|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Have you considered the possibility that Richardson is dumb as a bag of hammers?
Well, I have considered that he might regret saying the words but he hasn't come out and said so, despite all the uproar they seem to have caused.
Now, if you had substituted Josh Cribbs' name for that of Trent Richardson in your question, I would have responded that you shouldn't insult the intelligence of hammers by comparing them to the level of intelligence exhibited by Cribbs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
“He said as a rookie (Weeden) really had trouble reading defenses from time to time and they really had to skew their offense a little bit, sometimes somewhat predictable,” Wyche said. “(Richardson) thinks things are going to open up a little bit, but he really does like Brandon Weeden.” Trent Richardson: Brandon Weeden had trouble reading defenses - news-herald.com http://www.news-herald.com/articles/2013/02/27/sports/doc512d06c55c120372312909.txtWow ..... a rookie QB, in a completely new offense, adjusting to taking snaps from under Center, and completely new routes and adjustments ........ had troubles reading defenses from time to time, and the coaches had to adjust the offense to help him. Shocking. I mean, really ..... what a stunner. Who would have thought that such a thing could have happened. A rookie QB had troubles sometimes reading defenses. That never, ever happens. Ever. 
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: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
I didn't think it was all the much of an uproar. More like Richardson saying what everyone knows - which is that all QB's have some degree of difficulty reading defenses, especially rookies. How else could there be so many interceptions, incompletions, sacks, and generally-blown-up plays? Shurmur's offense itself usually called for a play that was made to be blown up somehow. Weeden needs to be evaluated through the prism of Shurmur's Muny League offense, imo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,692 |
J/C While some knock on the Campbell pickup, I think we have a viable option and a decent veteran in the lineup now. Jason Campbell was one free agent that I felt could come in a push Weeden for the starting job. Weeden needs someone to compete with to get better. I'm one that felt that BW was in a bad circumstance from the get go with Shurmur under the helm. It was definitely a square peck/ round hole situation, however, I was never sold on the BW pick from the beginning but I can't see any QB florishing in a Pat Shurmur offense. Weeden is built for a gun style offense. If Weeden doesn't win the starting situation in camp and Jason Campbell wins, I'm fine with that as well. I would view it as an upgrade, because if Weeden loses the job to Campbell, he has no business wearing a Brown uniform or any NFL uniform for that matter. Our QB situation sucks and there isn't much this year the FO can do to fix it. I like the move. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
“He said as a rookie (Weeden) really had trouble reading defenses from time to time and they really had to skew their offense a little bit, sometimes somewhat predictable,” Wyche said. “(Richardson) thinks things are going to open up a little bit, but he really does like Brandon Weeden.”
Trent Richardson: Brandon Weeden had trouble reading defenses - news-herald.com
http://www.news-herald.com/articles/2013/02/27/sports/doc512d06c55c120372312909.txt
Wow ..... a rookie QB, in a completely new offense, adjusting to taking snaps from under Center, and completely new routes and adjustments ........ had troubles reading defenses from time to time, and the coaches had to adjust the offense to help him.
Shocking. I mean, really ..... what a stunner. Who would have thought that such a thing could have happened. A rookie QB had troubles sometimes reading defenses. That never, ever happens. Ever.
So, begs the question, why was Brandon Weeden made the starting QB? Furthermore, at his age and with the amount of coaching that he would need, why did the former regime draft him in the first place?
'Splain that one Lucy!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Because we needed a QB, and did not have a starting quality QB on the roster.
I know that you won't like that answer, but it is the answer. The Browns front office had a full year to evaluate Colt McCoy and his play, and he was found to be lacking. If that wasn't the case, then they would never have drafted Weeden and given him the starting job.
Further, most rookie QBs have an adjustment period they have to go through adapting to the NFL, especially if they have to learn an entirely new offense. It is surprising when a QB comes into the NFL and doesn't have to learn how to play at this level.
You love Colt McCoy. I understand that. There were people who loved Charlie Frye, and who hated me because I said that he was never going to be a quality NFL starter. One even told me that Frye would show me by becoming a great QB when he went out to learn from Mike Holmgren.
Others loved Brady Quinn, and thought that the Browns made a huge mistake trading him away. I said that he was never going to be anything in the NFL. He was a former 1st round pick, and has had numerous opportunities to show how bad he sucks.
Colt McCoy had a year and a half to show what he could do. He appeared to have some promise as a rookie. He did tail off badly at the end of his rookie year though, throwing 1 TD and 6 INT in the final 2 games of the season. He then had a very, very poor 2012 season. You see it differently, but it's obvious that the front office and coaches saw things the way I did, because they dumped McCoy as the starter immediately upon drafting Weeden.
Now, Weeden isn't perfect, and may not make it an a starting NFL QB, but he has a superior talent level to that McCoy has. Colt McCoy really has no average to above average attributes, except scrambling ..... and maybe some degree of leadership. McCoy has below average ability to read a defense, arm strength, accuracy, ability to throw against man coverage, and many other deficiencies. Like I said, aside from scrambling, there really isn't anything he does at or above league average for the position.
At least Weeden has size and arm strength that are at or above league average. Perhaps he can learn the rest. Maybe not. However, what has been shown is that Colt McCoy cannot overcome his deficiencies. He simply does not have the talent necessary to play in the NFL. McCoy isn't even in the picture with this front office, if you pay any attention to what they really say.
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: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175 |
Quote:
So, begs the question, why was Brandon Weeden made the starting QB? Furthermore, at his age and with the amount of coaching that he would need, why did the former regime draft him in the first place?
'Splain that one Lucy!
To me it is very elementary, Holmgren/Heckert should have pony up to get RG iii. Getting Weeden was a desperate move, but I see why looking at this years QB class. I like Colt, but for a need a QB now franchise, Colt simply doesn't fit. He needed an established franchise with systems more in line with his talent. Changing offensive schemes ever year did him no favors. Colt would have been better off if drafted by Houston.
At least with Weeden and this coaching staff, they can continue moving forward building this team until a suitable QB is found. Weeden is still under his rookie contract, so he makes sense being a stop gap player. Adding Campbell makes similar sense both are of equal talent. I sure hope next years class has better quality.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Because we needed a QB, and did not have a starting quality QB on the roster.
Some would say that it leaves that vacancy on the roster.
But, I'll take it further back. Let's go back to when the same guys selected McCoy and brought in Jake Delhomme and Seneca Wallace. McCoy, it would seem, was taken with the intention to groom him for a couple of years while he rode the bench.
How bad does it look that the QBs that were brought in were Delhomme, Wallace, McCoy prior to them selecting Brandon Weeden? Are we to be impressed by Weeden's abilities knowing who was brought in to do the job prior to his arrival? We should believe that they hit on Weeden but missed on Delhomme, Wallace and McCoy?
It shouldn't be hard for any Browns fan to understand why Weeden isn't the answer for the Browns by that measure.
Quote:
I know that you won't like that answer, but it is the answer. Let's take that statement The Browns front office had a full year to evaluate Colt McCoy and his play, and he was found to be lacking. If that wasn't the case, then they would never have drafted Weeden and given him the starting job.
Oh, they drafted Weeden because of the perception that their jobs were on the line (and they were!) unless they did what the owner (a most disinterested one at that) told them to do. In the end, the move still cost them all their jobs after that owner sold the team. (source)
What it came down to was Randy Lerner (who couldn't tell you the difference between a football and a baseball), was calling the shots about who the Browns should draft.
Quote:
Further, most rookie QBs have an adjustment period they have to go through adapting to the NFL, especially if they have to learn an entirely new offense. It is surprising when a QB comes into the NFL and doesn't have to learn how to play at this level.
If this has been stated once, it has been stated a thousand times on this very message board and probably more like 10,000 times. It's beginning to sound like we're being bombarded by machinations from Joseph Goebbels.
Quote:
You love Colt McCoy. I understand that. There were people who loved Charlie Frye, and who hated me because I said that he was never going to be a quality NFL starter. One even told me that Frye would show me by becoming a great QB when he went out to learn from Mike Holmgren.
I don't love Colt. I simply think he's better than Weeden. If the team was going to have a competition, I would say that it should be between McCoy and Campbell and Weeden should be fighting it out for the 3rd QB spot. That's where Weeden would be at his age and skill set in the normal progression of NFL QBs. I'm not sure how Charlie Frye figures into the conversation, but okay. Whatever.
Quote:
Others loved Brady Quinn, and thought that the Browns made a huge mistake trading him away. I said that he was never going to be anything in the NFL. He was a former 1st round pick, and has had numerous opportunities to show how bad he sucks.
Same thing about Brady Quinn as with Charlie Frye. How does he fit into the conversation except that he was a Browns QB failure.
Quote:
Colt McCoy had a year and a half to show what he could do. He appeared to have some promise as a rookie. He did tail off badly at the end of his rookie year though, throwing 1 TD and 6 INT in the final 2 games of the season. He then had a very, very poor 2012 season. You see it differently, but it's obvious that the front office and coaches saw things the way I did, because they dumped McCoy as the starter immediately upon drafting Weeden.
Okay, back to something that's actually relevant. McCoy had a year and a half. Okay, right. Year 1/2, he got no reps with the first string players and was thrust into the starting QB role after the intent was to have him stand on the sidelines holding a clipboard. In his first full year, he was saddled with a new system and a first time HC (and just referring to Shurmur as a HC makes a mockery of head coaching). Not only this, but Shurmur decided on his own that he didn't need an OC and would call the plays himself. 
Even with that, McCoy won more games (6) than Brandon Weeden (5). Sure, McCoy has more games than Weeden, but he had a second year HC (if wisdom comes from experience, Weeden had a HC that learned something from the prior year) and better talent around him. Richardson > Hillis. Gordon & 2nd year Little > rookie Little & Massaquoi or Massaquoi & Robiskie.
In the end, the Browns managed just as many wins last year as the year before and not a single one more.
Quote:
Now, Weeden isn't perfect, and may not make it an a starting NFL QB, but he has a superior talent level to that McCoy has. Colt McCoy really has no average to above average attributes, except scrambling ..... and maybe some degree of leadership. McCoy has below average ability to read a defense, arm strength, accuracy, ability to throw against man coverage, and many other deficiencies. Like I said, aside from scrambling, there really isn't anything he does at or above league average for the position.
At least we're getting somewhere. You estimation is that Weeden is better than McCoy. I disagree with that 100%. In every respect, I think Weeden fails the test. That goes from his performance on the field to his statements off it (i.e., Twitter statement about not being able to run Chip Kelly's offense). Even if you believe that, you don't say it.
Quote:
At least Weeden has size and arm strength that are at or above league average. Perhaps he can learn the rest. Maybe not. However, what has been shown is that Colt McCoy cannot overcome his deficiencies. Hešsimply does not have the talent necessary to play in the NFL. McCoy isn't even in the picture with this front office, if you pay any attention to what they really say.
Weeden has size on Russell Wilson too. He has it on Drew Brees too. What he doesn't have over them is smarts. That's where McCoy passes up Weeden too. Colt wasn't given a fair opportunity to 'overcome his deficiencies'. What kind of specious argument are you trying to make? If that's the measure, then Weeden has shown that he can't overcome his lack of intelligence. Also, Weeden's size didn't keep him from leading the league in batted down passes. He got the balls batted down because opposing DL and LB were reading his mind through his eyes. Did the diminutive McCoy ever accomplish that feat of heroism?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Dang, for a guy who makes so little sense in the things you say you certainly take up a lot of board space to spell it all out.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,007
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,007 |
Quote:
Dang, for a guy who makes so little sense in the things you say you certainly take up a lot of board space to spell it all out.
my scroll finger gets tired ignoring him 
Joe Thomas #73
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
What it came down to was Randy Lerner (who couldn't tell you the difference between a football and a baseball), was calling the shots about who the Browns should draft.
Huh?
Quote:
Okay, back to something that's actually relevant. McCoy had a year and a half. Okay, right. Year 1/2, he got no reps with the first string players and was thrust into the starting QB role after the intent was to have him stand on the sidelines holding a clipboard. In his first full year, he was saddled with a new system and a first time HC (and just referring to Shurmur as a HC makes a mockery of head coaching). Not only this, but Shurmur decided on his own that he didn't need an OC and would call the plays himself.
Don't forget that Daboll was a tremendous ass to McCoy.
Quote:
You estimation is that Weeden is better than McCoy. I disagree with that 100%. In every respect, I think Weeden fails the test.
What do you mean by every respect? There are certainly things that Weeden does better than McCoy. Right?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3 |
I like this signing! Jason campbell was alot like colt mccoy thrown into a new offense every year. He has managed through all that to win some games in the nfl.Now to weeden i live in the midwest and got to see him play....the guy is worthless we saw it alot last year-no toughness-no on the field leadership-you can blame this on shurmer all u want- but just like the other rookies who went to the playoffs last year you either have it or u dont. I dont want to waiste another pick on a qb- but we might as well start making plans for the future, because if we dont the future is never going to come.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Dang, for a guy who makes so little sense in the things you say you certainly take up a lot of board space to spell it all out.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
jason...since you obviously missed my post comparing the season stats for all the rookie starters last season...take a look for yourself.
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.
Jason...now tell me again why you believe Weeden was/is "worthless", ok?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Quote:
Have you considered the possibility that Richardson is dumb as a bag of hammers?
Or, what about considering that Richardson meant exactly what he said? What is with the totally unwarranted cynicism? It's just lazy, intellectually dishonest twisting/dismissing of the facts in order to justify a preconceived position.
NRTU, Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3 |
But one thing i did not see from weeden that i did from most of the rookies he absolutely played with no passion or desire. Very critical ints in alot of td occassions. One thing we should of seen from weeden even more than other qb's because of his age was the mental capacity to figure things out. I.E over throwing receivers almost on a regular basis, not seeing the open man downfield, Not able to react to what a defense was doing, locking in on one receiver. Now correct me if im wrong but if those were intangables that he had before we drafted him i really dont think he would have struggled last year.
Yes yes yes i know he was a rookie yes yes yes i know shurmer was his coach-but i dont see things getting any better this year. If im wrong i will buy in-but i would almost bet a years income on it not getting better.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Confused? Randy Lerner said that he wanted a QB. He said so,
Granted, Daboll isn't very good but he's better than Shurmur as an OC. He'd probably make a better HC too. He could scarcely make a go of it to be worse.
Yes, I mean in every respect. If the object is to win games, McCoy beats Weeden hands down. If the object is to see who can throw the ball the farthest, maybe we should have gone out to get JaMarcus Russell.
All the arguments that I hear about Weeden failing are the same ones that could be used to excuse failures in McCoy's game. Shurmur? New system? McCoy has two added excuses if you want to play the excuses game. Mangini-Daboll and lack of talent around him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Dang, for a guy who makes so little sense in the things you say you certainly take up a lot of board space to spell it all out.
Complex ideas take more space to explain. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
But one thing i did not see from weeden that i did from most of the rookies he absolutely played with no passion or desire. Very critical ints in alot of td occassions. One thing we should of seen from weeden even more than other qb's because of his age was the mental capacity to figure things out. I.E over throwing receivers almost on a regular basis, not seeing the open man downfield, Not able to react to what a defense was doing, locking in on one receiver. Now correct me if im wrong but if those were intangables that he had before we drafted him i really dont think he would have struggled last year.
Yes yes yes i know he was a rookie yes yes yes i know shurmer was his coach-but i dont see things getting any better this year. If im wrong i will buy in-but i would almost bet a years income on it not getting better.
How much do you make?
I'm going to take arrows for this but I think Weeden will improve, because there will be even more talent on the team and those that make the draft decisions are SMARTER than the previous group. Yep. I'm saying that Joe Banner > Mike Holmgren and Mike Lombardi > Tom Heckert. I know, I know. I just spit in someone's Cheerios!
Weeden will also improve because Chudzinski >>> Shurmur and the people around him will be improving, making Weeden look better. Chudzinski alone is worth at least a win or two more than last season, maybe more than that.
We've gone from a 4-3 defense to a 3-4 and what holes do we really have on the defense? A corner? Another top-notch corner would improve any defense. Improvement in the safeties. That's about it. You could make a case that aside from the QB spot, our next biggest need is TE and then safety. We obviously need a kicker, but that's not a high priority. I would say that making sure the punter is more critical.
Now, are you sure you're that close to wager a year's worth of income? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3 |
Well if your going to say that you might as well say DA or brady quinn would succeed under chudinski...they cant help they play the way they do. And weeden is no better. You can put any coach and any offensive coordinator in any system. If they dont have qb intangables it makes no difference they will struggle. How many qb's down through the years have had no talent but they succeed one year and then try to cash in via FA?Too many to name! This is not college where you can feed a qb milk and expect him to give u steak for the main course.Weeden will have competition this training camp and it will be great to see what tangables he really has! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
The reason I brought up Charlie Frye and Brady Quinn is that both have a similar skill set to Colt McCoy. They are scramblers, who lack pocket awareness. They are weak armed tossers, instead of aggressive passers. They play it safe, safer, and safest, instead of taking shots. They play a timid game at QB ..... and that's no way to play the game. Colt McCoy is the same. You might disagree, and see McCoy as being some great option ..... but I doubt that he (barring injuries) ever gets another starting shot ever again ..... and that he will look a lot like Brady Quinn did this past year if he ever does. He is simply not a good QB. He does almost nothing at an average to above average level. One thing he did really well was throwing his receivers into coverage. That's not a positive for a professional QB though. I'm not going to worry about the rest of the novel you wrote. (I only wrote a paperback) I'm sure that it was an eloquent defense of Colt McCoy, and why things weren't really his fault ...... and why inaccurate passes weren't really inaccurate ..... why passes thrown out of bounds on 4th down really weren't bad throws ...... and how his inability to get anything at all going in many games until late in the 4th quarter, after the game was decided, was really a positive. I'm over McCoy. He's part of the past. Weeden might be part of the future. He fits the offense we're going to run, so there is some hope there. If he can't get the job done, then I don't care if he's gone next year too. I'm not in love with any player on the team. If they can perform well, then great. If not, then they need to go. It's time for McCoy to go. His time is past, and he has failed. There is nothing there to build on.
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: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Well if your going to say that you might as well say DA or brady quinn would succeed under chudinski.
For the record, I want nothing to do with Derek Anderson, but he did succeed under Chudzinski. He won the team 10 games under Romeo Crennel. It's true that they faced an epically weak schedule that year and missed the playoffs (due to Anderson's failures), but despite everything else, a 10-6 record would have to be considered 'success'.
As for Quinn, that's something altogether different. If you combined the worst QB traits of Weeden and McCoy, you'd come up with Brady Quinn.
Quote:
They cant help they play the way they do. And weeden is no better. You can put any coach and any offensive coordinator in any system. If they dont have qb intangibles it makes no difference they will struggle.
I wouldn't disagree with this except for the grammar is atrocious. 
Quote:
How many qb's down through the years have had no talent but they succeed one year and then try to cash in via FA?Too many to name!
If you want, toss out a few names.  I could name a few, but it would be interesting to see what kind of response you could get.
Quote:
This is not college where you can feed a qb milk and expect him to give u steak for the main course.Weeden will have competition this training camp and it will be great to see what tangables he really has!
If they have a true competition, I don't think that Brandon Weeden earns the job. If the competition includes Campbell, Weeden and McCoy, then I think that McCoy probably starts. If Chudzinski is as smart as I think he is, he's telling Turner that he wants to bring the TEs across the middle and down the seam often. If he puts his TEs in mismatches against linebackers or safeties, it's easy to see McCoy winning the job.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
The reason I brought up Charlie Frye and Brady Quinn is that both have a similar skill set to Colt McCoy. They are scramblers, who lack pocket awareness. They are weak armed tossers, instead of aggressive passers. They play it safe, safer, and safest, instead of taking shots. They play a timid game at QB ..... and that's no way to play the game. Colt McCoy is the same.
Neither Frye nor Quinn have the smarts that McCoy does. To add to it, McCoy had no pocket to be aware in. Putting nothing at the RT spot would have been beneficial to McCoy. He wouldn't have had a false sense of security over there.
McCoy does have one problem and it's that when he does scramble, he ALWAYS scrambled out to the right. I know, it's only natural for a right-handed passer to roll that way, but that can be coached out. It doesn't appear that he taught that sometimes your inclined course isn't always the best one.
Quote:
You might disagree, and see McCoy as being some great option ..... but I doubt that he (barring injuries) ever gets another starting shot ever again ..... and that he will look a lot like Brady Quinn did this past year if he ever does.
You may be right. He probably won't get a starting gig unless it's with a team that is fully going new with a new HC and has no QB (like the Browns?). He might get a legit shot at earning a starting job. But, you're probably right. Even so, I'm not sure how that helps the Browns QB situation.
Quote:
He is simply not a good QB. He does almost nothing at an average to above average level. One thing he did really well was throwing his receivers into coverage. That's not a positive for a professional QB though.
I don't accept your observation, but okay. That's a simple disagreement.
Quote:
I'm not going to worry about the rest of the novel you wrote. (I only wrote a paperback) I'm sure that it was an eloquent defense of Colt McCoy, and why things weren't really his fault ...... and why inaccurate passes weren't really inaccurate ..... why passes thrown out of bounds on 4th down really weren't bad throws ...... and how his inability to get anything at all going in many games until late in the 4th quarter, after the game was decided, was really a positive.
Yep, that's what I wrote. You got me!
Quote:
I'm over McCoy. He's part of the past. Weeden might be part of the future. He fits the offense we're going to run, so there is some hope there. If he can't get the job done, then I don't care if he's gone next year too. I'm not in love with any player on the team. If they can perform well, then great. If not, then they need to go. It's time for McCoy to go. His time is past, and he has failed. There is nothing there to build on.
Fine, you're over McCoy. But you think Weeden could be part of the future? Really? What did someone put in your coffee? Let's say that you're right and that Weeden fits the offensive system that the Browns are going to run, can he execute that system? I really don't think so.
You see, you're fine with giving Weeden the job without him earning it and are willing to waste another year doing it. You keep saying that I love McCoy (although I don't) but you want to give Weeden the job just because the team wasted a first round pick on him (yes, it was wasted). All I want the Browns to do is to make Weeden EARN the job. Make him perform the job better than anyone else so that there isn't any question about him. Anointing him like the previous regime did is a recipe for disaster... again!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
The reason I brought up Charlie Frye and Brady Quinn is that both have a similar skill set to Colt McCoy. They are scramblers, who lack pocket awareness. They are weak armed tossers, instead of aggressive passers. They play it safe, safer, and safest, instead of taking shots. They play a timid game at QB ..... and that's no way to play the game. Colt McCoy is the same.
Man I am tired of having starting QBs with that skill set. I have about the same tolerance for wounded ducks from a QB as I do shanked punts from a punter, and between those 3... ugh...
Don't get me wrong, I like a QB who has some wheels/escapability, but they better be very skilled at throwing a football as well. Of course I am talking about guys like Ben Roethlisberger, Andrew Luck, RG3, Michael Vick, Aaron Rodgers, Cam Newton, Colin Kaepernick, and Russell Wilson. All of those QBS are skilled at throwing a football and a lot of them are great pocket passers. Of course I would take many other QBs who aren't mobile but great QBs nonetheless.. you know who I am talking about. Just please no more of these underskilled, likeable, scrappy guys who can't make all the throws. If I'm a GM evaluating QBs, I better be convinced a QB can make all the throws, otherwise he is a late round pick at best.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Complex ideas take more space to explain.
So complex I'm too stupid to understand most of it.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Jason...now tell me again why you believe Weeden was/is "worthless", ok?
I'm not Jason but I'd like to point out that regardless of the facts contained in the numbers you posted, Luck took a 2 win team to 11 wins and a playoff appearance while Weeden took a 4 win team to 5 wins.
Since it's all about winning you'd have to score Luck_9 and Weeden_1.
There's your difference in the improvement each brought to their respective teams.
btw... I know you were addressing someone else and did not attribute the comment to me, but just for the record I don't consider Weeden worthless. But he'd better get his game on damn quick this upcoming season.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 19,058
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 19,058 |
Quote:
Quote:
Jason...now tell me again why you believe Weeden was/is "worthless", ok?
I'm not Jason but I'd like to point out that regardless of the facts contained in the numbers you posted, Luck took a 2 win team to 11 wins and a playoff appearance while Weeden took a 4 win team to 5 wins.
Since it's all about winning you'd have to score Luck_9 and Weeden_1.
I'd also like to point out Indy had Curtis Painter/Kerry Collins as their QB. If they were with the Browns in 2011, you'd see a more than +1 for Weeden. Those guys were horrible.
Or better yet, if we had Painter/Collins you'd see a better ratio with Luck for the Browns.
At DT, context and meaning are a scarecrow kicking at moving goalposts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
The Weeden Problem:
I think the empending sale of the team had a lot to do with the Weeden "Situation."
Holmgren- Underpressure to make his mark and save his job from new management (which he was aware of Lerner selling before it went public), stretched to get Weeden. And it all rolled down hill from here.
Shurmur- Was forced fed Weeden. There was no QB competition in camp or preseason games. And I never understood why Weeden was kept from playing in the last preseason game. McCoy had his shot to win the job in that game and he failed. I thought he looked very rusty, not incompetetant. Therefore Shurmur had no option but to start Weeden and to abide to Holmgren.
Weeden- Was not ready nor talented enough to be a 1st rounder. To his credit he was put into a bad situation. People want to bring up RG3& Luck to compare, but there are too many variables to compare. Weeden did look and act clueless out there most of the season. The term Deer in headlights comes to mind. He cant read defenses and didnt in college either. He said himself majority of the plays was him and Blackmon audibling with hand signs. He's very poor at reading coverages and misses WRs open all day long. His time in baseball only tells me one thing, he doesnt learn well. 5years in Single A ball with that arm????? Really makes me question his work ethic and his ability. He is absolutely a Pitcher out there trying to be a QB. A failed Pitcher!!!
McCoy- As I said B4, he had his shot and he failed. I just wonder one thing, If he did get the main reps and not look so rusty out of sync, would he had done much better with all the additions to the offense? I think he would.
Campbell- I like the pick up. Gives us a viable option if Weeden cant win the job. He is not gonna set the world on fire, but it would be nice to have an experienced QB thats as solid veteran. Not the greatest of careers but had adversity in Washington with 5OC/Systems in 5years.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343 |
Your posts are practically all the same. They have no substance.
...
You really think Weeden can be a starting QB in the NFL? LOL! What's wrong with you?? He's a backup at best in this league! He didn't earn the job last year, and therefore will always suck no matter what coaches and supporting cast he works with. Duh.
McCoy's smarter. That alone means he'll beat out Weeden no matter what if given the chance.
...
Only your posts are like 10x longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Holmgren- Underpressure to make his mark and save his job from new management (which he was aware of Lerner selling before it went public), stretched to get Weeden. And it all rolled down hill from here.
I'm certain he was aware before it went public. But I can find numerous articles saying he was "blindsided" by the sale whereas I doubt there's any saying he knew before the draft.
Quote:
And I never understood why Weeden was kept from playing in the last preseason game.
Most teams play their starting QB no more than that first series in the final preseason game. Weeden played a lot the first three games.
Quote:
People want to bring up RG3& Luck to compare, but there are too many variables to compare.
I agree with that and to take it a step further I believe that it's true for using most stats for comparison purposes.
Quote:
McCoy- As I said B4, he had his shot and he failed. I just wonder one thing, If he did get the main reps and not look so rusty out of sync, would he had done much better with all the additions to the offense? I think he would.
I do too. However he is on his third head coach and third offensive system in 4 years. It's time to move on.
Quote:
Campbell- I like the pick up. Gives us a viable option if Weeden cant win the job. He is not gonna set the world on fire, but it would be nice to have an experienced QB thats as solid veteran. Not the greatest of careers but had adversity in Washington with 5OC/Systems in 5years.
I just hope he doesn't follow in the footsteps of every other backup we've had short of Holcomb. He did really well as a backup.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Your posts are practically all the same. They have no substance.
...
You really think Weeden can be a starting QB in the NFL? LOL! What's wrong with you?? He's a backup at best in this league! He didn't earn the job last year, and therefore will always suck no matter what coaches and supporting cast he works with. Duh.
McCoy's smarter. That alone means he'll beat out Weeden no matter what if given the chance.
Only your posts are like 10x longer.
I love the substance you bring to the discussion. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343 |
Quote:
I love the substance you bring to the discussion. Thanks.
And I love that little gem of a post you've placed in another thread.
Also, I'd argue that me imitating you still adds something worthwhile to this thread. It pretty much exposes your posts as being filled with nothing but "if given the chance, McCoy will beat out Weeden, in my not-so-humble opinion."
You provide little-to-no evidence. It's all empty opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
I love the substance you bring to the discussion. Thanks.
And I love that little gem of a post you've placed in another thread.
Well, you invited my snarky response. Besides, I'm sure someone else will take the spot. If they don't I feel fully confident in who the Raiders should take at #3.
Quote:
Also, I'd argue that me imitating you still adds something worthwhile to this thread. It pretty much exposes your posts as being filled with nothing but "if given the chance, McCoy will beat out Weeden, in my not-so-humble opinion."
You provide little-to-no evidence. It's all empty opinions.
Of course it's my opinion and I provide evidence when a poster intimates that what I write is incorrect and the links that I provide prove otherwise.
It's your opinion that Weeden is better than McCoy. I suggest otherwise. My evidence would be the games that I watched which are stored electronically on my DVR. I watched the games myself. Every single one of them.
What you're telling me is that I shouldn't trust my own lying eyes and accept the opinion of someone else. If it offends you or rubs you the wrong way that I don't accept yours or some other opinion as my own, then we should stop the entertainment exercise right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 78
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 78 |
Powderblue, your going to have to explain to me why your ok with McCoy purposely throwing balls into the dirt against Denver- his one chance last season to make anyone believe he should be competing for a starting job here, or anywhere
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343 |
Quote:
Well, you invited my snarky response. Besides, I'm sure someone else will take the spot. If they don't I feel fully confident in who the Raiders should take at #3.
For the record, I'd take Star with the #3 pick. If JAX takes Star, I'd take Floyd. If both are gone, I'd take Mingo (yes, I know that's controversial).
Enough about this now.
Quote:
Of course it's my opinion and I provide evidence when a poster intimates that what I write is incorrect and the links that I provide prove otherwise.
It's your opinion that Weeden is better than McCoy. I suggest otherwise. My evidence would be the games that I watched which are stored electronically on my DVR. I watched the games myself. Every single one of them.
What you're telling me is that I shouldn't trust my own lying eyes and accept the opinion of someone else. If it offends you or rubs you the wrong way that I don't accept yours or some other opinion as my own, then we should stop the entertainment exercise right now.
You know what? This is stupid because I'm not going to convince you, just like you're not going to convince me. I think your posts regarding the QB controversy reek of jaundice, which is why they rub me the wrong way at times, but whatever. I'm sorry for insulting you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 35
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 35 |
In McCoy so called one chance to prove he should start in that game against Denver last season I think he did just that. He was the only QB to score a TD the entire game for the Browns. He did that all by himself, with zero reps with the first team all year and little chemistry or timing. We had quite a ways to go to catch up to the Broncos as Weeden stunk it up all game like he had ALL SEASON... We ran tons of pass plays and the guys were huffing and sucking for wind. Colt throwing the ball into the dirt was a smart play as it gave our team a chance to rest AND stopped the clock... but you know as well as I do that no excuse, even a logical plain as day excuse will cease your Colt bashing- grow up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 343 |
Quote:
In McCoy so called one chance to prove he should start in that game against Denver last season I think he did just that. He was the only QB to score a TD the entire game for the Browns. He did that all by himself, with zero reps with the first team all year and little chemistry or timing. We had quite a ways to go to catch up to the Broncos as Weeden stunk it up all game like he had ALL SEASON... We ran tons of pass plays and the guys were huffing and sucking for wind. Colt throwing the ball into the dirt was a smart play as it gave our team a chance to rest AND stopped the clock... but you know as well as I do that no excuse, even a logical plain as day excuse will cease your Colt bashing- grow up.
I'm not even sure who brought up the topic of the Denver game. I sure know I didn't. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Wow.
Just wow.
McCoy always could throw against a prevent. What happened on the drive after he scored a TD, when the defense decided to stop the prevent and start playing again?
McCoy's final 10 plays went like this:
Scramble for 15
Pass to Benjamin for 16
Short incomplete
Short incomplete
Short incomplete
Sack
Sack
Pass to Richardson for 4
Deep incomplete
Sack
That's awe inspiring stuff right there.
I know .... the OL ... or the receivers .... or the RB ...... or the tight ends ........ or the defense let us down ..... while McCoy was amazing.
In all honesty, neither QB played well against the Broncos. Weeden went 12-19 for 104. McCoy went 9-17 for 79 yards. To claim that either guy proved anything in that game is ignorant at best.
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: Nov 2006
Posts: 78
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 78 |
Ytown, don't confuse my post as a recommendation on Weeden. Far from it. It was just proof McCoy essential gave up, and choose to say he threw incomplete passes to curry favor with his receivers as some sort of hero. Do that as a QB in 31 other cities and your not starting the next week, and maybe never again. i highly doubt had he not been injured that he would have started the following week. And I don't think it was lost on the coaches, and SHOULDN'T be lost on the fans either.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 35
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 35 |
Where was the run game after "the broncos started playing again"? Where was Richardson? Out of the game... Where was Gordon? What were they doing? What was coach Shurmur thinking? What kinds of plays were those? Why is it up to Colt to single handedly bring the team to victory? I don't know about you but I was livid during that game in that the coach clearly wanted Colt to fail. It was so evident my family was screaming at the TV... completely atrocious playcalls and personell management from Pat Shurmur and Brad Childress! Did you even watch the game or just read Mary Kay Cabot's blog after the game because she clearly has an agenda against Colt?
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns signed QB Jason Campbell
|
|
