DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Weeden on what he learned from sideline: "Don't get hurt"

j/c:

I don't even feel like arguing w/the posters who are still defending Weeden and then dismissing what Hoyer did. Think what you will. All I know is this:

--While Weeden makes some nice throws, he still doesn't see the field. He still takes to long to pull the trigger. He still makes bone headed plays. He still stinks!

The energy level of the team when Hoyer was the qb was much, much higher. Hard to believe that people don't see that. The games were exciting when Hoyer played. And I don't think Hoyer is all that. It's just proves how freaking terrible Weeden is.

He doesn't make plays when we need them. Detroit started out hot in the second half. What does Weeden and the O do? Go three and out on back to back series. Once Detroit took the lead, I was praying for a punt return for a TD or pick six, because I knew Weeden wouldn't lead us back. He has no fire. No energy. No leadership. I can't even stand looking at his face.

I was so excited when Hoyer was leading us. Again, I don't think he is great, but it was fun to watch the Browns again. The team had so much more energy w/him. The games are boring w/Weeden at QB. B-O-R-I-N-G!!!

Look, I am not saying that other units and players played great yesterday, but man, the energy level is so different when Weeden is in there. It's like he sucks the life out of us. He has that baseball temperament. No passion. Takin' it easy on hot, lazy Sunday afternoon. That might work in baseball, but it doesn't have a prayer of working in football.

I keep praying he proves me wrong, but it's always more of the same. He's football dumb and he has the energy level of a rock. I'm sick of watching him.

Blah......

It's the NFL. Win, or lose. The qb takes the glory if it's a win, he takes the heat if it's a loss. For the most part.

I hate when people say "well, the qb looked great in the first half...." Who cares? There are 2 halves to a game. The GAME is what we want to win - not a half.

Weeden's just not getting it done. He's on record with that.

As to the title of the thread: "What did Weeden learn from the sideline"? Apparently nothing. He didn't get hurt. But he sure stares receivers down. I was at the game and watched him. His head seldom turned or moved from his first read. When he finally did look around, it was too late.

Let's just say 'Weeden has more than ample room to improve".

Quote:

---

"What did Weeden learn from the sideline"

---

That he wasn't the starter anymore.

Great analysis there.

My point is that he can thrive in the 1st half, even the pressure situations where he has to drive the team for points late in the 1st half. (which would have to be more stressful than starting the 3rd quarter with the lead)

I just don't know why there is such a disparity.

Toad, what's up with the Bronco's avatar?

I think "great" is a massive over statement. More like he doesn't completely and totally fall apart until the second half.

I consider a guy driving his team to last second scores in the waning moments of the 1st half to be pretty great. He's done that 3 or 4 times this season. There's no carryover though.

I'm convinced that Django and YTown are just playing devils advocate. They are reaching to see your reactions. They are too smart to believe what they are saying.

Weeden is exactly who we knew he was. All you had to do was watch him at OK State. He hasn't changed. Same guy.

Anderson, Mallet, most of these guys. They don't just change.

Listen, some guys do change, they do evolve. Rodgers, Brees, even Kapernick has evolved -- changed.

Lets hope Banner and Lombardi aren't who we know they are. Lets hope they have changed.

17 points in one half equates to 34 points in a game, if the team plays at the same level for both halves of the game. Actually we had reason to think that it could have been better, because we had the momentum on both offense and defense heading into the half. We had just driven the field for a FG on a drive starting with only 50 seconds left. That was a really nice less than a minute drive.

That's pretty damn good.

The 2nd half fell apart. That sucked. Weeden made one particularly boneheaded play. That sucked. H e didn't make many throws in the 2nd half overall. That sucked. The rest of the team also sucked. We ran for 5 yards in the 2nd half after running for 115 in the 1st half, against a team that has had trouble defending the run this year. (allowing 5.4 yards/carry so far) that sucked. The defense fell apart in the 2nd half, from the 1st drive to the last. They allowed 4 scoring drives out of 5 second half drives. They only forced 2 3rd down stops, one of which resulted in a FG. The coaches made a lot of questionable decisions.

The first half of the game was excellent. It might have been the best half of football we played this year. The one big mistake Weeden made in the first half was a 3rd down pass that was the equivalent of a punt inside the 20. We dominated the 1st half, We drove the field, especially late, to take a nice lead. We looked like a good team.

Then every single aspect of the game fell apart for us in the 2nd half. I honestly do not understand how that can happen.

j/c

Cleveland Browns: A painful look back at the first round of the 2012 draft: Terry Pluto

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The 2012 draft was supposed to change the future for the Browns.

I'm just going to focus on the first round, where the Browns had the No. 4 and No. 22 picks.

Those choices became Trent Richardson and Brandon Weeden.

Less than two years later, the top part of that draft is unraveling. Once again, a big draft looks like a huge missed opportunity for the Browns.

Before criticizing former team president Mike Holmgren and General Manager Tom Heckert for their picks, it's confession time. Not only did I like the moves the Browns made, but before the draft, I pushed for the selection of Trent Richardson and Brandon Weeden.

I wrote: "Yes, I am intrigued by Weeden."

I didn't care that he was 28 at the time, or that he played in sort of a gimmicky offense where he was allowed to stand in the pocket, take a long snap from center and heave the ball downfield. I wanted a quarterback, and I wanted one who was ready to play now.

I also wrote, "I'm enamored by Richardson, a bullish back who also can be stealth as he changes directions. Yes, running backs wear out. If Richardson gives the Browns 7,000 yards over the next five years, will anyone complain?"

Let's see … 7,000 yards over five seasons means Richardson was supposed to average 1,400 yards a year -- by my math.

I added that since the Browns returned in 1999, they have had eight different starting running backs on opening day. Only Jamal Lewis (2007-09) started for more than two years.

Remember, this was before the 2012 draft. I didn't know they would trade up a notch to grab Richardson, but in the end -- that was OK with me -- even though I sensed Minnesota tricked the Browns into thinking they had a deal for Richardson with another team.

In the end, the Browns traded picks No. 4, 118, 139 and 221 to move up to No. 3 for the Alabama running back.

Here is what Heckert said on draft day and why they traded up one spot to grab Richardson: "We were pretty fired up … Trent was a guy that we really wanted and I'm glad that it worked out … He can run the ball, catch the ball and he can block."



The decline of Richardson

Richardson is now with Indianapolis. In the four games since being traded by the Browns new front office for the Colts top pick in 2014, Richardson is rushing for 47 yards per game, a 3.1 average.

That's worse than the 3.5 average he had in 17 games with the Browns.

Furthermore, Richardson has caught only two passes in four games. His longest carry this season for either team is 12 yards.

At this rate, he may have to play 70 years to reach my 7,000-yard projection.

My theory is Richardson has never been the same since his second knee operation. He had one in the spring of 2012, a second in August of 2012.

Four weeks after the second surgery, he started the opening day game for the Browns.

Current Browns general manager Michael Lombardi was very critical of this draft when he was working for the NFL network. Along with CEO Joe Banner, Lombardi made a wise move turning the 2013 Trent Richardson into a 2014 first-round pick.

If Richardson can't be successful with the Colts and star quarterback Andrew Luck, whose passing scares opposing defenses, it's hard to know if Richardson will ever become anything more than just another NFL running back.


The deals that didn't happen

Holmgren loved Luck.

The team president said he tried to trade for the Stanford quarterback, targeted by the Colts with the draft's top pick.

Holmgren told a Seattle radio station that he offered the entire Browns' 2012 draft to the Colts for Luck. He added that he was talking to Colts General Manager Ryan Grigson by a swimming pool and they were having "umbrella drinks."

The Colts weren't interested in anything Holmgren had to say. They believed Luck would become an elite quarterback. They were right.

Apparently, neither were the Rams -- who put the draft's No. 2 pick on the trading block.

The target for Washington and the Browns was Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin III.

Griffin eventually was dealt to Washington for first-round picks in 2012, 2013 and 2014 -- and a second-round pick in 2012.

Holmgren told Browns season ticket holders that his offer "was every bit the offer that was chosen (by the Rams)."

He declined to say exactly what the Browns offered, but implied a relationship between the people running the teams in St. Louis and Washington was why that deal happened.

Griffin had a superior rookie season. He threw 20 touchdown passes to five interceptions and was the No. 3-ranked quarterback in the NFL.

This season, Griffin is coming off major knee surgery. He has six touchdown passes compared to five interceptions, and he's ranked 21st.

For what it's worth, I wrote that I favored Griffin for the Browns because I believed they wouldn't adjust their under-center, west coast offense to his scrambling style. But the real issue with Griffin will be durability.


The misjudgment of Weeden

Here's what former Browns coach Pat Shurmur said on draft day about Weeden: "He has the attributes you are looking for in a quarterback. He is a winner. He obviously took a non-traditional path to being a college quarterback, but he is a very mature guy. He is an outstanding thrower. He is a good decision maker. He is very accurate."

Weeden's accuracy has been iffy, and he has struggled with making decisions under pressure.

He was the 29th-ranked quarterback last year, and is 28th this season. Had Brian Hoyer remained healthy, Weeden would be the Browns backup quarterback.

The Browns could have taken quarterback Ryan Tannehill at No. 4, but they made the Richardson deal instead.

On draft day, Heckert said: "Brandon was by far the best player for us after a couple guys got picked. There wasn't even an afterthought. After a couple of guys went we knew we were going to take him and we didn't even think about moving down."

Tannehill has a 3-2 record as a starter for Miami with six touchdown passes and five interceptions this season. He's ranked 17th among quarterbacks.

Obviously, he is a better prospect than Weeden. But will he become a franchise quarterback, no one knows.

This much is certain -- if the Browns had the chance, they'd trade Richardson and Weeden for Tannehill, who was the No. 8 pick in the 2012 draft.

As for what I wrote about the first round, here it is: "Suppose picking Richardson and Weeden means the Browns have 'only a four-year window' to become a winning team with enough talent to become a factor in the playoffs. Well, open the window and jump through -- why wait any longer to get started?"

Well, that window is now shut as the Browns will have to try and rebound from those first-round mistakes when they have two first rounders and 10 total picks in the 2014 draft.

http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/index.ssf/2013/10/post_30.html

I hated the notion of trading up for Richardson, but I bought into the hype.
I *really* hated the pick of Weeden, but I was fooled in the early going last year that he might finally be the answer... last year, like this year, he looked like a rock star during pre-season.

I was beyond ticked off at the Richardson trade, but seeing that we don't really plan to run anyway, it makes sense to me and I'm ok with it now, even if I think that in the long run he WILL still pan out for them.

Weeden - I'm just full of apathy at this point. I wish the light would come on so we could just stop this freaking carousel once and for all, but it just doesn't look like it is going to happen and I completely do NOT have any faith in the new regime to get the QB pick right next spring.


Basically, I see us simply entering yet another level of the Hell this franchise has been rooted in for close to 15 years now.

I complained a little about both picks, but as always I said it's going to take 3 years before we know one way or the other. I was wrong about that less than 18 months later we have our answer already

Thanks for the article. A few comments:

--When did The Big Show make his comments to the Seattle radio station about Luck? I never heard those before. Were they AFTER Luck played his rookie season? I think he is a huge liar.

--Does anyone still believe that our offer was as good as Washington's for RGIII? It kills me how people slam Banner for being dishonest, yet they always ignored The Big Show's obvious lies. You know, like the one where he woke up one day and decided to fire Mangini that particular day. LOL........what a tool.

--I argued w/most of you about Weeden and TRich since they were drafted. I was adamant from day one that they were stupid moves. Of course, I was called names and I was posting w/an agenda. Yeah, the agenda was that I knew those were two stupid picks. It's amazing how many times similar situations have played out. No, I am not asking for a pat on the back, but how about you think before you ridicule my opinion in the future? How about you cool it w/the stupid agenda comments? How about you argue w/logic and reason rather than ridicule and insults? Nah, it won't happen. Speaking of mac, where has he been since there has been some evidence that our FO has made good moves?

--I really wish Dj and YTown would just shut up. You guys were both wrong. Just admit it. It's not the end of the world. Weeden has no future here, nor should he. Admit it. Stop the BS.

--Unlike Purp, I have some hope in the FO. They have made very good moves since they have been here. They have assembled a fine coaching staff. They have accumulated draft picks. They stole from Indy. They found Hoyer. They brought in Bryant and Kruger. Mingo will make plays for us. They sure as heck haven't done anything as dumb as trading up w/Minni [pssstttttt, Peterson plays for them] to grab a RB who doesn't have good vision and has poor instincts. They sure as heck didn't spend a high draft pick on an older, dumb, QB who can't make a play to save his life and who gags under pressure.

--I'm rolling w/this FO. And I will remember those of you who aren't.

--I do have one major problem w/this regime. I say cut Weeden today. Bring in Thigpen. We should have brought in T. Lewis. Weeden is a poison. Cut his butt, today!

I remeber the draft vividly. I had a lady friend buying me tequila shots as she knew I was hyped for the draft. Lets just say I was almost asked to leave the Browns Backer Bar because I was screaming at the TV. I didn't mind the Richardson pick, I hated that we drafted up.
I saw another post that made the most sense how to handle the Minny trade.
"So you have another offer, fine we are going to take Kahill at four & trade him away"
Wow. thats how it should have been done.

Then when Weeden came at 22, I was like Who? What did we just do, the oldest first rounder- ever!

It continued w/ Schwartz next, it was time for me to go at that point-lol
I did come to understand our whole draft got moved up when our targeted receiver was taken @ 21.

I do have a certain confidence in our new FO. Lets face it, so far they are making good choices, especially knowing this fan base is out of patience. As JB has said, can't be afraid to make mistakes, just keep to a minimum (Paraphrasing)
Heckert didnt miss on all his picks so lets continue to build what was started.

Best I can tell this was an evaluation year for many players, it quite evident to me what we are needing, I'm sure it is too for the evaluators

At least he's not the worst...only 2nd worst.

Best and Worst QBs so far this season.

2. Brandon Weeden, Browns-- Let's be clear. Any time your'e benched for Brian Hoyer, things are not going well. Weeden technically was "injured" and "replaced" by Hoyer but he had it coming either way. A three-pick and 49 percent completion day to open the season against Miami got things started off on the wrong foot. The perfect bookend for that nightmare? The game-sealing interception he threw against the Lions Sunday. It is, arguably, the worst pass attempt in the history of the NFL.

Think about this pick for a second. It is first-and-10 and the Browns have the ball down seven points at midfield. Weeden is (sort of) chased out of the pocket, (sort of) rolls left and (sort of) throws -- against his body, no less! -- an underhanded pass toward the sidelines into double coverage. It's the perfect storm of terrible decision making.

Was Gabbert the worst according to this guy?

Yep. And somehow Schaub didn't even make his bottom five. List is a bit suspect.

As our most lists. Earlier, I listed my top five qbs. I could easily see how people would vehemently disagree w/my choices.

I wonder if anyone other than Dj, Ytown, and perhaps Purp.........would argue that Weeden is not in the bottom five, though?

Boy, you sure do get off on poking people, don't you?


Where did I ever say he was or wasn't top 5 or bottom 5 anything??

Please tell me.

Yeah, Brady lost damn near every one of his targets in the passing game. Hie receivers have been replaced with rookies and a fragile Amendola, (and Edleman .. SP) and their TE position has been devastated by injury and murder.

Somehow Brady has still managed to pull them together. It's not pretty .... but he has somehow pulled it off to the tune of a 4-1 start. Unbelievable. If he's not the best in the NFL, then he has to be #2. No one has done what he has done with largely average talent at WR and RB over the years. He hasn't had a lot of those burner types .... but has had more competent types. He's just amazing.

Daryl Ruiter, a Browns beat writer, had some pretty good images of the Lions game. He had several others but these four stuck out to me:

This is a shot if the intentional grounding penalty we got our first possession of the 4th quarter. Two receivers wide open, one of them wide open over the 25 yards down the field. We were down 17-14 at the time.



Weeden took a sack on this play. Two receivers wide open, one with tons of running room. One other receiver that can be open long with a pretty difficult throw.



Weeden threw incomplete to Jordan Cameron on this play. He was locked into him the whole time. He had two other receivers wide open.



The backhanded flip play. He had one receiver about to come open over the middle and his check down was wide open. It has to be said, this play was on first down. He could have just taken a sack.

Those are pretty damning. He definitely did miss some wide open receivers.

It seems obvious that he is going to be the guy the rest of the year, because the staff does not seem to like Campbell at all. I hope that the coaches can help him improve on seeing this stuff. I don't know whether they will or now. but we can hope anyway.

Yikes, not much to argue about there.

It's pretty obvious Weeden comes to the line knowing who he is going to target and pretty much sticks with it. That's ok if his target is open. Not so good if he isn't.

Quote:

---

--When did The Big Show make his comments to the Seattle radio station about Luck? I never heard those before. Were they AFTER Luck played his rookie season? I think he is a huge liar.

---

I remember him saying that.. I had heard or read he was going to be on that Seattle station and I listened on line. I wish I could remember the timeline on it, but he did indeed SAY he offered up the entire draft for Luck.

Now, the question becomes did he REALLY do that. I remember him saying it, I don't remember hearing that he actually did that. Which in and of itself isn't a big deal, we don't hear about everything anyway.

No, I don't believe our offer was as good as Washingtons. I think that was a "Face Saving" comment by Holmgren. But, in the final analysis, I think we were lucky to have lost out.

I'm having a hard time believing that RGIII will be long for this league. He had a style, he was exciting to watch, he had a great Rookie year and now, he's completely below average. (as the article points out) I don't know, maybe he's still recovering and will return to form in the future. I like the kid, hope it works out for him.

Quote:

---

--I argued w/most of you about Weeden and TRich since they were drafted. I was adamant from day one that they were stupid moves. Of course, I was called names and I was posting w/an agenda.

---

I don't remember you being called names, you can get kicked off the board for that and I don't remember anyone having that happen to them. But, I didn't read every post so I suppose it could have happened.

But my guess is, IF you were called names, it wasn't because you opposed those picks, it was probably the attitude you displayed in doing so. You can be an arrogant and condescending sounding guy thinking that you are right and the world is wrong. And you can and have gotten very vocal in those instances. Just a little food for thought.

OH, by the way, here is a little proof of my thoughts:

Quote:

---

--I really wish Dj and YTown would just shut up. You guys were both wrong. Just admit it. It's not the end of the world. Weeden has no future here, nor should he. Admit it. Stop the BS.

---

Do you see how that can be seen as arrogant? If that doesn't do it, perhaps this one will.

Quote:

---

--I'm rolling w/this FO. And I will remember those of you who aren't.

---

You'll remember those who aren't? What the hell does that mean? are you going to come to their homes beat them up? What's scary is that you believe that scared anyone

Regarding the FO:

As it stands right now, I happen to like this front office. I'm anxious to see what they do this off season. I didn't always like every move they've made, but most of them seem to be working out fairly well.. Drafting Mingo, getting Kruger, Bess and Bryant, not trading Gordon when it appeared teams wanted him, trading TRich (I didn't get it at first, but I did after some reflection), Signing Hoyer was a good decision. ( I really hope that works out in the long term for him and us but I'm prepared to say Bye to Weeden and Welcome a new Starter with Hoyer as the Backup and Campbell gone as well)

Since I generally like this FO, I guess that means that you don't have to remember who I am

Quote:

---

I remember him saying that.. I had heard or read he was going to be on that Seattle station and I listened on line. I wish I could remember the timeline on it, but he did indeed SAY he offered up the entire draft for Luck.

---

Mike Holmgren Show

http://www.sportsradiokjr.com/pages/softy_page.html?article=11669464

Mike Holmgren believes finding a franchise quarterback is of paramount importance for building a team that can consistently compete for a Super Bowl title. It was with that thought in mind that he approached Indianapolis Colts general manager Ryan Grigson at the owners’ meetings last year.

During an interview with Dave “Softy” Mahler of 950 KJR-AM in Seattle, Holmgren said he was willing to offer a huge windfall to the Colts in the way of draft picks from the Cleveland Browns for the rights to draft Andrew Luck.

“I talked to (Grigson) before we made the trade (up to the No. 3 overall pick to select Trent Richardson), I said ‘I’ll give you all our draft picks for the number one pick and I’ll take Luck,’” Holmgren said.

Holmgren joked that they were both sitting by the pool and Grigson was “having one of those little drinks with an umbrella in it so I thought I could take advantage of him.”

The Browns made 10 selections in the 2012 draft after dealing away selections in the fourth, fifth and seventh rounds to move up to take Richardson. It would have meant Holmgren was willing to send close to 13 picks (before other trades in the draft) to the Colts for the rights to take Luck with the first pick.

Grigson shot Holmgren down and told him they were going to take Luck. He said Grigson probably didn’t take the offer seriously, though Holmgren did put it on the table.

“I probably offered it knowing he wouldn’t take it,” Holmgren said. “If he had said OK, I probably would have choked on my offer.”

Holmgren said the Colts made the right decision in standing pat and taking Luck. One piece Holmgren added was that Grigson supposedly said that if something weird had happened with Luck, they wanted to take Richardson with the top selection.

Now the Colts have both Luck and Richardson.