27
Mark Sanchez - 26
Once you get into your late 20s as a QB, you need to have proven yourself, not be in development mode.. because the QBs on both of those lists that aren't producing are all being questioned.... I know Weeden is a second year QB but when you are the 13th oldest starting QB in the league and you are bragging about putting up decent rookie numbers, you are going to get questioned... sorry about that.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,681
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,681 |
For the long term is age isn't a plus, but I don't see it a problem for the next 5 years.
I also don't think his age is going to hinder his short term progress.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
For the long term is age isn't a plus, but I don't see it a problem for the next 5 years.
I also don't think his age is going to hinder his short term progress.
I agree. If it takes hin another 3 or 4 years to reach "Super Bowl" level, then we'd have a 32-33 year old QB with Super Bowl level skills. Some QBs play far later than that .... and such a circumstance could give us a 2-5 year window.
Given what we've had over the years, I'd find that to be acceptable.
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: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
Do you realize there are only 12 QBs in the entire NFL that are starting and are older than Weeden?
ONLY 12??? ONLY???? That is over a THIRD of the leagues starting QB's add in the ones right behind him in age and you have OVER HALF.....I understand the point you are trying to make...but I don't think age has anything to do with anything...you either prove you can play or you won't be...
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
For the long term is age isn't a plus, but I don't see it a problem for the next 5 years.
I also don't think his age is going to hinder his short term progress.
The problem is that his progress is an unknown, it's a gamble as to how much he is actually going to progress..... so if you are going to gamble on a guy progressing from a decent rookie year to being a high quality NFL starter in a few years, do you want to take that gamble with a guy where the payoff, even if you are right, is 3-4 years of playing at that level or do you want to gamble on a guy where, if you are right, the payoff is 10-12 years of playing at that level?
If picking an elite QB in the first round of the NFL draft is like betting on green in roulette, would you be more likely to bet on green if the payoff was 5:1 or 12:1?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
ONLY 12??? ONLY???? That is over a THIRD of the leagues starting QB's add in the ones right behind him in age and you have OVER HALF.....
Yes, and they are, for the most part, the best half with a few exceptions... Being in the top half in age and at the very bottom in productivity is not a good combination... regardless of what your potential is.
Quote:
I understand the point you are trying to make...but I don't think age has anything to do with anything...you either prove you can play or you won't be...
I agree, the question is, how long do you get to prove it? Peyton had one struggling year and then took off almost immediately, Eli had a few struggling years before it looked like he "got it", Joe Flacco seems to have just incrementally improved each year for 5 years to the point where he looks like he's got it, Brees struggled for 2 full years before he got it... So that is the question, how long does Weeden get to figure it out? What does his learning curve this coming year have to look like? I don't think it has to be Peyton-like where he comes out and wins 13 games, but if he posts another QBR in the low to mid 70s, does he get a 3rd year? Brees, for example, didn't play much his first year, his QBR his first year as a starter was 76, his second year it fell to 67... his ypa got worse, his TD:INT got worse, his completion % got worse... if Weeden has that kind of year, does he get a 3rd year?
So you say, you either prove you can play or you don't.. Brees really didn't, not in year 3 of his career (2nd as the starter).. but he was given more time and we all know what happened... most QBs don't do what Brees did... so my question remains, how much time does Weeden get and what does he have to do to earn even more time?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Do you realize there are only 12 QBs in the entire NFL that are starting and are older than Weeden?
ONLY 12??? ONLY???? That is over a THIRD of the leagues starting QB's add in the ones right behind him in age and you have OVER HALF.....I understand the point you are trying to make...but I don't think age has anything to do with anything...you either prove you can play or you won't be...
In my opinion the comparisons of Weeden to Manning(s) is pointless. In fact, comparing Weeden to ANY rookie QB is pointless, and while we're at it, comparing him to any starters his age or older still doesn't address the biggest question:
How many QB's his age are developmental?
As has been explained well-before he was even drafted, the window for development for Weeden was tiny. Historically speaking, there has only been ONE QB his age who was considered developmental, which means historically speaking, there have been no 30-year old developmental QB's.
The point here isn't trying to draw a correlation between Weeden and other rookies. There cannot be a correlation because of the huge age difference.
Everything can be set aside for one simple fact: If Weeden doesn't make big strides in the year where he turns 30, he won't get a year here as a 31-year old developmental QB.
Truth be told, it doesn't appear that he's a lock to get even his second year. Assuming he does, he's got to really make huge strides or he's out because teams don't develop QB's in their 30's. Nothing else needs to be said.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,681
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,681 |
I understand what you and DC are saying. If he doesn't develop, I agree.
The point I am making is we have him and his age doesn't impact one thing. Either he can get it done or he can't.
I am certainly not saying we look at him and see how it pans out 4 years from now. I agree, this year is the story. Either he makes big strides or we go fishing elsewhere.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
Every time you hear the coaches and front office speak, they talk about bringing in someone to compete with Weeden.
We have been through this before. No one in the front office or coaching staff has said anything about "bringing in" anyone. All they have said is that Weeden will compete for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
I frequently do business with a Miami based business and have a good relationship with their shipping manager. He shocked me this morning when he asked, "Are you guys really gonna steal Matt Moore from us"? Having been a bit out of the loop lately I didnt have a reply.  Any REAL news of this possibility?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805 |
Quote:
Truth be told, it doesn't appear that he's a lock to get even his second year. Assuming he does, he's got to really make huge strides or he's out because teams don't develop QB's in their 30's. Nothing else needs to be said.
Exactly.
And given everyone that's being mentioned brought in, I'd bet he does get this year. As the starter. These QB's being mentioned are junk.
Bring in Moore or DA to back Weeden up and get rid of McCoy for a Dysert late rounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
'Peen, my response was more towards Mac and his incessant yammerings about the Manning brothers. I understand your statement which is even more direct than mine: Nothing matters at this point except for his one last shot to keep the job.
Quote:
Quote:
Every time you hear the coaches and front office speak, they talk about bringing in someone to compete with Weeden.
We have been through this before. No one in the front office or coaching staff has said anything about "bringing in" anyone. All they have said is that Weeden will compete for the job.
No, they haven't said they will bring someone in. But they also haven't said one positive thing about McCoy.
Based on everything they've said, it's almost a given that we are going outside the organization for competition. Whether that's a free agent or a drafted guy, by not speaking about McCoy, they have made it apparent he isn't the "competition." Sure, they'll make some lame statement about how "all three guys will compete for the starting job" but we all know that's a farce.
We can't prove they'll bring a QB in from the outside, but the overwhelming circumstantial evidence says we will.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
I'd read the quote from Haslam before. He doesn't specifically say it's coming from the outside. It just is surely damned assumed, hehe.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
"Bring in a new Quarterback" and also the word "sign" certainly, and strongly, implies that it will be someone from the outside.
Why would we need to "bring in a new QB", and "sign" someone already on the roster? In fact, how would we do so?
The more I think about everything I have read, the more likely the name Moore lands on our roster seems to become. I have read that Norv Turner really likes him a great deal, and he could certainly be competition for Weeden.
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: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
I'm not sure you are ever going to get it Mac
You can throw out all the facts and data you keep compiling. It doesn't matter. What bothers most people about weeden is age. He might be fine for 7 or 8 years or he might not. The thing is, we don't have time to develop him.
You take a kid 23 or 24 years old, he has the exact same record and stats as Weeden and you say,, hey, not bad, we have some time to develop him,, Grow him up, figure out what we need around him.
With Weeden, we got a year.. that's about it.
I don't dislike weeden.. not at all. But if there is an alternative to him that's as good or better and younger and has a great upside,, I'm good with that. Otherwise, you play him and next years draft class for QB's stronger,, so there you go.
#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: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217 |
Actually it's more than that.
You can't "bring in" someone who is "already here".
Even semantics can't dance around that one.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Who will be the QB III
|
|
