|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
Quote:
I gave Schwartz a 4th grade and wanted us to take him in that round.
Vers we talked extensively about Schwartz as I pushed him as a prospect on the board. 2 things of relatively new but perhaps repeated significance.
We talked about possibly bringing in a RT but you weren't convinced Schwartz could make it at RG because of his lack of power. Does, in your mind, a zone blocking scheme change that? You convinced me before but with the scheme coming in I think it might be an actual positive for him. He fits the mold as a zone OG better than zone RT IMO. Thoughts?
The second issue is clearly there was a difference in his pass pro between his rookie year and year 2. How much of that is because of a change in scheme? Especially because that scheme is known to be particularly hard on OT's given the deeper drops and generally the QB holds the ball to allow the deeper routes to develop. If we do switch to a zone/WCO I think whether at RT or OG we could see a turn around. FYI I am not asking any of this because he was my guy pre-draft. Legit concern.
BTW if Oakland let Veldheer go can you imagine our OL? Thomas, Schwartz, Mack, Rook(Gabe?), Veldheer. Wow that would be insane. Very contingent but insane. I really like Albert as well since he was at UV but he seems to have become a .. Maybe just because of what KC pulled on him. He'd be the ultimate zone RT though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Yeah, Turner's offense does require deeper drops by the QB and it puts a lot of stress on the OL. Just look at the sack numbers for San Diego w/and w/out Norv.
We can probably roll w/Schwartz at RT. We certainly need to upgrade the RG and there is no way that Lava will be effective in Shanny's scheme. I do think we need to keep Mack, for sure. There is a good article over on the Shanny thread. Kwhip posted it. You should check it out. It's pretty accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Yeah, weren't you the guy who asked me to write a profile on Schwartz? We did have some good conversations on him and other RT prospects. Quote:
We talked about possibly bringing in a RT but you weren't convinced Schwartz could make it at RG because of his lack of power. Does, in your mind, a zone blocking scheme change that? You convinced me before but with the scheme coming in I think it might be an actual positive for him. He fits the mold as a zone OG better than zone RT IMO. Thoughts?
Hmmmmm..........good question. I am not sure about that. I agree that he may be better suited to the zone blocking scheme, but I am not sure about moving inside. His height is an advantage at RT, but it might be an issue at guard. I need to think about it. I am not dodging your question, I simply don't want to make a stupid argument. I need time to think.
Quote:
The second issue is clearly there was a difference in his pass pro between his rookie year and year 2. How much of that is because of a change in scheme? Especially because that scheme is known to be particularly hard on OT's given the deeper drops and generally the QB holds the ball to allow the deeper routes to develop. If we do switch to a zone/WCO I think whether at RT or OG we could see a turn around. FYI I am not asking any of this because he was my guy pre-draft. Legit concern.
Another good comment/question. Yeah, I agree w/you. You guys are making me reevaluate my opinion on Schwartz. There have been quite a few good posts in that latter part of this thread. The scheme Norv ran almost certainly adversely effected Schwartz and probably all of the linemen. We may be able to roll w/Schwartzie again. Those wide-looping rushes will not be as effective in our new scheme. He still needs to improve his balance and ability to handle blitzes, though.
Quote:
BTW if Oakland let Veldheer go can you imagine our OL? Thomas, Schwartz, Mack, Rook(Gabe?), Veldheer. Wow that would be insane. Very contingent but insane. I really like Albert as well since he was at UV but he seems to have become a .. Maybe just because of what KC pulled on him. He'd be the ultimate zone RT though.
Oakland probably won't let him walk, but hey......we can dream, right? If we do move Schwartz inside, he will have to play at RG. His feet aren't quite good enough to be able to trap and pull as much as this system requires. KC did jerk Albert around. He's a very good player and I would take him any day of the week.
Good post, my man. I enjoyed the conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,001
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,001 |
Quote:
Nice football post.
Do you get some perverse pleasure from hijacking threads?
Pot, meet Kettle. and I did ask a football question but you choose to ignore it. To what end, I honestly don't know.
#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: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
Quote:
Yeah, weren't you the guy who asked me to write a profile on Schwartz? We did have some good conversations on him and other RT prospects.
Yeah that was me. I wanted him in the 3rd while you wanted him in the 4th.
Quote:
Hmmmmm..........good question. I am not sure about that. I agree that he may be better suited to the zone blocking scheme, but I am not sure about moving inside. His height is an advantage at RT, but it might be an issue at guard. I need to think about it. I am not dodging your question, I simply don't want to make a stupid argument. I need time to think.
If I recall he's 6'4". Plenty of OGs are 6'4/6'5 even. Unless zone requires less length? I am fairly inexperienced with the zone concept. I've never had to understand it so I have research to do. I could understand it at OG though. DTs seem to be evolving to shorter and quicker guys like Atkins. With Schwartz balance and knee bend maybe it would be best to keep him at RT.
The prospects for RT this year is really what makes me ask. The idea of a Kouandjio or Richardson at RT until Joe retires is enticing. I would love to pull a Jordan Gross and have our future LT developed at RT. That to me offers more value to a team than just taking a OG in the 1st 2 rounds. That is contingent on Schwartz being able to play OG. Strengthening RT, OG and future LT with one pick. Joes a FA in 2019 which just happens to be when a RT taken at 26 would need resigned.
Quote:
Another good comment/question. Yeah, I agree w/you. You guys are making me reevaluate my opinion on Schwartz. There have been quite a few good posts in that latter part of this thread. The scheme Norv ran almost certainly adversely effected Schwartz and probably all of the linemen. We may be able to roll w/Schwartzie again. Those wide-looping rushes will not be as effective in our new scheme. He still needs to improve his balance and ability to handle blitzes, though.
I mean I still completely agree with your initial report before he was drafted so I don't think you need to necessarily reevaluate. I just think it's highly likely that the scheme combined with 14 weeks of QBs who hold the ball far too long equated to the entire OL having a poor year. Even Joe had by far his worst year. BTW anyone else notice Joe getting destroyed at the pro bowl? Just a side note. I know it's the probowl but still. Just saying. Is it realistic to think maybe he's seen his ceiling in the rear view? I am far from anti Joe just being observant.
Quote:
Oakland probably won't let him walk, but hey......we can dream, right? If we do move Schwartz inside, he will have to play at RG. His feet aren't quite good enough to be able to trap and pull as much as this system requires. KC did jerk Albert around. He's a very good player and I would take him any day of the week.
Good post, my man. I enjoyed the conversation.
I was a big proponent of Veldheer when he came out. I pushed him as RT on the other board HARD. I had a friend who went to Hillsdale with him who said he would not stop until he was the best. Just a physical freak of a man.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
I do also remember you eating some crow and stating that he actual was pretty good - that was the last 5 games or so of his rookie season where he improved...Last year he did take a step back. Why? I don't know.
Possibly year two and 2nd New offense to learn?
Possibly having two OL coaches one brought here to teach the Zone blocking scheme?
Possibly having about 3 RGs due to injury...he seemed to get a little better when Lava got healthy?
But yes he looked like he took a step back.
Is he a move in to OG kind of guy and become a Pro Bowler??? I don't know but he's probably the best RT we have had whose name is not Tucker.
Again you are probably correct in what you saw...usually I see it too. I don't think its that Grave its not that big deal that Heckert took him in the 2nd round. I thought for sure he was going to take Reiff...at 22 but supposedly that is when Holmgren came crashing into the War room and insisted we take Weeden (Heckert had Weeden pegged for our 2nd round pick) well so the story goes. lol 
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 |
Quote:
The idea of a Kouandjio or Richardson at RT until Joe retires is enticing...
Predator: I trust you are not forgetting that the NFL coaching staff at the 2012 Senior Bowl moved Schwartz from RT to LT. Post-game reports were highly complimentary of his performance. I am not implying that Schwartz is the heir-apparent to JT, but it something to keep in mind...
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
I'm sure who ever our QB is next season will see it that way 
I'm sure that Mack will go where the highest price is paid. He may live up to his promise of giving the Browns the right of last refusal (made prior to Chudzinski's firing) but the Browns may not pay. If he is allowed to leave, you have to go to a back-up plan.
Quote:
Brian de la Puente has been with 5 different teams (six if you count the 49ers twice) he was undrafted and hasn't been able to stick anywhere. And you want him to replace Mack? I don't think so.
So, you say that he keeps finding work although he isn't any good? 
Also, he's been with the Saints since 2011 and has been their starter since that season. Funny how Drew Brees has passed for more than 5000 yards in each of those seasons.
He was a RFA last year and the Saints saw highly enough of him to tender him.
As for his undrafted status, maybe Peyton Manning would tell you about some other undrafted center that held down the spot for him for nearly a dozen years. His name was Jeff Saturday. I'm not saying that de la Puente is Jeff Saturday, just ridiculing your view that and 'undrafted center' isn't worth it.
By all means, lets go 4-12 or 5-11 with our first round draft choice and Pro Bowl center Alex Mack.
Quote:
Cody Wallace has been with 6 teams (seven if you count Detroit twice) and can't stick? And you want to replace Mack with him? I don't think so.
Again, he keeps finding work. He must suck badly. I mentioned him because he's versatile and can play any interior position.
Quote:
Evan Dietrich-Smith has been with 2 teams (three if you cound the packers twice) and can't stick. I don't think so.
Keeps finding work.
Quote:
I'll stop there as a pattern is developing. You appear to be more interested in paying less, than you are about who the best we can get is.
I am concerned about overpaying for a position where a starting caliber center can be found easily enough.
I wouldn't mind bringing back Mack, but I don't think we should overpay for a position. And, you make it sound like Mack can be enslaved. If you're going to throw piles of money at a guy's feet, you could get him to stay. Or, you could sign someone more cheaply that can do an adequate job and save the money.
You don't spend money like a drunken sailor and expect good things to happen. Things that happen to drunken sailors happens when you spend like one.
Quote:
Look, if we loose Mack in FA, then any one of those guys could be decent to be brought in.
If we lose Mack to free agency, then we should bring in one of them and save a lot of money. I wouldn't tag Mack (like many are saying they'd do) or offer him an outrageous contract either. I don't see Banner doing that for any center, including Mack.
Quote:
But if the lease on your Maybach is up and you have the money to buy it out, you don't go get a Volkswagen and delude yourself into thinking you got the better end of that deal.
I'm not even sure that I understand this analogy.
Quote:
While I'm in agreement with you that not every position along the Oline needs to be all pro or anything, you do need competent people in those roles. If you got one of the best and you have the pockets to pay, you pay. End of discussion.
How about YOU pay his salary? Hey, it's only a few million, right?  Maybe you do if that's what you want. As for me, I shop for the best value. I don't purchase groceries at an overpriced supermarket. I use coupons. I stock up when a good deal comes out in the Sunday newspaper inserts.
However, feel free to shop without coupons at the grocery store but stop at the gas station to save a nickel on a gallon of gas.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
So, you say that he keeps finding work although he isn't any good?
Quote:
Again, he keeps finding work. He must suck badly.
Quote:
Keeps finding work.
So does Curtis Painter.
Is that evidence that he is good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Just a matter of opinion but I disagree.
Okay. We'll have to agree to disagree then. That's fine. It is one observation against another.
Quote:
Remember Tony Pashos??
Yes. Again, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think Pashos was any good either, but my view that Schwartz hasn't been an upgrade is unchanged.
Quote:
...earning PFF accolades if you like that sort of thing
I don't and I don't accept them as part of the argument in Schwartz' defense.
Quote:
Will a new offensive scheme suit him better?
Perhaps. I'll leave that up to the new coaches. As for me, I would look to deal him if I were Banner. I would actually ask for input from the coaches, but that wouldn't necessarily sway my view that he he should be traded if possible. I simply don't think we'll find many teams inquiring about his availability on the trade block.
Quote:
I just don't give up on him yet. I wait a year and address other positions in the offseason.
That's an approach that can be taken. Maybe a new offense will do him a world of good. I'm not holding my breath though. We have to look at the season with him fulfilling a roster spot. He's not a free agent and he'll probably be given the chance to earn his job. Maybe they'll move him inside and try him there. I just don't know. That is also a possibility. And they're legit ones.
I just don't think the guy is cut out to be a tackle.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
so you're reasoning is that mack is the reason we have sucked so much.
lets get rid of all our pro-bowlers if thats the case.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175 |
Quote:
so you're reasoning is that mack is the reason we have sucked so much.
lets get rid of all our pro-bowlers if thats the case.
Seriously? Come on anarchy is saying no such thing.
I disagree with his logic, but all he is saying Browns can equal production without spending a lot of money on Mack.
Anarchy is putting up a good argument give him his do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
It's funny, I've never heard a GM of a team talk about value.
When asked about why they traded away the 4th and 5th round picks in last year's draft, Banner said that they didn't see the value there so they traded away those picks for additional picks this year, where he saw more value. I tried to find the audio or video but couldn't. I do remember hearing it though.
Quote:
I suppose there could be a valid reason for that. Not sure what it would be, but maybe there is one.
And Banner gave one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
imo, he's not.
mack is a pro bowl player. some places has him as the #1 center in the NFL.
Anarch's argument is that we can get similar production for less cost?
where? who? are they pro bowl, or more importantly, all-pro players?
if not, thats A DOWNGRADE. we aren't talking about swapping out Gibspon for Adams, or Robertson for another ILB thats cheaper.
he's talking about swapping an All-pro Center for a..in a sense, nobody, and go into the season with the thought process of "eh, we gonna be ok in that position".
i'm not down with that.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175 |
Swish, you may not agree, but he is making an intelligent argument for his point of view. You can't fault his agruments. It's a debate correct? It is ok to have multi-points of views no matter how wrong anarchy is!!!!! I don't mean to beat you up, but anarchy is lone wolf and making a sensible case. I hate to see go to waste.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
so you're reasoning is that mack is the reason we have sucked so much.
lets get rid of all our pro-bowlers if thats the case.
Now don't be stupid. We've sucked because previous regimes have made bad choices. In fact, this one made a bad one in hiring Chudzinski last year.
I don't know if they were really intrigued by him or if he was just the fallback guy and the best was hoped for when they signed him. I simply don't know.
What I'm very certain about is that his firing was a Jimmy Haslam move. It wasn't a Joe Banner move.
I already like Pettine more than Chudzinski.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
everybody has an opinion, hell, i'm wrong all the time.
my thing is, i don't like equating a non-skill position player to our W-L record.
thats the only part i've mad a big deal out of, bugs.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
Quote:
Quote:
so you're reasoning is that mack is the reason we have sucked so much.
lets get rid of all our pro-bowlers if thats the case.
Now don't be stupid. We've sucked because previous regimes have made bad choices. In fact, this one made a bad one in hiring Chudzinski last year.
I don't know if they were really intrigued by him or if he was just the fallback guy and the best was hoped for when they signed him. I simply don't know.
What I'm very certain about is that his firing was a Jimmy Haslam move. It wasn't a Joe Banner move.
I already like Pettine more than Chudzinski.
i liked the pettine hire.
but remember this: the FO straight up SOLD the part about having 6 pro bowlers here on this team for an HC to come to.
if i'm Pettine, i EXPECT to have 6 pro bowlers on this roster come training camp.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Mack is a pro bowl player. Some places has him as the #1 center in the NFL.
What's your assessment? Is your assessment the same as what some website or another has written? I'm curious to know what Swish's views are. I don't want to know what so-and-so website had to say about it. I don't want to know what some talking head on the TV or radio has to say. I want to hear Swish's unfiltered and original thoughts. I don't wan them piped though a website, TV or radio program or some newspaper article.
Quote:
Anarchy's argument is that we can get similar production for less cost?
where? who? are they pro bowl, or more importantly, all-pro players?
And so, my view that some want pro bowlers or all-pro players at every position holds true. This ain't the Madden video game. I know that some seem to get the two realms (reality and make-believe) totally confused, but we need to be real about it.
If you say "pay the man" (how'd that work for us when Cribbs was given his money?), I'll tell you to put up or shut up if the money doesn't come directly out of your hand to the player's hand. It's awfully easy (and convenient) to say 'pay the man' when you aren't the one paying.
Quote:
if not, thats A DOWNGRADE. we aren't talking about swapping out Gibspon for Adams, or Robertson for another ILB thats cheaper.
No we're not. But since you're bringing up ILBs, D'Qwell Jackson is overpaid. That's just to send you off on another diatribe about how stupid and silly I am.
Quote:
he's talking about swapping an All-pro Center for a..in a sense, nobody, and go into the season with the thought process of "eh, we gonna be ok in that position".
i'm not down with that.
Nobody? Brian de le Puente has been the starting center for the Saints for the past 3 seasons. How many Pro Bowls does he have? Zero. How many times have his team gone to the playoffs? Twice. Granted, the team didn't make the playoffs after Sean Payton was forced to sit for a season. Still, in each of those years, Drew Brees passed for more than 5000 (actually, more than 5100) yards each year.
But, let's overpay Mack so that we can't help the team get better by signing an improvement at another position.
You sir, are a fool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,001
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,001 |
Maybe Chud wouldn't have worked out.. don't know and we never will, but I'd really like to see what would have happened if he had Hoyer all season... Tell you what, Pettine is in for a helluva bad day if he doesn't find consistent QB play and He better find a running game as well. Or he's destined for the same as Chud.. One and Done. (no, they wouldn't be that stupid to repeat that)
#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: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
my assessment of mack? imo, he's the best center out there right now. never misses a game, is great in pass blocking, good at run blocking. hell, i don't remember him getting beat. i'm sure it has happened, but thats how rare it is.
nobody called it a madden video game. but these guys earn these honors(pro bowl, all-pro) for a reason. first off, you keep forgetting, the reason these guys and coaches get so much money is because FAN'S pay for it. jersey sales, tickets, hotdogs, whatever, WE pay for it. you damn right its our money. see if our team doesn't move if we stop showing up to the games because of crap seasons every year...let that sink in.
i don't think DQ is overpaid. that guy is a monster, and would get more credit if we had more consistent offense and won more games. but you think it's easy to replace and replicate the few recognized players on our team. imo, i disagree, and it gets to me for some reason that we, a losing franchise, think we are the patriots and steelers and get rid of good players and not miss a beat.
here's my problem with your opinion. you're equating Puente as the reason why Bree's has passed for all those yards. you need to make it clear to this board that isn't the case. because thats false beyond reason. the ENTIRE OL is the reason Bree's has all that time.
you wanna use stats to based your argument, but how come you never mention how last year with mack at center, we had a top 5 ranked pass blocking line in the NFL? why does THAT always seem to miss being typed in your post?
it's not overpaying if that's what the guy deserves. imo, we overpaid for Kruger, and Byrant...and where did that leave us? but i can specifically remember you saying you loved those pick ups.
but all of a sudden, you don't wanna pay mack whats he's worth? maybe you're the fool.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
i liked the pettine hire.
but remember this: the FO straight up SOLD the part about having 6 pro bowlers here on this team for an HC to come to.
if i'm Pettine, i EXPECT to have 6 pro bowlers on this roster come training camp.
I don't think that Pettine expects anything. He took the job knowing that Mack and Ward are pending free agents.
He'll have Thomas, Cameron, Haden and Gordon on the team next season as they're all still under contract.
I also don't think that Pettine expects to make the playoffs next year but that he knows that there is a good nucleus for a team to build upon. I'm sure that he also likes the fact that the team has so many selections in the upcoming draft. He probably expects to have some input on the players that he thinks that they need improvements at, just by judging the tape.
If Pettine hasn't already been in the facility watching every game from last year (keying on the play of every position), I would be shocked. He's probably watched every game a dozen times with evaluations about the play of each player for those games.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Maybe Chud wouldn't have worked out.. don't know and we never will, but I'd really like to see what would have happened if he had Hoyer all season...
Tell you what, Pettine is in for a helluva bad day if he doesn't find consistent QB play and He better find a running game as well.
Or he's destined for the same as Chud.. One and Done. (no, they wouldn't be that stupid to repeat that)
That's why I think getting good guard play is critical to setting up a running game. To be fair, Chudzinski had some bad luck (and bad coaching by his coordinators) to go along with his own bad decisions. Chudzinski could have started Hoyer from the start. It was his decision to go with Weeden to start the season. He did find consistent QB play. Unfortunately, following Hoyer's injury, it was all poor in it's consistency.
I don't think they'll be one and done. I don't know what to expect really. It's hard to determine at this point. If the team could find someone to give the Browns a 3rd or 4th rounder for Hoyer (who I think was the best QB on the roster last season), I would urge them to accept it. If not, I would be alright with them checking to see if Hoyer can be on the roster, either as starter or as a back-up. I do know that he got rid of the ball quickly and made better reads than Weeden or the experienced veteran Campbell.
Will they pull the plug so quickly on Pettine? Probably not. He may have it written into his contract that he cannot actually be fired from the HC job after one season.  It might be a concession on his part to give the team the option about picking up his fifth year if he does well. I hope the Browns are at the point where they want to execute that option.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175 |
I can see it a few years ago playing a 4-3 against strong DT, but in today's game were 3-4 is the getting more preferred, why do you not think strong center play is better than having two strong guards?
As for cost, you're saving coin on one center instead of two guards. I do believe you need to add more talent at guard.
Are you simply distributing talent/cost to the guards? What I struggle with is playing both Pit and Bal twice with a less center. Having a strong center will allow free lancing from athletic guards. I am assuming the RT improves as well.
You do know Pittsburgh struggled for years getting a center until drafting Maurkice Pouncey. College talent at the center position has diminished last several years. Guards have remain relatively consistent, so why not strive having both a strong center and athletic guards? You can save cost at RB. See New England.
My biggest concern if we do let Mack walk is it takes years trying to get equivalent. Assuming your opinion is wrong. When Pittsburgh made Center a first round pick a few years ago increased my opinion on need of center.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
my assessment of mack? imo, he's the best center out there right now. never misses a game, is great in pass blocking, good at run blocking. hell, i don't remember him getting beat. i'm sure it has happened, but thats how rare it is.
Fair enough point. Is his play at such a higher level that it's worth 3 or 4 million per year more than centers like de la Puente? De la Puente played for a shade over $2 last year for New Orleans.
Asked another way, how much are you willing to pay Mack, average per season, and for how long? Would you pay him $4 million? 5 million? Six? Seven? Three years? Four years? Five?
Quote:
nobody called it a madden video game. but these guys earn these honors(pro bowl, all-pro) for a reason.
I'm nobody then? It appears to me that most people begging for the Browns to re-sign Mack are willing to pay him video game dollars. And the honors aren't what they used to be. Now, the honors are being given as much on reputation than for actual performance.
Quote:
first off, you keep forgetting, the reason these guys and coaches get so much money is because FAN'S pay for it. jersey sales, tickets, hotdogs, whatever, WE pay for it. you damn right its our money. see if our team doesn't move if we stop showing up to the games because of crap seasons every year...let that sink in.
That's partially true, however, they get more from the licensing rights than from the merchandise itself. Also, they get more from TV revenue deals than from any other source other than licensing.
The Browns would still be a profitable franchise and there will always be sales of concessions at the games. Let's say that they make $100 for every seat at every game (tickets, concessions, etc) and sell out every game. The stadium holds 73,200 people at full capacity. That comes to $7,320,000 per game. Multiply that times 8 (for the eight home games), that comes to less than $60 million in revenues per season. Each team had a maximum salary cap over $120 million. Even if you doubled the figure ($200 per seat - with every game sold out), the team would simply break even if they were near the cap.
What you're describing, sadly, isn't the case anymore. Teams can't make it what you buy anymore. They're licensing everything, including the names of the stadiums, to get revenue to make up for the shortfalls. They have to pay the office crew, scouts, grounds keepers, parking attendants, stadium maintenance, legal counsel, etc. also. Maybe you need to buy more stuff so that they can pay Alex Mack more money.
Quote:
i don't think DQ is overpaid.
Who didn't see that coming? I'll rest my case right there.
Quote:
here's my problem with your opinion. you're equating Puente as the reason why Brees has passed for all those yards. you need to make it clear to this board that isn't the case. because thats false beyond reason. the ENTIRE OL is the reason Brees has all that time.
I don't dispute that the entire OL in New Orleans did a nice job. So did the rest of the team. As a team, they went 11-5 this season and made the playoffs.
Quote:
you wanna use stats to based your argument, but how come you never mention how last year with mack at center, we had a top 5 ranked pass blocking line in the NFL? why does THAT always seem to miss being typed in your post?
I'm not mention it because I'm not considering it too much. I'm considering the dollar amounts. Which FA players next year are you going to let walk because you don't have the money to pay him? Haden? Taylor? Sheard? Cameron? Two pro-bowlers there too! Haden won't come cheap either. Cameron will probably have to be left to test the free agent market. Same with Taylor and Sheard.
Tell me how you fill those holes?
Quote:
it's not overpaying if that's what the guy deserves. imo, we overpaid for Kruger, and Byrant...and where did that leave us? but i can specifically remember you saying you loved those pick ups.
I don't dispute that the overpaid for Kruger and Bryant. I don't think that Kruger should be playing every down. Put him in the game like they used him in BallsNoMore and he can be more effective.
Quote:
but all of a sudden, you don't wanna pay mack whats he's worth? maybe you're the fool.
Maybe I am. So, I ask again, like I did near the beginning of this response. What's he worth? For how long?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,480 |
easy, you pay him what the top dollar for a center is. and you make that contract 6-7 years.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
I can see it a few years ago playing a 4-3 against strong DT, but in today's game were 3-4 is the getting more preferred, why do you not think strong center play is better than having two strong guards?
I think that having two strong guards is a complimentary style. Each OL player helps the other with good play. Putting a star player next to a piece of crap is like having a jewelry quality stone on a nickel-plated piece of jewelry. I'd take a lower quality jewelry level stone set in lower quality metal (silver) over the high quality stone set in base metals.
Super Bowl time. I'll address more of this later.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,175 |
Quote:
Quote:
I can see it a few years ago playing a 4-3 against strong DT, but in today's game were 3-4 is the getting more preferred, why do you not think strong center play is better than having two strong guards?
I think that having two strong guards is a complimentary style. Each OL player helps the other with good play. Putting a star player next to a piece of crap is like having a jewelry quality stone on a nickel-plated piece of jewelry. I'd take a lower quality jewelry level stone set in lower quality metal (silver) over the high quality stone set in base metals.
Super Bowl time. I'll address more of this later.
I think we are inverted! You like guards. I like tackles and Center!
Super Bowl...such a let down...I was hoping game. I hate both teams!
Bring the debate tomorrow. Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
easy, you pay him what the top dollar for a center is. and you make that contract 6-7 years.
Okay. Say hello to a 4 or 5 win season again. That'll solve all the problems with the Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Quote:
Quote:
easy, you pay him what the top dollar for a center is. and you make that contract 6-7 years.
Okay. Say hello to a 4 or 5 win season again. That'll solve all the problems with the Browns.
Yep. The all pro center is the reason we're not winning games. Nothing else. It's literally all his fault. It's him and his .6% share of the total salary cap.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
As for cost, you're saving coin on one center instead of two guards. I do believe you need to add more talent at guard.
I agree. The guards have been needing upgrading for years. Gilkey might actually be able to get the job done. I don't know yet. Maybe new OL coaches will get something right with him and whoever else they have. Thank God the Warhop debacle is over and I'm not sure what that dual OL coach crap was that they brought in. I still shake my head at that.
Quote:
Are you simply distributing talent/cost to the guards? What I struggle with is playing both Pit and Bal twice with a less center. Having a strong center will allow free lancing from athletic guards. I am assuming the RT improves as well.
I would love to pick up Jared Veldheer (I wanted the Browns to draft him anyway) but they went with Montario Hardesty and then Colt McCoy (who I liked) and Shawn 'effing' Lauvao! That's the Holmgren & Heckert team we all know and hate.
Quote:
You do know Pittsburgh struggled for years getting a center until drafting Maurkice Pouncey.
And yet, they won Super Bowls in 2005 and 2008 without him on the team. Who was the starting center for those teams? I had to look it up. In 2005, they had Jeff Hartings (who was there a long time) and in 2008, with their 3rd center in as many seasons, they won it again with Justin Hartwig. But they also had problems with continuity with their guard spots. In 2008, they started a rookie at their RG spot for 12 games.
Quote:
College talent at the center position has diminished last several years. Guards have remain relatively consistent, so why not strive having both a strong center and athletic guards? You can save cost at RB. See New England.
You can get quality play from both the C and G positions. As for the RB, I don't have to look to NE. I can look at the Browns. We have Edwin Baker, Dion Lewis, Fozzy Whittaker and Chris Ogbonnaya. I purposefully left off Willis Magahee because he absolutely won't be back. His contract is over.
Quote:
My biggest concern if we do let Mack walk is it takes years trying to get equivalent. Assuming your opinion is wrong. When Pittsburgh made Center a first round pick a few years ago increased my opinion on need of center.
Dallas used a first round pick on Travis Frederick last year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
I think we are inverted! You like guards. I like tackles and Center!
Super Bowl...such a let down...I was hoping game. I hate both teams!
Bring the debate tomorrow. Cheers!
I like them all. I just don't like overpaying them. For that matter, I don't want to overpay for any player.
I want good competent players at all locations but I don't want to have star players at one position while neglecting others because I can't afford to pay for competent players.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
easy, you pay him what the top dollar for a center is. and you make that contract 6-7 years.
Okay. Say hello to a 4 or 5 win season again. That'll solve all the problems with the Browns.
Yep. The all pro center is the reason we're not winning games. Nothing else. It's literally all his fault. It's him and his .6% share of the total salary cap.
Do you struggle be that ignorant or does it come naturally? Goodbye.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
That would make sense if we didn't have to. We're perfectly fine signing anyone we want to.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
Quote:
Quote:
easy, you pay him what the top dollar for a center is. and you make that contract 6-7 years.
Okay. Say hello to a 4 or 5 win season again. That'll solve all the problems with the Browns.
We have 4-5 win seasons because we don't have a QB or even a RB.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum OUR pending free agents . . .
|
|
