|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,575
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,575 |
Quote:
Quote:
He rejected the notion that he's locking on to his receivers.
"It's overrated,'' he said with a smile. "I've got to look where I'm throwing. I'm not that good yet.''
Locking onto receivers is overrated, huh?
I suppose holding the ball too long is overrated, too?
What about pocket presence? Overrated, right Brandon?
Seeing the filed? Overrated. Better to check down for a minimal game and keep that completion percentage up.
You know..........I do want the guy to succeed because that would be best for the Browns, but I have to say...........I really don't like the guy. His comments last year when he threw Passive Pat under the bus for calling a play they didn't practice THAT PARTICULAR WEEK, left a bad taste in my mouth. The above quoted comments speak of arrogance and foolishness. He looks like a dummy out there. His facial expressions don't inspire confidence.
Yes, he was a rookie last year, but he is going to be 30. How much better can he get? I could be wrong and hope I am...........but, I think he is a chump.
All a matter of interpretation. Those that want to hate will hate (obviously that includes you).
When Weeden says its overrated, he's talking about whether he is locking on. His answer is that he believes he isn't doing it as much as his detractors are saying. . . . What would any QB say in the same situation? Of course he will and should defend himself. Professional athletes don't expose the areas of weakness in their game in the national press and talk about it.
Vers - apparently you believe he is saying that any QB locking onto a receiver isn't important. 
The more things change the more they stay the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
It seems we agree on most of our points about Weeden.
I think we may have had a battle or three, but we settled things and it was cool after that.
Good post. Lots of football in it. It's good, my man.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Quote:
I'm not sure what's going on -- are you guys arguing the same point? It seems that both of you are saying the same thing.
I thought the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not sure what's going on -- are you guys arguing the same point? It seems that both of you are saying the same thing.
I thought the same thing.
That's exactly what's been going on.
It's like some old-timey comedy bit. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Quote:
Remember how you didn't want to give Weeden ANY props for playing well in preseason ??? Remember ?? Well this was another preseason game. So - if he was horrible. It don't matter. You said so yourself. Get over it.
Actually, I don't remember it that way.
What I said was this:
--I was encouraged by Weeden's play in the first two games.
--I also said two preseason games did not Prove he was a good qb because what he did in the regular season last year was more important.
And to be very clear. I am NOT saying he will stink this year because he played poorly in the preseason game. It was one game. It was a preseason game. He could play great this year. It is a possibility. I am skeptical of that though and that is because of how he played last year and I just think he struggles in some very important areas, such as reading defenses, recognizing coverages, accuracy after being pressured, etc.
That doesn't mean I think he won't improve. I am just skeptical right now. That is talking football. It slays me so many people get bent about that opinion. Heck, we got guys slamming the OL---who was our best unit on the team last year---and no one freaks out about that. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
I see a lot of words on here, but no one has answered this question:
Quote:
Other than his arm strength, how is he not horrible?
He was ranked at the bottom of the league rankings. His team sucked in terms of record. He threw more picks than TDs. He doesn't inspire his teammates. He rarely makes plays when we really need them. What about him---other than a decent arm---is not horrible?
Still waiting.
I'll try for the upteenth time but probably get the same "pff" from the Weeden-haterr group that after your "friendship" consists solidly of you and arch. Btw, you get a big fat from me from making internet friends with him.
As for "big plays" or "when the team needed them" I'll point to his splits, which were pretty even and consistent in terms of QBr or comp% no matter if his team was up or behind 1 or 2 scores. You should compare them to McCoy stats who skyrocketed "behind by 9-16p" and got INDEED worse the more his team needed him. It's somewhat funny that the same guys who were either in love with McCoy (arch) or at least think he's better (or less worse) than Weeden (Vers) are the same guys who make this accusation.
Weeden made enough big play throws to win games just to have it destroyed by bad D giving it up again or his WRs (and "superstar" RB) failing him:
His most beautiful throw he made last season was the strike to Gordon late in the 4th Qtr down a score that Gordon dropped at the GL. What more can he do to win that game? A game btw where he outplayed Luck IN Indianapolis...oh and since we are there: after week one Luck and Weeden had about the same QBr (around 80) and if not for week one, he'd have more TDs than INTs too, so a lot of your "points" are really riding on a game he has proven to be much better than. I'm not ommitting his worst game at some time mid season, it was his first start for christ's sake and since he has clearly been a totally different QB. Whatever happened to "development" being the most important thing with a rook? What we saw after week one was the "real" Weeden, with all its inconsistencies.
Another late game winning throw was the TD to Watson vs Dallas, too bad the refs and our DB gave that one away too in 90seconds. Was that Weeden's fault? Should he have managed the the clock too to go with the go ahead TD? Should he have played D too?
He had his team up by two scores IN NY vs the Giants striking beautiful deep throws to Gordon et al, but then TRich was unable to gain a yd when it was needed, dancing around and the D gave up TD after TD, after Cribbs managed to fumble a KR and the inability of our star RB to gain a yd on 3rd&short forced our rook HC to call an ill advised ROLLOUT with our statue rookie QB which resulted in a game changing INT-RET-TD, all that shortly before the half there. Was that really all on Weeden? Can he really be the scapegoat in this game considering all the FACTS I just mentioned concerning this game? How much weight to you want do you expect a rook QB to carry? It was TRichs job to keep the clock rolling while heading towards a two score lead at halftime in New York, not Weeden's and surely not on a stupid rollout that exposes him to unprotected pressure. That was beyond stupid, his stupid throw was just the tip of the stupidity and inability-iceberg.
That said, he still was below AVG to bad in most of what you accuse him over the course of the season, but FAR from horrible, that only qualifies for his first game. Since then he had some good, some bad, some below AVG and some AVG games.....pretty much what I expected a POCKET rookie QB to look like.
Maybe some of you should check your expectations again in terms of realism, but a rookie staline of 59%comp, 7ypp, 14 TDs and 13 INTs, only 4 fumbles (only ONE lost, where's the love here from our self proclaimed "objective" scouts? Looks like he's pretty good in that department, no?) and over 3200yds in 13 starts SINCE week 1 look pretty good to me. No?
Why do I already know that those same stats to support his rookie season are for losers all of a sudden? 
I'm waiting too....for some time now, every time when I responded to those bottom line statistical "arguments"
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
if not for week one, he'd have more TDs than INTs too
...and if I had invested in Apple in the 80's, I'd be filthy rich.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
As much as I hate the "take the one horrible game out" argument, in this case I think that game was an outlier. If you look at his game log that game sticks out like a sore thumb. And he was also probably disorientated by getting stuck under the flag.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
Quote:
if not for week one, he'd have more TDs than INTs too
...and if I had invested in Apple in the 80's, I'd be filthy rich.
13 game sample size > 1 game
especially since he never was even close to as bad in any game since. He was clearly all jitters in that game and he crapped his pants on the field. Acting as if this was part of the norm and thus his game, is pretty stubborn and argumentatively pretty weak imho, especially since it was the game he is the furthest away NOW, which is all that is important projecting his future, no?
It's like telling your little boy in December that overall this year he leaked a liter of urine bedwetting the same amount once on January and call him a bedwetter, although he never wet his bed all year again. You think that's smart and accurate? Well, have fun then
Or ask any MLB manager when he has a decision to make who his 4th SP is in the POs if he takes the 3.5 overall ERA guy that has a 4.5 ERA over the past 2 months or the 4.5 ERA guy that has a 3.5 ERA but who's overall stats are still showing his first start where he allowed 8 ER in 2 IP.
Weeden's first start CLEARLY was the abberation to his "norm", which was about a 1:1 TD:INT guy with 59% accuracy and a pretty decent 6.9ish ypp that took pretty good care of the ball.
Btw, Luck had a pretty rough start too to his season.
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,140
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,140 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
if not for week one, he'd have more TDs than INTs too
...and if I had invested in Apple in the 80's, I'd be filthy rich.
13 game sample size > 1 game
especially since he never was even close to as bad in any game since. He was clearly all jitters in that game and he crapped his pants on the field. Acting as if this was part of the norm and thus his game, is pretty stubborn and argumentatively pretty weak imho, especially since it was the game he is the furthest away NOW, which is all that is important projecting his future, no?
It's like telling your little boy in December that overall this year he leaked a liter of urine bedwetting the same amount once on January and call him a bedwetter, although he never wet his bed all year again. You think that's smart and accurate? Well, have fun then
Or ask any MLB manager when he has a decision to make who his 4th SP is in the POs if he takes the 3.5 overall ERA guy that has a 4.5 ERA over the past 2 months or the 4.5 ERA guy that has a 3.5 ERA but who's overall stats are still showing his first start where he allowed 8 ER in 2 IP.
Weeden's first start CLEARLY was the abberation to his "norm", which was about a 1:1 TD:INT guy with 59% accuracy and a pretty decent 6.9ish ypp that took pretty good care of the ball.
Btw, Luck had a pretty rough start too to his season.
Also let's not forget in that first game WRs dropped 4 passes. Including what should've been a touchdown to Little which turned into an interception. Hit Little right int he hands, that's a 2 TD-INT change but hardly within Weeden's control.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 367
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 367 |
After looking at the gamelog for both QB's their stats are almost Identical with the exception of Luck playing 16 games and gaining 1000 more yards. But lets be real, he had friggin REGGIE WAYNE. An almost certain HOF player. Who fits that bill in Cleveland as a receiver. And that was under Pat Shurmers lethargic offense last year.
Who let the Dawgs out???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
I'll try for the upteenth time but probably get the same "pff" from the Weeden-haterr group that after your "friendship" consists solidly of you and arch. Btw, you get a big fat from me from making internet friends with him.
Wait a minute. So now I'm a founding member of the Weeden haters? Or am I just a member of the "Weeden haters?" Or, in reality, am I a member of the "Weeden can improve, and I certainly expect him to do that in his second year as the game should come to him better/easier" club?
You obviously haven't read much of what I've posted about Weeden. Maybe you're projecting my thoughts?
Oh, for the record, vers and I aren't friends, nor are we enemies.
I will post what I think, and what I see. You may disagree, and that's just fine. Ironically, you posted this: That said, he still was below AVG to bad in most of what you accuse him over the course of the season, but FAR from horrible, that only qualifies for his first game. Since then he had some good, some bad, some below AVG and some AVG games.....pretty much what I expected a POCKET rookie QB to look like.
Geez, man, be careful what you say. You may get called a "friend of arch" before long.
I appreciate reading your take. Doesn't mean I always agree. Doesn't mean your always right.
Hey, look, you're a friend of mine. Better duck.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
And actually, jango, as I read your thoughts of me, and some other posters thoughts of me, I've come to the conclusion I probably don't need to post anymore, as ya'll know exactly what I'll say anyway.
Django and I are friends!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
As much as I hate the "take the one horrible game out" argument, in this case I think that game was an outlier. If you look at his game log that game sticks out like a sore thumb.
And he was also probably disorientated by getting stuck under the flag.
I agree with that completely....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
I don't think many would argue that it wasn't a deviation from the norm.
But to ignore a negative aberration just to make a case, especially with such a small sample size...
Could you imagine if he lit it up against the Eagles last year? Let's say 400 yards and 4 TD's, and then went on to have the same numbers the rest of the way.
Not many would say 'ignore that opener, when he was great'.
Not to mention...if you showed someone that one game, and they saw nothing else, and then they asked "So did he show definite signs that he corrected the problematic parts of his game?', how would you answer?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
When we do audit analysis at work, we usually discard the high and low as outliers. If we take out that first game along with his best game, what are we left with?
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
When we do audit analysis at work, we usually discard the high and low as outliers. If we take out that first game along with his best game, what are we left with?
A mediocre at best quarterback.
On another note, I shudder to think what Richardson's numbers would look like if you did that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
That flag thing...don't underestimate how an embarrassment like that can throw off your whole essence.
Think of doing something that really embarrassed you and think of how long it threw you off for if you were at work or in a social situation or somewhere where that was seen by the people you'll be seeing for a while.
That being said...being a professional, the effects should be more minimal.
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,575
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,575 |
Quote:
Quote:
Remember how you didn't want to give Weeden ANY props for playing well in preseason ??? Remember ?? Well this was another preseason game. So - if he was horrible. It don't matter. You said so yourself. Get over it.
Actually, I don't remember it that way.
What I said was this:
--I was encouraged by Weeden's play in the first two games.
--I also said two preseason games did not Prove he was a good qb because what he did in the regular season last year was more important.
And to be very clear. I am NOT saying he will stink this year because he played poorly in the preseason game. It was one game. It was a preseason game. He could play great this year. It is a possibility. I am skeptical of that though and that is because of how he played last year and I just think he struggles in some very important areas, such as reading defenses, recognizing coverages, accuracy after being pressured, etc.
That doesn't mean I think he won't improve. I am just skeptical right now. That is talking football. It slays me so many people get bent about that opinion. Heck, we got guys slamming the OL---who was our best unit on the team last year---and no one freaks out about that.
Nothin wrong with anything in this post - I think most of your posts are constructed with an emphasis on how bad Weeden is and *might be* ... whether its because you think people are getting carried away or something I don't know.
I don't think Weeden was good last year - but he was a rookie with a coach that gave him zero chance of success - so I chalk most of his struggles up to those 2 things. I am less skeptical that he will be good under Norv. Better coaching - better play calling = better QB play. Papa Johns! But he has to do it in regular season p[lay and I think we'll see that. I think we're an 8-8 team if we stay healthy - and my heart hopes for a little more.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
When we do audit analysis at work, we usually discard the high and low as outliers. If we take out that first game along with his best game, what are we left with?
Whatever YTBF wants it to say.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,002
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,002 |
My opinions on Weeden weren't based on the first game. From the beginning I threw it out as a rookie's first game. I think it is very fair to do that.
My problems with Weeden is 90% with his mental acuity. I mean he just isn't a quick enough thinker. His ability to read defenses and make adjustments is horrible. His field of vision is way too narrow. You can tell he barely sees a third of the field at a time and because of that he doesn't change his focus to new receivers once he doesn't get a WR open that he planned on. He only makes vertical checkdowns instead of scanning the whole field.
I don't think his big arm is enough to over come his mental issues. I mean I hope he proves me wrong but I am pretty certain we will be drafting a QB this in 2014 or 2015.
And vers the only thing I routinely complain about in regards to the O-line is RG. I wanted to draft one in the second round and I still wish we had. Greco in my eyes is only avg and has very little push but he does good with his zone blocking that chud and turner like.
You can't fix stupid but you can destroy ignorance. When you destroy ignorance you remove the justifications for evil. If you want to destroy evil then educate our people. Hate is a tool of the stupid to deal with what they can't understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
But to ignore a negative aberration just to make a case, especially with such a small sample size...
I never said to ignore it. I just think it needs to be put into context.. and as far as the sample size, that's exactly WHY it needs to be put into context because one game like that has such an impact on the overall season numbers.
Quote:
Could you imagine if he lit it up against the Eagles last year? Let's say 400 yards and 4 TD's, and then went on to have the same numbers the rest of the way.
Not many would say 'ignore that opener, when he was great'.
I believe I would take the same approach, put it in context... the upside to this scenario is that at least we would know he was capable of going off like that.
Quote:
Not to mention...if you showed someone that one game, and they saw nothing else, and then they asked "So did he show definite signs that he corrected the problematic parts of his game?', how would you answer?
Corrected as in "Totally fixed"? No, he didn't totally fix them... but he did show that the levels of problems in that game are not the norm.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
A few points:
--If someone tries to objectively analyze Weeden's play, you--and others--automatically claim they are a hater. Very mature.
--I despise the "take this game out" talk. Steve Doershcuk always did that crap. Why throw it out? Did you throw out his best game?
--I didn't make my judgement on Weeden from that first game. My feelings about him are because he consistently held the ball way too long. He consistently didn't see the field. He consistently made inaccurate throws after being pressured. Other than one play, I didn't see him audible us into a good play. I saw terrible pocket presence. I never saw him throw guys open.
--I love how you use completion percentage as a strength. LOL.......the guy constantly checked down on third and long for meaningless 2 yard completions. His completion percentage increased, but we didn't get first downs and our defense was under the gun over and over and over.
--Beautiful throw? Gordon was wide freaking open. What qb couldn't make that throw? That is your answer? Really?
The guy did not show the ability to make plays when it counted.
You can get all huffy and continue your barrage of insults of which guys are friends and who is a hater, but the facts are that he was horrible last year. He ranked near the bottom of the league. He didn't lead us to wins and was often the culprit of our losses.
And you are nuts if you think he doesn't need to make dramatic improvements if we are ever to be a winning team.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 857
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 857 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,620
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,620 |
Quote:
-2
All the times we have had "+1" posts on this board, and no one had yet to toss out one of these. Wonder why it took so long ... I never thought of it and I am pretty snarky.
Cracked me up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,578
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,578 |
I also thought the '-2' was pretty funny.
The real reason I want to post is because of the whole 'toss out his first game' discussion.
Yes, you throw out that first game because it is an outlier, both statistically and by the eye test. That game was way out of the norm (both statistically and how he looked on the field), which makes it an outlier that you are supposed to toss out.
If he had a really good game that skewed his stats the other way, then yes, you would throw out that game as well.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544 |
j/c
well we will see. right now I don't think there would be much drop off between Campbell and weeden as far as play. more than less the same as turner said.
being a browns fan is like taking your dog to vet every week to be put down...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
--I didn't make my judgement on Weeden from that first game. My feelings about him are because he consistently held the ball way too long. He consistently didn't see the field. He consistently made inaccurate throws after being pressured. Other than one play, I didn't see him audible us into a good play. I saw terrible pocket presence. I never saw him throw guys open.
Oh, you didn't? Then why keep bringing up his total stats that are clearly skewed by this abortion of an opener? As far as your assessment of his on-field and mental weaknesses, WE AGREE and you won't find many saying the opposite. So what or who are you fighting here? Everybody knows he has got to get better, it's not the revelation you think it is, it's common sense and you'll find no one on here that says Weeden is god and our QB for the forseeable future. Everybody knows he needs to step his game.
Quote:
--I love how you use completion percentage as a strength. LOL.......the guy constantly checked down on third and long for meaningless 2 yard completions. His completion percentage increased, but we didn't get first downs and our defense was under the gun over and over and over.
As a strength? Where did I say that? I said those were numbers I totally "expected" and are acceptable for a rook QB, whereas you keep ommitting that he was a rook and keep comparing his play to multi year vets and a once in a lifetime rookie QB class,that's not fair. In a historical context his rookie season, was neither bad nor good. In fact, as far as rookie QBs go, it was above AVG and comparable to Bradford's rookie season which was considered very promising at the time.
Also, as I said, it's really laughable to accuse him of "dumping down" along with "he didn't make plays when the team needed them" and then turn around and say McCoy was less worse. Doesn't make an ounce of sense and only reveals your true colours.
He didn't do this anywhere as much as you claim, evidenced by his high number of INTs when down by much 8unlike Mr McCoy who had steallr stats when down by 2+ scores), which indicates a QB that at least tries to make something happen. Weeden has a lot of problems, but stat whoring is one of his least concerns. You're way off here, not even close.
Quote:
--Beautiful throw? Gordon was wide freaking open. What qb couldn't make that throw? That is your answer? Really?
The guy did not show the ability to make plays when it counted.
Pretty much everything anyone needs to know about your "objectivity" assessing his play. If that wasn't a good throw, we're talking about perfectly placed 50yds downfield strike in full stride, then you'll be never going to give him any credit. With McCoy that would have been a jump ball at best, if it ever gets there, but 98% he doesn't even try that throw, because he couldn't make it to begin with.
Quote:
You can get all huffy and continue your barrage of insults of which guys are friends and who is a hater, but the facts are that he was horrible last year. He ranked near the bottom of the league. He didn't lead us to wins and was often the culprit of our losses.
I disagree and exactly stated WHY, you keep ignoring that or downplay it (Gordon throw) and keep bringing up total stats clearly skewed by his 1st start and keep pinning TEAM total record solely on him completely ignoring the numerous examples I gave you where that clearly wasn't the case. Didn't expect anything else. So much for "talking football", all you really do when it comes to Weeden is ranting from a soapbox.
Quote:
And you are nuts if you think he doesn't need to make dramatic improvements if we are ever to be a winning team.
Please quote me where I said he'll be fine and re-read my post while you're at it  Which part of "he was below AVG to bad" did you miss? What I disputed was that he was "horrible" as you claimed. The funny thing is that I agree with most of your criticism on his weaknesses, re-read what I wrote about him after the Indy game. I said since we even drafted him that he's a 50-50 boom/bust gamble and after last season I said that this is his make or break season and needs to get clearly better to remain a starter. He's far being fine or an AVG QB, I don't think you'll find anyone arguing that, so I guess you're fighting windmills yet again, building argumentative strawmen that don't exist just to push your "arguments". Have fun on that soapbox and let me know when you're really interested in "talking football" again.
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
My opinions on Weeden weren't based on the first game. From the beginning I threw it out as a rookie's first game. I think it is very fair to do that.
My problems with Weeden is 90% with his mental acuity. I mean he just isn't a quick enough thinker. His ability to read defenses and make adjustments is horrible. His field of vision is way too narrow. You can tell he barely sees a third of the field at a time and because of that he doesn't change his focus to new receivers once he doesn't get a WR open that he planned on. He only makes vertical checkdowns instead of scanning the whole field.
I don't think his big arm is enough to over come his mental issues. I mean I hope he proves me wrong but I am pretty certain we will be drafting a QB this in 2014 or 2015.
And vers the only thing I routinely complain about in regards to the O-line is RG. I wanted to draft one in the second round and I still wish we had. Greco in my eyes is only avg and has very little push but he does good with his zone blocking that chud and turner like.
Good post. Agree with most of it. I share the same concerns about Weeden, but am slightly more optmistic. My confidence in him slipped maybe from 50/50 of him making it to 40/60. As bad as that still is, it's still better than the 5/95 or worse we've trotted out as starters the 3-4 seasons pre-Weeden.
Either way, we will know a lot more in 1-2 months from now.
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Quote:
Oh, you didn't? Then why keep bringing up his total stats that are clearly skewed by this abortion of an opener?
I don't even think about it. I don't throw games out,whether they be good or bad. Neither do the people that keep stats. I simply report the stats. When I post his stats, should I say he only threw 13 interceptions? Really? You are trying to combine two separate arguments and wrap them up in a neat, little bow in order to prove your point that my hate for Weeden skews any objectivity that I might have. Sorry Dj, but that isn't true.
Quote:
As a strength? Where did I say that? I said those were numbers I totally "expected" and are acceptable for a rook QB, whereas you keep ommitting that he was a rook and keep comparing his play to multi year vets and a once in a lifetime rookie QB class,that's not fair. In a historical context his rookie season, was neither bad nor good. In fact, as far as rookie QBs go, it was above AVG and comparable to Bradford's rookie season which was considered very promising at the time.
Also, as I said, it's really laughable to accuse him of "dumping down" along with "he didn't make plays when the team needed them" and then turn around and say McCoy was less worse. Doesn't make an ounce of sense and only reveals your true colours.
He didn't do this anywhere as much as you claim, evidenced by his high number of INTs when down by much 8unlike Mr McCoy who had steallr stats when down by 2+ scores), which indicates a QB that at least tries to make something happen. Weeden has a lot of problems, but stat whoring is one of his least concerns. You're way off here, not even close.
You're right, you did not say as a strength. You said they were acceptable. I don't think his completion percentage was acceptable because he did indeed dump down all the time on third and long. He did it again the other night against Indy.
The fact that he threw so many picks while dumping down so often further lends itself to how horrible his play really was.
Why bring up McCoy? know McCoy checked down way too often. I never said he didn't. Once again, you are taking two separate statements and treating them as one. I only said that McCoy seemed to make more plays than Weeden. But yes, McCoy checked down all the time, too. Drove me freaking crazy. You keep forgetting that I took all kinds of grief for saying Colt wasn't the guy. I just compare them at times. So what? Would you freak out if I said Weeden had a stronger arm? Would you be offended if I said Weeden throws the slant and the crossing routes way better than Colt? Well, all three of those things are true. It is also true that Colt made more plays when he had to and out of nothing than Weeden did. Why does everything have to be absolute w/some of you guys?
And just because McCoy checked down, it's okay that Weeden did? That is a lame justification. Both teams headed offenses that were terrible. People try and compare Luck's numbers w/Weedens and they assign a similar grade to the two. Well, Luck tries to throw for first downs on 3rd down. It hurts the numbers. And that is only one way that he is far superior.
Quote:
Pretty much everything anyone needs to know about your "objectivity" assessing his play. If that wasn't a good throw, we're talking about perfectly placed 50yds downfield strike in full stride, then you'll be never going to give him any credit. With McCoy that would have been a jump ball at best, if it ever gets there, but 98% he doesn't even try that throw, because he couldn't make it to begin with.
Love the first sentence. You always have to draw others into it. Hey guys, let's disagree w/Vers. Why do you need support, Dj? You try and make these discussions you guys against me. And then you say that I am not talking football. LOL
The throw was beautiful. Perfectly placed. Great throw. But, those aren't the tough throws. I've seen Weeden make dozens of throws way, way harder than that one. Every qb in the league can make that throw. Even Colt. It's not the bombs that show off a strong-armed QB's uniqueness. It's the lasers that split zones in tight windows and the throws that get to the outside like lightning bolts. Those are the throws Colt can't make and Weeden can. They can all throw the bomb to a wide open WR. And again, why do you keep bringing Colt up as a defense for Weeden? Colt is gone. It was decided he wasn't good enough. You need to get that through your head.
Quote:
I disagree and exactly stated WHY, you keep ignoring that or downplay it (Gordon throw) and keep bringing up total stats clearly skewed by his 1st start and keep pinning TEAM total record solely on him completely ignoring the numerous examples I gave you where that clearly wasn't the case. Didn't expect anything else. So much for "talking football", all you really do when it comes to Weeden is ranting from a soapbox.
So, if I don't agree w/your examples that were very "clear," then I am not talking football? LOL man. I am talking football. So are you. We don't have to agree. Good discussion is a good thing. Others learn from it. I get PMs from people who tell me they learn from these types of conversations. Instead of getting so upset about us not agreeing, how about enjoying a good debate? I have made good points. You have made good points. We agree on many things. We disagree on others and that is what a debate is for. To examine all the facts and opinions so we can better understand the situation and learn more. I hope this isn't true, but you come across as one of those guys who NEEDS to have everyone agree w/you and you get very upset if everyone doesn't. Relax man. No one is going to think you are ignorant if someone disagrees w/you. You need a bigger ego. By that, I mean you need to have enough confidence in yourself to admit it is okay to be wrong sometimes or to lose a debate. Only a self conscious, small man needs to APPEAR to be right every time.
If we can leave out the crap I just said to you and the crap about my objectivity and me not talking football..........there is a lot of great stuff in our posts. A lot of sound debate. That is a good thing, Dj. It helps you and I learn and it helps others learn. I actually welcome you disagreeing w/me. Let's just keep the personal comments out of it. Keep bringing up good points like you have. I will counter w/other points. We'll agree on some things and disagree on others. As we hash it out, the REAL TRUTH will become more evident. I used to love doing that w/guys like Diam, DnD, and Toad.
Are you man enough for that, or do we have to keep up w/the "lets discredit the other poster personally" to prove our own points?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Sorry mac, but how Weeden has performed, is performing, and will perform is a far, far cry from beating a dead horse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
-2
Does that mean the argument is a draw?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 |
Quote:
Quote:
-2
Does that mean the argument is a draw?
Since when does +1 -2 = 0?
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
-2
Does that mean the argument is a draw?
Since when does +1 -2 = 0?
Since the +1 was coupled with the original comment thus making it 2. After a -2 it becomes 0..
You can use your fingers and toes if you need.. I won't tell
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
Quote:
Since the +1 was coupled with the original comment thus making it 2. After a -2 it becomes 0..
Therefore, we must bomb Syria. 
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
-2
Does that mean the argument is a draw?
Since when does +1 -2 = 0?
Since the +1 was coupled with the original comment thus making it 2. After a -2 it becomes 0..
You can use your fingers and toes if you need.. I won't tell
I trust you're not doing home schooling... 
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
I only said that McCoy seemed to make more plays than Weeden.
When? In practice? McCoy was the absolutely worst playmaker at the QB position I have seen in a long, long time. He could not, and would not push the ball down the field at all, and could not throw a ball that a receiver could do anything with, He would go into the 4th quarter of games with 70 yards of passing, then explode as teams played soft zones, trading yards (and sometimes points) for time off the clock.
Last year alone, Weeden had 48 pass plays of 20+ yards, and 6 of 40+ yards. He averaged 6.55 yards/pass attempt. This was with 517 pass attempts.
In 2011, Colt McCoy, in the same offense, had 26 pass plays of 20+ yards, and 5 of 40+ yards. He averaged 5.90 yards/pass attempt. This was with 463 pass attempts.
McCoy ran himself into trouble more than most QBs I have seen. He had no feel for pressure in the pocket, and I often saw him roll right into the area the OL was blocking the defender away to. It was amazing.
Weeden's not perfect, but there is just no way that a rational argument can be made that McCoy was more of a playmaker. His biggest wins were games where he was carefully managed by Mangini and Daboll so he couldn't blow the game for them. If you can make an argument that McCoy was a better at making plays than Weeden, please try to do so. I certainly don't see it ..... from the eyeball test, nor from a stat basis.
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: 11,465
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
If we're down by 4 on the opponents 20 with a minute left and no time outs, I would take Colt McCoy's chances over Weeden's.
If we were on our own 20 in that scenario, I would take Weeden every time.
Weeden has more tools, McCoy got more out of his limited tools. To date. I expect that to be a dated statement pretty soon.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Not Sold On Weeden?
|
|
