|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
I do hope he succeeds. It's a possibility. However, he was worse than McCoy and that is saying something. And it really freaking kills me when people compare him to Luck and RGIII. It's like the guy gets a free pass around here. And I can't figure it out.......other than hope and guys not wanting to admit that Heckert blew it by drafting him that high.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196 |
We agree to some extent and disagree to another.
I think H&H made a desperation pick with Weeden. But I do believe that desperation came due to the fact they didn't feel they had a legit. QB in Colt. And I agree with them on not having a legit QB in Colt. But I do think this FO's approach in signing Campbell is a better idea that overspending in the draft for one. ( Which hopefully they won't. )
I do know that Colt's arm is quite questionable. But beyond that, he seemed almost afraid to push the ball downfield. He was "the check down king".
Do I think Shurmer was a good HC? Not by a mile! So why Colt had such a lack of confidence in throwing the ball is beyond me.
And seriously, if you wish to talk about giving someone a free pass? Why should Colt get one for throwing the ball into the ground in order to give his WR's a rest when he did get the start last year?
I lost a lot of respect for Colt on that one. But yes, I think H&H reached on Weeden somewhat. I agree with why they did it, not that I agree that they did it.
They needed a starting QB that wasn't afraid to throw the ball for more than 5 yards so we could move the chains.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
But, if we just give Weeden another year in a better offense, he'll prove to you that he's better than Colt McCoy and really was the best rookie QB of the 2012 NFL Draft. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
That is why Weeden was such a wasted pick
Really ...you can determine Weeden was a wasted pick with one year under Shurmur. Really? wow
Yes. I'll say that Weeden was a wasted pick and I don't even have to say anything about his play last season or who the HC was. Absolutely. It was a wasted pick. It was a huge mistake that assisted in getting the men that drafted him fired.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Good for you. And I can tell that Weeden sucks, too. 
+1 
I'll add my voice to the "Weeden sucks!" column of the ledger.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
It absolutely was a knee jerk reaction. It's obvious you didn't consider the post I was responding to, or read my entire (though short) reply. You would have recognized that I was only defending TR's comment....not any of the things you're saying. Nowhere did I say Weeden's play was on the level of Luck or RGIII. You overreacted and won't admit it. I sure didn't see where Richardson's comments were in the context you posted....hence how this whole thing got started.
Well, here's what I was replying to. It was your response to one of pblack's posts.
Quote:
Poster: jfanent
Subject: Re: Browns signed QB Jason Campbell
pblack's comment:
Running back Trent Richardson told NFL Network's Steve Wyche during an off-camera chat between segments on "NFL AM" from the Scouting Combine that Browns QB Brandon Weeden had trouble reading defenses on occasion during his rookie season.
So did Luck and RGIII. I don't see this as anything important, he was a damn rookie in the NFL.
You were comparing Luck and RG3 to Weeden, saying that they had trouble reading defenses on occasion.
All QBs, including future HOF QBs don't read defenses correctly. Truth is, Weeden can't read defenses AT ALL. That's the summation of what we need to know about Weeden's abilities to read defenses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815 |
Quote:
Quote:
Good for you. And I can tell that Weeden sucks, too.
+1
I'll add my voice to the "Weeden sucks!" column of the ledger.
It's a shame then the FO can't tell that. 
" Browns CEO Joe Banner said Thursday that when Cleveland opens training camp, quarterback Brandon Weeden will be the starter "
Link
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
Quote:
Sometimes, you should just admit you were wrong. It would go easier for you. No big deal. We are all wrong occasionally.
Here is the first thing you said on the matter:
Quote:
So did Luck and RGIII. I don't see this as anything important, he was a damn rookie in the NFL.
That was in response to the TRich's comments about Weeden not reading defenses. Sure doesn't look like you were defending TRich. Sure looks like you were making crap up about Luck and RGIII. Sure looks like you were defending Weeden by calling him a rookie.
Let it go, man. You were wrong. No big deal. But, you are making yourself look bad by blaming others for pointing it out.
Holy Shiite! I don't see how this could be so misconstrued. What was I wrong about....that all rookies have occasionally have problems reading defenses? Others got my point. Unless maybe you thought I was referring to TR being the damn rookie? I was defending TR, nothing more. As others here will verify, I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. I'm not in this case. BTW, I'm not sold on Weeden....I'd give him about a 15-20% chance of being our starter in 2014.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
You couldn't know, but I heard the interview between Banner and Kiley & Booms on WKRK at the announcement about the tri-cast for Browns games next year.
When training camp opens, he'll be the starter. What about at the end of training camp?
I missed nothing though. I've heard that they are also willing to trade McCoy and/or Weeden. At this point, none of our comments really mean squat and we're all just speculating about what the future is going to hold for the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
BTW, I'm not sold on Weeden....I'd give him about a 15-20% chance of being our starter in 2013.
I corrected your statement to make my sentiment.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815 |
Quote:
I missed nothing though. I've heard that they are also willing to trade McCoy and/or Weeden.
That makes it seem like the FO has no clue what they are doing...Why waste time and money on something /someone you say SUCKS ?
That would be BAD BUSINESS wouldn't it?
Would it be better business to cut your losses and get someone who doesn't SUCK?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Good for you. And I can tell that Weeden sucks, too.
+1
I'll add my voice to the "Weeden sucks!" column of the ledger.
It's a shame then the FO can't tell that.
" Browns CEO Joe Banner said Thursday that when Cleveland opens training camp, quarterback Brandon Weeden will be the starter "
Link
That statement was made exactly one year after this one:
Quote:
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Browns coach Pat Shurmur said here today that "we're moving forward'' with Colt McCoy as the Browns starting quarterback. "At this point, he's our quarterback,'' said Shurmur. "We're looking forward to him being our guy and I'm looking forward to seeing him improve. We believe he has a chance to be a fine player in this league.''
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
What it indicates is that Weeden, unless he is traded (which is highly doubtful) will go into camp as the #1 starting QB and the job will be his to lose. We could debate whether one of us or the other thinks that he'll earn the starting job after camp breaks but all that we'd be doing is speculating and nothing more. That's all that we really can do at this point.
I also heard that the Browns stated that Colt McCoy was in their future plans. What can you deduce from that?
Truth is that we'll just have to wait and see what happens.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815 |
Quote:
I also heard that the Browns stated that Colt McCoy was in their future plans. What can you deduce from that?
Truth is that we'll just have to wait and see what happens.
Well I would first ask for the link or at the very least who made the statement before I make any comment on it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 316
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 316 |
Quote:
Quote:
I also heard that the Browns stated that Colt McCoy was in their future plans. What can you deduce from that?
Truth is that we'll just have to wait and see what happens.
Well I would first ask for the link or at the very least who made the statement before I make any comment on it.
Bet I can find a link from a year ago stating that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 35
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 35 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 6,815 |
The title "Brandon Weeden, Colt McCoy still in Browns plans amidst Alex Smith rumor" This was the author's RUMOR so I wouldn't believe it holds much water.
I could not find any statement made by the BROWNS coaching or FO in the article that mention anything about Colt other than his salary was manageable and he was on the roster.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Quote:
We agree to some extent and disagree to another.
Pit, I am NOT saying that I think Colt should be the starter and is a bonafide NFL QB. I am saying that Weeden looked just as bad--if not worse--than McCoy and that Weeden played w/better talent and had the benefit of a full off-season. I didn't get all the hostility and hate towards Colt, while Weeden got a free pass.
However, I think I may have figured it out. I wasn't on this board and the topic wasn't a huge issue on the other board, but I am betting that there were QB Board Wars between Colt and Weeds all last pre-season and even during the season. I bet people chose sides. I bet the majority chose Weeden and that is why people are not evaluating him objectively. It's a mini-version of the Timid/Holcomb Wars. The DA/BQ Wars. I get it, now. LOL
I have a question for all of you: Just what did Timid, Holcomb, DA, or BQ do after they left here? Holcomb had the most success and that wasn't much at all. None of them did squat to prove they deserved so much of our support. I don't think that this one is going to turn out different.
Pit, you say Colt was always checking down. So did Weeden. It was infuriating to hear about his big arm and then watch him dump it off. Someone had the stinking nerve to compare Weeden's completion percentage to Luck's. Well, luck is slinging the ball 15-20 yards downfield and making tough throws to pick-up first downs while Weeden dumps and dumps and then throws a 2 yd. pass in the flat on 3rd and 9.
Respect? Did you respect Weeden when he threw it out of bounds on 4th down because he didn't want to get hit? Did you respect him when he could have easily picked up the first down on 3rd and 2, but chose to slide down behind the LOS? Did you respect him for blaming the coaches for calling a play they hadn't practiced that particular week? [I'd love to hear P. Manning's reaction to that one...LOL]. Do you respect him when he holds the ball forever and then crumbles under late pressure? Do you respect his reputation as a guy who does not work hard or put the time in the film room?
Hopefully, everything will magically change. It will all come down to a simple offensive scheme change. Weeden will magically transform into a good qb because we are now going to be running an offense that fits his strengths. There is a chance it can happen. I am NOT saying it won't happen. Let's just say I am skeptical.
I fail to see how this will help him read defenses pre-snap and call proper audibles.
I fail to see how he is going to be able to make his post-snap reads quicker.
I fail to see how his anticipation skills will improve.
I fail to see how this will improve his courage.
I fail to see how this will make him study harder.
I fail to see how this will make him more accountable.
I fail to see how this will make him more accurate, especially when pressured.
But........perhaps it is like you guys say. All of those problems will magically disappear because he is now playing in an offense that fits his needs and will have better coaches than he did last year. Jefferson Starship had a song about: If only you believed in miracles, so would I --or something like that.
Now, all sarcasm aside.......I do think there are ways this new offensive scheme and coaching change will help Weeden and I will be glad to tell them to any of you, if you so desire. I just don't think that many of Weeden's deficiencies are going to be magically fixed because of the coaching change.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,805 |
Nice mouthful "Vers".
Shurmer's pathetic version of a WCO had a huge affect on Weeden.
Now is the year to truly evaluate this guy in an offense catered to his skillset.
So I for one will leave this alone until week 10 or so. Because Weed's WILL be the starting QB on this team.
Anyone who doesn't see what we did by bringing in Campbell just doesn't get it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Report: Colt McCoy has been told he’s in Chip Kelly’s plansPlease note that it's the reporters that assumed that the Browns next head coach would be Chip Kelly. Banner doesn't say that Kelly would be the Browns' next coach. That's assumed by the writers of the article.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
2012 rookie QB stats...
...Total passing yds..............Yds/game.............TDs/INTs....td/int...........
...Luck..........4374............Luck..........273.........Wilson.......26/10
...Weeden.....3385**.........Weeden......225**......Luck..........23/18
...Tannehill....3294............RG.............213.........RG............20/5
...RG............3200............Tannehl......205.........Weeden.....14/17
...Wilson.......3118............Wilson.......194.........Tannehl......12/13
Completion %....................QB rating..............Passes +20yds..........Passes +40yds............
...Luck.........54.1............RG.............102.4.....Luck.........65...........Luck........11...
...Weeden....57.4**.........Wilson........100.0.....Weeden....48**.........Wilson.....11...
...Tannehl.....58.3............Luck...........76.5......RG...........47............Weeden....6**.
...Wilson......64.1............Tannehl.......76.1......Wilson......42............RG...........6...
...RG...........65.6............Weeden......72.6**....Tannehl.....40............Tannehl....3...
Attempts/game
...Luck........39.2
...Weeden...34.5**
...Tannehl....30.2
...RG..........26.2
...Wilson.....24.6
Avg yds/completion
...Weeden...6.5**
...Tannehl....6.8
...Luck........7.0
...Wilson.....7.9
...RG..........8.1
Just the facts...
Whether those looking at these performances give any weight to the fact that Weeden played on a team that was very young with little NFL experience is up to the fan.
Those attempting to drive their agenda will view these numbers as Weeden sucks...the unbiased fan will see that Weeden's performance was comparable to the other rookie starters in 2012.
It is very true that all rookie QBs have trouble reading NFL defenses and some more so than others. Of the rookie QBs, Luck was probably the best prepared due to having a father who played in the NFL, plus his QB coaching in college.
...yet Luck had the lowest completion percentage (54.1) of all the rookie starters at QB and he had the most interceptions (18) and his QB rating was only 3.9% points higher than Weeden's.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 31
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 31 |
I agree with you completely about Luck. But he did come from a pro style offense at Stanford, where he was asked to do just as much as he was asked to do at Indy. Albeit on a different level. He was the second best rookie QB last year. Wilson was number one.
As for Weedon, I understand your concerns, but I don't think he was as bad as you saw. Not saying what you saw was wrong, just his talents weren't maximized by the staff. He was a rookie, an old one, but still a rookie. I did not want to draft him, especially where we did, thought Foles would be a better value. He did come from a spread and those guys always struggle. In the end he performed about where I expected.
"If people don't occasionally walk away from you shaking their heads, you're doing something wrong." John Gierach
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 19,058
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 19,058 |
Just my guess, but I think the offensive coaching staff likes Weeden more than they want to admit. And that's good. Bring in some competition to hopefully elevate his game and focus.
Interesting stats, Mac. On those 20+ and 40+ yards...did those include attempts as well or are they just completions? Also, were other QB info available for those specific stats?
At DT, context and meaning are a scarecrow kicking at moving goalposts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
Quote:
Weeden can't read defenses AT ALL. That's the summation of what we need to know about Weeden's abilities to read defenses.
here is what Trent said... "Weeden had trouble reading defenses on occasion during his rookie season."
ummm - me thinks you are full of CRAPOLA on this one.
You actually got the gall to put the quote up by Trent to state that what Jf stated was so off the wall. And then you state what that was - which was way off the wall compared to Jf
And you put it in print right there for all to see how Wrong you ARE...sorry I just don't get it.
Just what part of "ON OCCASION" suddenly gets morphed by you to Can't read defenses AT ALL  Actually out of the two interpretations Jf happens to be correct. Again the Trent quote stated On Occasion as a Rookie QB.
Jf was correct in stating so did Luck, RG3  What how DARE I...lol
Now where is this thought process remotely stating Weeden is as good Luck or RG3 - all it was stating that you could have put the NAMES LUCK or RG3 into that phrase.
Luck On Occasion as a rookie QB had difficulties reading Defenses.
RG3 On Occasion as a rookie QB had difficulties reading Defenses.
I understand this is the Dead Zone. I have no idea who this Jf kid is or what history of posting. I just read this for what it was worth. I fail to see the need to degrade what he said. It actually had more validity than what you stated as a fact from this quote anarchy.
Hey I'm not here taking sides. I'm just reading and saying to myself WOW I cannot believe you are coming down on this kid for actually making a CORRECT statement.
How this gets morphed to Weeden is as good as Luck, RG3? All that was said that what Trent stated on the side - bearing the truth - was "ON OCCASION" this does not mean you can then MAKE UP YOUR WORDS TO FIT IN THERE LIKE "AT ALL"
 Sorry that is just wrong. Weeden might be the guy or he might not. Obviously Chud n Norv feel he has the Skill Set for what they want us to have on the field. I guess we will see. Obviously they don't wish to put all the eggs in one basket either. Ergo Campbell who can play in the vertical game...but he is talented that has underachieved mostly cause He Cannot Read defenses which I feel sort of comical in this discussion.
I'm not looking to make enemies - just when I see something way wrong I cannot sit back n watch you all berate Jf...when he happens to be correct n you are INCORRECT.
Thats all. What you do with that go ahead but I spelled it out. NO  involved - pure n simple It is what it is.
JMHO...ummm but more fact than opinion on this one!
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,288 |
j/c I'm ok with the Campbell signing...he is what he is and we all know what he is. But...the one thing that bothers me about him was his signing with Chicago. Stay with me here for a minute. He looked pretty good in Oakland until he got hurt. I thought Oakland made a mistake by moving on from him. (Again acknowledging that he is what he is.) When Oakland let him go, I was thinking/expecting that he would go somewhere to compete for a starting gig. Again...not because he is special...but he seemed like a guy who could still start somewhere in the NFL. Then he goes and signs with Chicago where he wouldn't even sniff the competition to be a starter.  My memory is that he signed rather early in the FA process as well. I remember thinking the destination and quick-signing was odd. That entire process above left me thinking that he either knew he wasn't starter-quality anymore...or he knew he's just about washed up...OR he didn't WANT the pressure and pain of being a starter anymore. I don't like any of those three options. In the end, I don't think it matters much. It's Weeden's job to lose. I don't think the FO thinks that Campbell will truly push to be the starter. He's here to be the backup and push McCoy for the #2 role. Maybe he will be our Charlie Batch. I'd be ok with that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
Weeden played w/better talent and had the benefit of a full off-season. I didn't get all the hostility and hate towards Colt, while Weeden got a free pass.
Free pass? All Browns fan did was bashing the "old" rookie QB BEFORE he even hit the field.
You know who's the one with the "free pass"? His name is Trent Richardson...the guy we invested 4 picks, including our most valuable one. He was supposed to carry the team, but he didn't....in our rare "flash" moments on offense it was Weeden and the young WRs that had them....how often did we lead a game thanks to them just to lose it because TRich couldn't get 1st downs and our HC saw himself forced to throw it on 3rd/4th&short because of it
I also disagree that he had so much more talent around him, especially to begin the season...we switched Pashos with Schwartz and inserted Gordon for Cribbs/Robo..both rooks needed the first 3-5 weeks to get going and the running game production was as bad as in 2011 throughout the year (again, HERE'S the real disappointment)...after those two 2nd round rookies improved their game?, yes, Weeden had an upgraded team...oh and look, after that the Browns went 5-6 to end the year, playing competitive .500 ball and Weeden had a QBr north of 80. So my conclusion to this is that we IMPROVED once the two upgrades at RT and WR improved, debunking your "myth" that Weeden played as bad as Colt did...you do know that we scored almost a TD per game more last season, do you? That's not "as bad as", that's another world of offensive production
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Weeden can't read defenses AT ALL. That's the summation of what we need to know about Weeden's abilities to read defenses.
here is what Trent said... "Weeden had trouble reading defenses on occasion during his rookie season."
ummm - me thinks you are full of CRAPOLA on this one.
You actually got the gall to put the quote up by Trent to state that what Jf stated was so off the wall. And then you state what that was - which was way off the wall compared to Jf
And you put it in print right there for all to see how Wrong you ARE...sorry I just don't get it.
Just what part of "ON OCCASION" suddenly gets morphed by you to Can't read defenses AT ALL Actually out of the two interpretations Jf happens to be correct. Again the Trent quote stated On Occasion as a Rookie QB.
Jf was correct in stating so did Luck, RG3 What how DARE I...lol
Now where is this thought process remotely stating Weeden is as good Luck or RG3 - all it was stating that you could have put the NAMES LUCK or RG3 into that phrase.
Luck On Occasion as a rookie QB had difficulties reading Defenses.
RG3 On Occasion as a rookie QB had difficulties reading Defenses.
I understand this is the Dead Zone. I have no idea who this Jf kid is or what history of posting. I just read this for what it was worth. I fail to see the need to degrade what he said. It actually had more validity than what you stated as a fact from this quote anarchy.
Hey I'm not here taking sides. I'm just reading and saying to myself WOW I cannot believe you are coming down on this kid for actually making a CORRECT statement.
How this gets morphed to Weeden is as good as Luck, RG3? All that was said that what Trent stated on the side - bearing the truth - was "ON OCCASION" this does not mean you can then MAKE UP YOUR WORDS TO FIT IN THERE LIKE "AT ALL"
Sorry that is just wrong. Weeden might be the guy or he might not. Obviously Chud n Norv feel he has the Skill Set for what they want us to have on the field. I guess we will see. Obviously they don't wish to put all the eggs in one basket either. Ergo Campbell who can play in the vertical game...but he is talented that has underachieved mostly cause He Cannot Read defenses which I feel sort of comical in this discussion.
I'm not looking to make enemies - just when I see something way wrong I cannot sit back n watch you all berate Jf...when he happens to be correct n you are INCORRECT.
Thats all. What you do with that go ahead but I spelled it out. NO involved - pure n simple It is what it is.
JMHO...ummm but more fact than opinion on this one!
Oh, I know what Trent said. I think he was being diplomatic about his comments. My contention is that if he were truly able to say what he thought, he would've said exactly what I stated was really meant by his comments.
It's not any different than people taking anything else and making comments what they think it really means. For example, Joe Banner said something like, "Brandon Weeden will be the starting QB going into training camp." I've seen this stated as imperial evidence that Brandon Weeden is the teams starting QB next season despite all the comments by nearly everyone in the organization about bringing in competition for the QB spot and the signing of Jason Campbell.
We can add even more reports and comments by everyone about every move made by the team in the off-season. Let's take for example, that Paul Kruger was signed and it was a good move, a doubly good move taking him away from the Ravens. Then Dumervil was released and that move got turned into a bad move by the Browns because Dumervil was signed for less. Somehow, in this whole thing, some think the Browns got played.
Blah, blah, blah. I'm only stating what I think Trent Richardson meant because it's in line with what I saw with my own untrained eyes from watching every game last year.
Richardson, in my opinion, was just being diplomatic in his statements. His criticisms weren't the first ones that have been leveled at Weeden.
You attack my viewpoint saying it's unsubstantiated but then toss this gem out there for public consumption "Weeden might be the guy or he might not. Obviously Chud n Norv feel he has the Skill Set for what they want us to have on the field." Seriously? Come on now. Campbell was brought in but Chudzinski and Turner had little or nothing to say about it but then you go onto criticize Campbell for not being able to read defenses and that's not been reported ANYWHERE.
I'm glad you're not looking to make enemies, it would be silly to do it (especially here), but I'm not going to roll over on my thoughts of what Richardson really meant by his statement about Weeden.
If all that Trent Richardson meant by the comments were what you say then why report on it? Obviously, it was taken one way by those reporting it and as far as I'm aware, Richardson hasn't come out to clarify anything or try to soften the impact of his comments about Weeden.
I think it stands on its own and the reporting on it stands too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196 |
Quote:
But........perhaps it is like you guys say. All of those problems will magically disappear because he is now playing in an offense that fits his needs and will have better coaches than he did last year. Jefferson Starship had a song about: If only you believed in miracles, so would I --or something like that.
Am I one of "you guys" since you are replying to me?
I do think putting in an offense that plays to weedens strengths helps the odds. But I am one who on this board viewed my disappointment in weeden.
From my perspective he improved until about midway through the season then digressed. He went backwards.
My comments weren't that weeden was so good, it was that none of them were really any good. Thus my earlier comment concerning people debating "who is the best of the worst."
I do hope Weeden improves under the new system. I hope he matures and grows. For all of our sakes. But I really don't put any stock into that happening.
And for whoever it was that claimed there was a comment about Colt being in "This FO's plans"?
That's not what was said at all. What was said was that Colt was in "the new HC's plans". But that's when we were still in "the Chip Kelly phase" of interviewing HC's and well before either Chud or norv were interviewed. So that statement seemed to be a bit pre-mature at that stage of things.
It's pretty simple verse.... I simply don't believe Colt has the velocity in his passes to be a strong contender to be a QB in a downfield, vertical passing game. To me, the signing of Campbell, from a business standpoint points that out.
Otherwise, I don't see anyone as a clear cut leader between Weeden or Campbell. This FO is not tied to weeden in any way. So I guess we'll just see how it all pans out from here.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196 |
Quote:
Oh, I know what Trent said. I think he was being diplomatic about his comments. My contention is that if he were truly able to say what he thought, he would've said exactly what I stated was really meant by his comments.
Wow! 
Now you have to "know what he was thinking or would have said if he could" to support this?
Actually all you're doing here is speculating as if you understand what TR thinks. That's a pretty big reach.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
I don't think TR understands what TR thinks.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
That's not what was said at all. What was said was that Colt was in "the new HC's plans". But that's when we were still in "the Chip Kelly phase" of interviewing HC's and well before either Chud or norv were interviewed. So that statement seemed to be a bit pre-mature at that stage of things.
Actually, that was me. And I think that Banner knew exactly what he was saying. We still don't know what those plans are and you make presumptions about Chip Kelly being the HC (just like the rest of the media did).
I remember reading that Haslam said that after the interview with Kelly in Arizona that Kelly had been eliminated from the discussion. This also was before Chudzinski was hired. I'm not sure, but I recall that these statements were reported to have been made prior to the end of the season. Premature? Maybe. Despite your assertions, they were made and they stand. At this point, McCoy is still on the roster.
If you want to talk about the state of things being 'premature', it seems that all the talk about Chip Kelly being the next head coach of the Browns was certainly that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Jason Campbell isn't getting paid like a starter, yet: "When the Browns signed quarterback Jason Campbell, many assumed he’d potentially become the team’s starter in 2013. And he’ll definitely get a chance to win the job, since he’s the first signal-caller signed by the new regime in Cleveland, after previously starting in Washington and Oakland. For now, though, he’s getting paid like a backup, and not a lot when compared to other backups. A source with knowledge of the contract tells PFT that Campbell’s contract pays out $1.5 million in 2013. Specifically, he gets a base salary of $1.5 million in 2013, $500,000 of which is fully guaranteed. That said, if Campbell can win the job, he’ll make more money via incentives. Specifically, he gets $150,000 for 50 percent playing time in 2013, 65 percent results in $350,000, and 80 percent triggers $600,000. In 2014, Campbell’s base salary is a bit higher, at $2 million. He also gets roster bonus of $250,000 due the third day of the league year. But there are escalators for 2014 based on playing time in the coming season. Campbell’s 2014 base salary will increase by $500,000 based on 30 percent playing time in 2013. 40 percent playing time in 2013 increases the 2014 salary by another $500,000. Ten more percent in 2013? Another $500,000 in 2014. And if Campbell takes 65 percent or more of the snaps in 2013, his $2 million salary will double. Still, his backup pay for 2013 is low, and that’s largely because Campbell’s options were limited. Especially in light of the egg he laid when he had a chance during 2012 to sub for Jay Cutler in Chicago, during that Monday night debacle against the 49ers. Campbell could have stayed in Chicago and backed up Cutler, or he could have gone to Cleveland with a chance to win the starting job. If Campbell pulls it off, he’ll be paid more on the back end. And if he plays really well in 2013, the Browns likely will tear up the 2014 deal and sign him to something better." http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/30/jason-campbell-isnt-getting-paid-like-a-starter-yet/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, I know what Trent said. I think he was being diplomatic about his comments. My contention is that if he were truly able to say what he thought, he would've said exactly what I stated was really meant by his comments.
Wow!
Now you have to "know what he was thinking or would have said if he could" to support this?
Actually all you're doing here is speculating as if you understand what TR thinks. That's a pretty big reach.
Whatever floats your boat. I never claim to speak for Richardson. I'm only telling you how I interpret what he said.
Now, lecture me about what you think Trent Richardson meant by his comments. I'm sure you've got a direct link into his thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196 |
Quote:
Actually, that was me. And I think that Banner knew exactly what he was saying. We still don't know what those plans are and you make presumptions about Chip Kelly being the HC (just like the rest of the media did).
I remember reading that Haslam said that after the interview with Kelly in Arizona that Kelly had been eliminated from the discussion. This also was before Chudzinski was hired. I'm not sure, but I recall that these statements were reported to have been made prior to the end of the season. Premature? Maybe. Despite your assertions, they were made and they stand. At this point, McCoy is still on the roster.
Actually, I don't recall the comment even being made by Banner. What I recall is it was kind of a blurb that colt was told this but the comment wasn't attributed to anyone specifically. And I'm pretty sure it was early on before everything fell through with Kelly.
Quote:
If you want to talk about the state of things being 'premature', it seems that all the talk about Chip Kelly being the next head coach of the Browns was certainly that.
Funny thing. I do feel that had Kelly shown up for that second interview willing to sign a contract, he would be our HC right now. I'm very glad he didn't!
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,196 |
Quote:
Now, lecture me about what you think Trent Richardson meant by his comments. I'm sure you've got a direct link into his thoughts.
I'll take him at his word without adding or deleting anything as I don't have a direct link into his thoughts.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Quote:
Oh, I know what Trent said. I think he was being diplomatic about his comments. My contention is that if he were truly able to say what he thought, he would've said exactly what I stated was really meant by his comments.
Classic anarchy2day. Never deal with the actual content of the statement. Instead, dismiss the actual content of the statement by insisting on a "hidden" meaning, which is, essentially, a personal license to write whatever logically incoherent drivel you prefer. And then you write this....
Quote:
It's not any different than people taking anything else and making comments what they think it really means.
What you fail to understand (and probably always will) is that the plausibility of your interpretations depend on actual evidence. Is it a coincidence that the biggest conspiracy theorist on this board is taking Richardson's comment and claiming a "hidden" meaning? I think not. Furthermore, all we really need to know about the value of your interpretation is that your justification for your interpretation is "everyone else is doing it."
Now, reply to this with a response that obstinately reiterates everything you already said and which demonstrates you are incapable of learning anything from what you read. We've seen it all before....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Actually, I don't recall the comment even being made by Banner. What I recall is it was kind of a blurb that colt was told this but the comment wasn't attributed to anyone specifically.
From the link I provided earlier to NBC Sports:
According to the report, Browns CEO Joe Banner told McCoy he is “in the next head coach’s plans."
That seems rather clearly attributed to Joe Banner saying it.
Quote:
And I'm pretty sure it was early on before everything fell through with Kelly.
Fell through with Chip Kelly? You see, you bought into the media hype too. Maybe the Browns decided that Chip Kelly wasn't the man that they wanted for the job after interviewing him. Sounds to me like Philly wasn't all that impressed either. They didn't make him their coach until AFTER he returned to Oregon.
If I were to hazard a guess (and I will), Philly became desperate for a HC and acceded to Kelly's "unreasonable" demands out of desperation.
Of course, it's all speculation on my part, just as it is on yours to make assumptions that Kelly was the Browns top choice for the job just because the media wanted to make it so.
Quote:
Funny thing. I do feel that had Kelly shown up for that second interview willing to sign a contract, he would be our HC right now. I'm very glad he didn't!
But you still bought the media hype about Kelly and the Browns. He was never given a chance for a second interview.
From the LA Times:
Quote:
Earlier Sunday, a person familiar with Cleveland's coaching search said the team passed on Kelly after he was indecisive about making the leap to the NFL.
The Browns nearly had a deal with Kelly two days ago, but they've moved on to other candidates, said the person who spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the search.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Now, lecture me about what you think Trent Richardson meant by his comments. I'm sure you've got a direct link into his thoughts.
I'll take him at his word without adding or deleting anything as I don't have a direct link into his thoughts.
Great. I'll interpret the meaning beyond his words. I don't think Richardson has much confidence in Brandon Weeden's abilities.
I'll do it because he stated them when he could have said nothing at all. Why would he say them at all?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Have you considered the possibility that Richardson is dumb as a bag of hammers?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Classic anarchy2day. Never deal with the actual content of the statement. Instead, dismiss the actual content of the statement by insisting on a "hidden" meaning, which is, essentially, a personal license to write whatever logically incoherent drivel you prefer. And then you write this....
Thanks. Seems you're a fan of what I write then.
I'm only adding my thoughts on what Trent Richardson said. Yes, I interpret it as a much more significant statement than you do. You know what they say about opinions, right?
Quote:
It's not any different than people taking anything else and making comments what they think it really means.
Quote:
What you fail to understand (and probably always will) is that the plausibility of your interpretations depend on actual evidence. Is it a coincidence that the biggest conspiracy theorist on this board is taking Richardson's comment and claiming a "hidden" meaning? I think not. Furthermore, all we really need to know about the value of your interpretation is that your justification for your interpretation is "everyone else is doing it."
I'm a conspiracy theorist now? Wow! I better let Alex Jones(town) and all the others that I've knocked them off their perch.
And I didn't say that Richardson's comment had any "hidden meaning". I said that he was being diplomatic in his choice of words. Obviously, since you have no tact, you cannot comprehend what 'diplomatic' means.
At least you're entertaining...barely.
Quote:
Now, reply to this with a response that obstinately reiterates everything you already said and which demonstrates you are incapable of learning anything from what you read. We've seen it all before....
I love insults. I'm sure it makes you feel big. Let me knock that down a notch though. Your insults might matter if I cared what you think of me or my comments, but as happenstance has it, I don't care what you think of me or my comments. I only responded as a courtesy to you and for my own amusement.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns signed QB Jason Campbell
|
|
