|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Going into this year, I thought we were still a pretty bad football team. I was OK with that, but I thought we would be a 4-6 win team.
I still think we're looking at 6-7 wins, but I do think that we could be right in the thick of hunt, with a winning record, if we'd had at least competent QB play this season. I really think we could make the playoffs, been a feel good story, etc. Probably would've been dismantled the first game, because we aren't quite there yet.
But things could've been much different if we hadn't wasted any time on Weeden. I don't blame the FO for how it shook out - you had to give him a look - but, man...we are better than I thought.
Sometimes this FO seems shrewd, and other times it looks like the Keystone Cops. Though I do like their approach in sinking all of their eggs into the front 7 this year. I"d much rather see a focused overhaul of a until at a time than scattershot band aids spread thin as we've done so often in the past. I can't say just yet that they've done it right, but I like the approach.
I don't know if this improvement is due to coaching and system or the talent we've brought in. I hope it's the former, and I suspect it to be. The franchises with sustained success have systems that they plug players into rather than players that they develop systems around.
Anyway... if we can get our guy this year, get him. If we can tread water with Hoyer/Campbell for one more year, that's an option as well.
It won't get you to the Super Bowl, but I don't plan to be there next year anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753 |
Quote:
I think that the coaching staff started Hoyer because they saw some things in practice and they wanted to see if they would translate to the field. I don't necessarily see it as a slam on Campbell, but as a desire to see what Hoyer could do.
And I don't see it as a slam on Campbell either. I think it was simply a choice they executed. I said pretty much the same thing you did in regards to seeing if what they saw in practice from Hoyer could be executed at the next level. And I would say it was pretty much successful.
Quote:
I do think that Campbell has outplayed their expectations, because if they thought that he could play like this, he would have started from the 1st time Weeden faltered. The theme this year has been se2ing what we have at the QB position. Weeden was given extra rope because they wanted to see what he could become. He was put back in as the backup because they wanted to see how he would respond if he had an opportunity to play again. I think that they thought that the knew what they had in Campbell, and I bet that he has surprised them with the quality of his play. I would bet that they thought that they would get what other teams have gotten from Campbell, but he has been far better than that. Given that Campbell has never thrown more than 20 TD passes in any single season, I would bet that 5 passing TDs in 2 games was an absolute shocker. Given the lack of a run game, I bet that played a huge part in deciding to start Hoyer as well. The team knew that they would need more than a single TD pass per game on average, and that's really what Campbell has been in the past.
Firstly, I won't even get into the Weeden part of it as I see him already in the past tense.
As it pertains to the rest of the quote we whole heartedly disagree. To say they were shocked that Campbell is playing this well? Yes, I think you are mistaken here. At least to the point he is putting up better numbers than Hoyer was. Norv's system is very QB friendly, especially to an experienced QB. So seeing better numbers from Campbell shouldn't be a real surprise there IMO
By the point you made here, one would have to take that to mean that this coaching staff can not evaluate their own players as it pertains to which talent is better. I simply don't believe that. It would also mean they signed someone they felt is incapable of stepping into play, a contract of over 3 million dollars. I don't buy that either.
When you take a journeyman QB who has won 50+% of his starts compared to a young kid who has never been a starter, then try to say your coaching staff couldn't see who would be the better of the 2? What would that indicate about your coaching staff?
So to me, the answer is pretty clear here. You know Campbell can come in and be an adequate QB, but you don't really know what you have in Hoyer.
So while I do agree that Campbell may be playing slightly above what they expected, not shockingly so. To me, it was simply that they chose to see what if anything they had in Hoyer and if he bombed, you go to Campbell.
I don't believe they actually felt Hoyer was the better of the two QB's. They simply felt that Hoyer "may develop into more" given some game experience and it would better let them know where they stood going into the draft and next year.
I just feel this staff understood that Campbell may be the better temporary band aid for the now, but not for the long term. And giving Hoyer the opportunity to start and develop may help give them a better long term answer.
This being the case, I would see the exact same scenario entering next season if one of these two are to be the starting QB next year. Campbell is what he is. Hoyer showed some ability, but they need to see what he develops into.
JMHO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861 |
Quote:
I actually think that they handled the situation appropriately.
They gave Weeden a chance. He got hurt, and Hoyer got a chance. He proved that he was worth an extended look, so they were going to go that direction. Unfortunately, he got hurt, so they went back to Weeden, and he performed well for one game. They gave him a little more rope, and he couldn't swing with it, so they went to Campbell.
I don't see any real inappropriate handling of the QB spot. I thinkt hey handled it about as well as could be expected.
The only question I have is why did Hoyer jump ahead of Campbell in the first place. But he did and it worked so I'm not at all upset by it.
Campbell has to wonder I'd guess.
#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: 50,419
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Campbell, in all kinds of systems, has never thrown more than 20 TD in any season. His 20 TD season was a year in which he played all 16 games.
He has never been a QB that carries the team. He has been a piece, but not the engine.
He has never been the engine that drives his team. The coaches had no reason to expect that he would be here. He has been competent in the past, but never a top level type QB.
This team has no run game whatsoever. We manufacture some runs using the proverbial "trickeration", but we cannot load up at the end of a game and run the ball to victory. This is a pass heavy team right now.
I think that the coaches looked at the team as constructed, especially with the trade of Richardson, and they knew, basically, what they had in Campbell. He's always been a competent, capable guy, but not a guy you count on for multiple TD passes on a weekly basis. This team, without a run game, needs a QB who can throw multiple TD passes pretty much every week if we are going to win games.
They had to find out of Hoyer could be that guy, because there was no reason to expect that Campbell would suddenly be something he has never once before in his career ever been. Once Hoyer got hurt, they went back to Weeden to see if he could be that guy. He wasn't. When that became obvious, they went to Campbell, and they have to be thrilled with 5 TD passes in 2 weeks. In the past 3 years he has thrown 6, 2, and 5 TD passes. He has been a 1 game, 1 TD pass kind of guy. That wasn't the kind of QB we need, and the coaches knew it.
I understand that the coaches like his maturity, and many other strengths, but they have to be shocked beyond words to see him performing at the level he is. It is far beyond anything he has done in the past. There is no way they could "expect" it.
I would add that, when we signed Campbell, we expected Richardson to be a big part of the ofiense. In a run heavy offense, Campbell of any point in his past can be effective. There is no way that anyone could expect him to do as well as he has. He is a transformed QB.
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: 74,753
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753 |
I guess the only real place we disagree is about "at this moment". I believe that they felt "at this moment", Campbell would have been the most logical choice. But he is what he is. On the other hand, Hoyer was an untapped talent. You have to give him playing time to see what you have in him and if he can develop. You don't think it was just as surprising to see what Hoyer did as compared to what Campbell is doing?  And as for what Campbell is doing as being a surprise..... What about DA under Chud? I don't really see comparing what Campbell did in other systems as any indication of what he would do under Chud's system. I believe it was even you yourself as believing that Weeden would have the best option to succeed under Chud's system and used DA as an example of why. I don't see why that same logic wouldn't apply to Campbell. And you don't believe this coaching staff can work with a QB and after doing so, have a pretty good idea what they have when they evaluate that player along with others who play that same position? And you believe they would sign a back up QB to a 3.1 million dollar contract that they don't believe can come in and contribute more than a FA QB signing? I really would appreciate direct answers to these questions.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
How many free agent QBs are going to give you more than 1 TD pass/game on average?
How many free agent QBs have teams signed in the past 5 years who have had 20+ TD pass seasons?
I bet that the number is really, really tiny.
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: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
In the past 3 years he has thrown 6, 2, and 5 TD passes. He has been a 1 game, 1 TD pass kind of guy. That wasn't the kind of QB we need, and the coaches knew it.
I brought all this up in the "Campbell" thread and commented that still, he's been reasonably successful. It made me think that he moved the ball well between the 20s and when they got close to the goal line they punched it in with the run game. I don't really know what kind of scoring team they were in his wins. If their scores were much beyond 14 points then it was likely the run game that contributed heavily.
So maybe with a good run game he'd be fine going forward.
My concern for the rest of this season is that teams are going to completely dismiss our run game and focus solely on stopping the passing game. Then again, we have a pretty good OL at pass protection so maybe it'll work out.
I just want some wins and am a little concerned with his lack of TD production. But I'm willing, excited even, to see what happens in Norv/Chud's offense. That could be the difference maker.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511 |
Quote:
Keep Hoyer and Campbell but let Weeden go. Get a young guy with promising upside to sit behind the two of them. I'd start Hoyer over Campbell due to the youth factor. Let Campbell be the second string guy.
As for Weeden? Trade him for a ham sandwich.
Agree 100%
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
Quote:
Keep Hoyer and Campbell but let Weeden go. Get a young guy with promising upside to sit behind the two of them. I'd start Hoyer over Campbell due to the youth factor. Let Campbell be the second string guy.
As for Weeden? Trade him for a ham sandwich.
Agree 100%
+ 2
Hoyer comes back and gets a shot to run the offense. No room for Weeden on this roster, get a young kid and let Campbell and etc mentor him. At this point, a young kid needs to learn everything that Brandon clearly does, and Brandon been given a shot. Multiple shots technically, and has laid stinky, smelling eggs virtually each time. His internal processor is outdated and too slow.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
We still need to take a QB in the early rounds who has the potential to develop into a top shelf starter. Remember how "set" we were at QB when DA played well? Hoyer will turn 29 next season and Campbell will be 32. Who knows if Campbell even stays on if he's not starting? It's fair to say they're legitimate stopgap measures but we're idiots if we have all these resources and don't spend some of them to land a legit QB to develop.
What their success allows us to do is go into the draft without being desperate. If we don't feel like a QB is worth blowing multiple 1sts on, we don't have to do it. We also don't have to pull a Holmgren and reach for a guy like Weeden. We have the luxury that if things don't go our way, we don't need to get crazy.
That said, we need a young guy in here and preferrably in the 1st/2nd. Norv has already proven he can work wonders with someone like Campbell, imagine if he gets a year or two to work on a raw high upside QB. Someone like Derek Carr who has the physical tools and intangibles but needs some mechanical/footwork correction would be perfect IMO.
We have our "present" QB situation plugged fairly well but we NEED to address the "future" if we ever want to keep a good thing going.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
Quote:
Quote:
Keep Hoyer and Campbell but let Weeden go. Get a young guy with promising upside to sit behind the two of them. I'd start Hoyer over Campbell due to the youth factor. Let Campbell be the second string guy.
As for Weeden? Trade him for a ham sandwich.
Agree 100%
This is why I've become a big fan of Brett Hundley.
Hundley isn't NFL ready, but I think he has the most upside. Bring him in and let him sit for a year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Hundley isn't NFL ready, but I think he has the most upside.
Just curious, why do you think this? I haven't seen what is making everyone excited about him. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753 |
Quote:
How many free agent QBs are going to give you more than 1 TD pass/game on average?
I see you avoided answering my questions and then posted your own. Am I somehow more obligated to answer yours while you avoid mine?
Let's review.
You yourself felt that Weeden could turn things around given Chud's system. You didn't say it WOULD happen, but that Chud's system gave him the best possible chance to turn things around. The vertical offense and how DA did under Chud.
So now you seemingly avoid using that same logic with Campbell? Why? My point was and is, that this coaching staff practices with their players every week. They should have a pretty firm grasp of what they do or don't have there.
Quote:
How many free agent QBs have teams signed in the past 5 years who have had 20+ TD pass seasons?
I bet that the number is really, really tiny.
Once again, are you suggesting this coaching staff felt that Hoyer was the better option to "win now" over Campbell when they started Hoyer, or that they did it more to see if Hoyer could perform in games?
They went out and signed the FA QB they felt would be best for their system. One they felt could produce. One they felt could win them games if need be. The didn't "inherit" Campbell. They "chose him".
I do believe they feel they are getting the most from Campbell that they could have expected. But to say they are surprised or shocked by his production I believe is overstating it.
If I feel anything would have shocked them, it would have been that Weeden would remain our starter beyond half way through the season. I believe they felt far more confident Weeden wouldn't be the starter for much of this year rather than they are shocked or surprised by Campbell's play.
I feel they went out and signed a guy they felt would be productive in Chud's system because they were pretty sure they had a guy in Weeden who couldn't.
None of that surprises me.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
OK, it has been generally accepted that Hoyer will probably be the "caretaker" QB when we draft a new "Franchise" QB in the coming draft. However, my question is this: Is Campbell playing himself into competition to be that guy instead?
Of course. Campbell has played better than Hoyer so far, who was overrated, probably because of the background, overachiever story. It really all depends on what happens the rest of the season, though, it's that simple. If Campbell keeps up the good play, he'll be kept of course and be cheap at 2.2mil and be in front of Hoyer to start next TC. If he reverts back to his career norms, you could still make a point to keep him, as the Browns seem to be the only team that needs all its starters at QB almost every season and still call it a competition between the two. It also depends on our record. If we finish with only 2-3 wins the rest of the way, even with him being "adequate or AVG", then we could let him go too.
Either way, I can't imagine a scenario where we DON'T select a QB at some point in the next draft.
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
Hundley isn't NFL ready, but I think he has the most upside.
Just curious, why do you think this? I haven't seen what is making everyone excited about him. Thanks.
I suggest watching the Nebraska game. He was anticipating routes and throwing people open really well in that game and he did so when I saw him last season as well.
His issue is that he is really, really inconsistent this year and has not made a big leap forward as many of us (including myself here) expected. I was really high on him coming into the season, but that was partially based on that expected leap. I thought I saw it in that Husker game, but he has reverted since then.
I think right now he's a 2nd/3rd round prospect if he were to come out. One with a high upside (size, strength, mobility, decent accuracy and shown flashes of next-level potential), but I also think he goes back to school after the year he is having to try to work himself to a 1st round grade.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753 |
I agree with you. And for the record, I don't see Campbell sustaining this level of play for the remainder of the season for much of what ddub stated.
At some point the lack of having a running game will haunt us.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
There is a huge difference between Weeden and Campbell, in that Weeden was a rookie last year, with only one season in the NFL, and Campbell has been around for a very long time, and has been what he has been over that time frame, I had hoped that Weeden would be able to improve with better coaching. Unfortunately that was not the case. Campbell has had quality coaching throughout his career. He still has generally been a 1 Passing TD/game kind of guy. He hasn't been the superstar QB who loads the team on his shoulders and carries them to victory.
There is a significant difference. It like a kid who is a lousy driver at 16, and a person who is a lousy driver at 30. The kid stands a better chance of improving, because he doesn;'t have as many bad habits to unlearn, and his behaviors aren't as deeply ingrained.
When we signed Seneca Wallace, most people knew what to expect out of him. He was a decent enough backup QB, but was limited in his abilities. He hadn't shown any great capacity to exceed what he was. Same thing with Campbell. Even in his time with the Raiders, which many point to as sme kind of turning point in his career, he played 19 games, and threw 19 TD passes. He looked like a game manager type, in DC, in Oakland, and in Chicago. (in a backup role) He has never looked as good as he looks these days. There is no way that anyone could have expected that.
I felt that a very inexperienced guy like Weeden might be able to improve in Norv's system. The book hadn't yet been written on his abilities yet. We were in the 9th chapter of the Campbell story. Despite a few well publicized exceptions, most stories don't change course dramatically late in an NFL career, especially at QB. Guys generally are what they appear to be once they have played 3 or 4 seasons. It's rare for a guy to suddenly show massive improvement in his game at that late in his career, especially at QB.
As far as Hoyer vs Campbell, I think that they had a good idea what Campbell was likely to be for them. They could look at a long track record and assume what he would do in Cleveland. Hoyer, on the other and, had a far more limited background. They had to project more with him. They didn't really know if he would be a "good but not great" QB, a bum, or a great QB. The odds were against great, but they liked what they saw in practices. They saw potential upside and room for development. I would guess that they saw Campbell as developed, and a developed Campbell, based on what he had done in the past, would not be enough to win games. They needed an explosive QB, a play maker, a guy who could take the team, load them up, and carry them, and while they did not know about Hoyer, they probably felt that Campbell could succeed with a situation around him ala Alex Smith, but not on a team without a running game. They needed to see if Hoyer could. Again, the difference between having a huge track record to look back upon with regards to Campbell, and a more limited track record, with hope that he could develop further in Hoyer. I really don't know how to put it any clearer than that.
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: 6,447
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,447 |
... Got one for ya Town .. What made the Coaching staff think this team was going to be run heavy ( as you stated ) this season .. We couldn't run ourselves out of a paper bag last season,and never really made any up grades this year ( pet peeve of mine )
... You win in the trenches , look at our D !
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
I suggest watching the Nebraska game. [Hundley] was anticipating routes and throwing people open really well in that game and he did so when I saw him last season as well.
Watch the New Mexico State game. They are a tad less talented than Nebraska and Hundley struggled.
I was all in on the Hundley bandwagon. He has not progressed at all and has probably even regressed. During the Stanford game he had no clue what to do when they took away his bubble screens and swing passes. He definitely needs to go back to school. If he comes out he could have a Jeven Snead like drop (maybe not that bad, but still pretty bad).
From TopDawg:
Quote:
Hundley isn't NFL ready, but I think he has the most upside.
Really? Mariota is the better player right now, he is the same size (maybe even a little bigger), and is just as athletic. There are several other players (Manziel for one) who I think have just as big of an upside as Hundley or a bigger upside.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
Let me chime in...
I like Hundley too. But would never put him ahead of Mariotta. Mariotta is 20tds, 0 ints, hellafide atheltic, and highly intelligent. I think he is the most ready and most upside of any QB in this draft.
Mariotta, Bridgewater, Mettenberer, Hundley, Boyd, Manziel in that order
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
I didn't see Hundley vs. N.Mex.St, but I did mention that he hasn't been consistently good like he was vs. the Huskers. I agree that he needs to go back to school next year and show the progress in 2014 that we were hoping he would make this year.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Quote:
... Got one for ya Town .. What made the Coaching staff think this team was going to be run heavy ( as you stated ) this season .. We couldn't run ourselves out of a paper bag last season,and never really made any up grades this year ( pet peeve of mine )
... You win in the trenches , look at our D !
2 things.
1, Trent was healthy this year, and theoretically should have been better than he was as a rookie.
2. Dion Lewis was going to be our 2nd RB, and he showed god overall skills.
Plus, we also had Hardesty, who we expected to be healthy, and also Obi. That was 4 pretty darn good RB to start the year,
Then, of course, Lewis and Hardesty (yet again) got hurt, Trent lost his burst entirely, and Obi was played at FB.
I would play Obi ahead of McGahee right now, and would give Whittaker more touches. We have to get the run game going somehow, and 31 yards on 21 carries isn't getting it done.
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: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
Hundley Reminds me of a better Jake Locker. More accurate version
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Hundley is not as athletic as Locker and his arm is not as strong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
I really should be paying attention to college QBs, but we never seem to wind up with the one I want anyway ...... so it probably doesn't matter anyway. (not that my evaluation mattered to start with) 
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Also, for whatever reason, Locker tended to inspire his teammates to play well. I don't see that in Hundley when I watch UCLA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
j/c:
I think there are no easy answers here and that it's too early to make any determinations. ddub had it right when he said to throw out the stats because the sampling size was too slow and that there was a lot of football to be played this year.
All of this is subject to change, but here are some things I am leaning towards:
--The QB class is hard to evaluate. So many are Spread Qbs and they are the hardest to judge. They also take longer to develop due the simplicity of their offenses. It is very hard to tell if any of those Spread guys can read coverages and/or even read defenses pre-snap. It's going to be a risky proposition drafting one of these guys.
--I like Bridgewater the best of all of them right now. He plays in an offense that is more of a pro style O than the others, except for LSU. He is very accurate. He is smart. Calm in the pocket. Doesn't seem to have a lot of "it" though. I would say he has the fewest question marks and is the safest pick.
--I am leaning toward us not trading both first round picks and other picks to move up in the first and draft the premier guy. I would rather use just one of our first round picks on a qb and roll w/Hoyer and Campbell for another year.
--I actually prefer Hoyer over Campbell right now. His intangibles seem to be a lot better to me. However, it's a close call and I would allow the two to battle it out in the camps.
--I think letting the rookie sit behind those two guys would be smart, although I know how the fans around here just love unproven first round QBs. Couch, BQ, and Weeden all sucked eggs, but they each had a ton of supporters. The coaching staff will come under fire if they don't win right away w/either Hoyer or Campbell.
--As I said earlier, it's still early and there is a lot of evaluating to do. Things are subject to change.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,044 |
J/C I say "No QB in the first Round this year" I don't see any of these QB worth a 1st rd pick...there is no "Andrew Luck" in this draft, and drafting one of the QB coming out this year in the 1st will be no different then Holmgren reaching for Weeden...it will be a mistake. Now if A.J McCarron is around in the 2nd or 3rd rds...i'd take a flier on him then, but let him sit behind Campbell and Hoyer (Both who are still under contract and have played well so far) and groom McCarron. I think our best bet for our 1st rders again this year is....DEFENSE...a big part of why this team has been in every game and hasn't totally sucked is because of defense.... I say go out and get another big time cornerback to play opposite of Joe Haden so we can move Skrine to Nickel....that shuts down/makes it very hard for opposing teams to pass on us... Next we need 1 more OLB to complete our rotation...Kruger/Mingo/Sheard/ We just need one more...that gives us the dreaded 4 headed pass rushing monster like the Steelers had in the 90's....Combine 1 more pass rusher with another Top CB opposite of Haden, and this team can win the division with "Average QB Play" maybe even win a Super Bowl....when you got a suffocating D that pressures the QB, shuts down the Run, and makes its difficult to pass on....you got a winning combination. We also need 1 or 2 more OL...FA/Draft can help us there....but we need 1 more OLB and 1 more starting corner for certain....2 most important pieces we need right now....we get that...we got a #1-#2 ranked D in the league....with that, the sky is the limit... A stong D can make up for some short comings at QB...I think with a good D, Hoyer/Campbell will be enough to get the job done as long as we go after a RB like Tate in FA and build this team to rely on its D Look at Baltimore over the years,,,no question...the soul of that team was Defense...now that Lewis and Reed are gone, that D is not what it once was, and Flacco don't look so hot now does he? I say we get the CB and 1 more OLB/Pass Rusher to fill out that D and then use FA and other draft picks to get OG/RB/OT/WR help to gets us moving 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,076
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,076 |
Quote:
--I actually prefer Hoyer over Campbell right now. His intangibles seem to be a lot better to me. However, it's a close call and I would allow the two to battle it out in the camps.
I totally get what you've said here about the intangibles.
Still, talk about "small sample size".... Hoyer had to be about the fastest 'shooting star' we've had a glance at since '99! When he went down I was bummed because of the loss of spark I knew we'd suffer, but also for this:
It was extremely important to see this guy play in all kinds of games, against all kinds of opponents so we fans could get to evaluate a decent body of work. At this point, we still don't know if his success was based upon personal ability, or the fact that teams had no tape on him. Now, we'll have to wait until next year... perhaps. We may never get to find out, too- strange things happen during the off season (...which kind of addresses your desire to see H & C duke it out in camp...Will we even see both back here next year? Wow- what a guessing game, huh?)
I agree that what he showed in those games intrigued the helloutta me. This team seemed to be rippling with 'positive energy' when he was in games. Was it real? Smoke & mirrors? Does Hoyer have the "it?"
I hope your scenario rolls out... it would be great fun to see H & C vie for a starting spot while a promising rook takes it all in.
Dream scenario for a team that has been in O disarray and dysfunction for almost 15 years.
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,651
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,651 |
The Browns season has been that of a team trying to find a QB.
We should pay homage to the saying, unless you have a franchise QB, you are sill looking an going nowhere.... Such is the story of the Browns since the return, a team in search of a franchise QB.
Does a QB make a difference, yes. All you have to do is look at Jacksonville (MJD), and Minnesota (AP) to realize that you can have a miserable record with a great back. It just does not matter when you have Brees, Brady, Rodgers and P. Manning knocking of chunks of yards in seconds, that takes minutes for a back to grind out.
I don't know who the next QB is, but until the Browns find one, they are destined to mediocrity.
It is one of the things that Haslem pointed out, and I believe that if he has provided any direction, it is to find a franchise QB.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 |
Quote:
...Will we even see both back here next year?
I would expect so barring a trade for a top QB. The way I believe it may shake out is that Campbell is retained for the veteran presence (and he can win games) and Hoyer is also kept as we may (or may not) have a diamond in the rough. The question then becomes, as expecting that we will keep 3 QB's, whether you retain Weeden or draft the QB of your choice. I think we all know the answer to that...
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,556
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,556 |
Quote:
Does a QB make a difference, yes. All you have to do is look at Jacksonville (MJD), and Minnesota (AP) to realize that you can have a miserable record with a great back.
True.....but something else we can pull from that...we are in the same boat....those teams have used high picks on QBs in recent years and gotten very little in return. We should know all about that. Say we hadn't drafted Weeden and drafted anybody available at that point. Would we be better off?
Now we fast forward to this next QB class. Are there any sure things? I don't think so. I think we do have to draft a QB and hope he pans out, and for that reason I sure as heck don't want to give up extra picks. All of these QBs being discussed aren't going in the top 10....even top 20.
Let the draft come to us. If we do that, we may even find we don't need to take the QB with the first of the picks.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861 |
There are no Andrew Lucks or Payton Mannings in this draft... When I say that, I'm not saying there isn't someone that can't pull off a Tom Brady and come out of nowhere, but Luck and Manning were considered sure fire hits.
then again, wasn't Bradford considered a "can't miss" guy? The record shows that that didn't exactly work out.
#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: 17,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 |
There's no Andrew Luck in this draft, and there probably won't be one next year. Maybe Winston, but I don't see him as this once every 3 decades prospect like we called Luck.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 |
Quote:
There are no Andrew Lucks or Payton Mannings in this draft... When I say that, I'm not saying there isn't someone that can't pull off a Tom Brady and come out of nowhere, but Luck and Manning were considered sure fire hits.
then again, wasn't Bradford considered a "can't miss" guy? The record shows that that didn't exactly work out.
I don't think people were crazy about him as much as they were with Luck. Wasn't he also injured when he was drafted?
Cam Newton was viewed as a possible superstar, but everyone in the world knew he would need time to develop a better passing game.
Matt Ryan was drafted after an offensive and defensive linemen were taken.
Stafford was probably the last guy people were really crazy over.
How many QB's get drafted out of the top 5 that end up being really good? Lots and lots. I really think out of this class, at least one is going to be a franchise QB, maybe even 2 or 3.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,861 |
Quote:
Quote:
There are no Andrew Lucks or Payton Mannings in this draft... When I say that, I'm not saying there isn't someone that can't pull off a Tom Brady and come out of nowhere, but Luck and Manning were considered sure fire hits.
then again, wasn't Bradford considered a "can't miss" guy? The record shows that that didn't exactly work out.
I don't think people were crazy about him as much as they were with Luck. Wasn't he also injured when he was drafted?
Cam Newton was viewed as a possible superstar, but everyone in the world knew he would need time to develop a better passing game.
Matt Ryan was drafted after an offensive and defensive linemen were taken.
Stafford was probably the last guy people were really crazy over.
How many QB's get drafted out of the top 5 that end up being really good? Lots and lots. I really think out of this class, at least one is going to be a franchise QB, maybe even 2 or 3.
I assume you are speaking of Bradford being injured,, I think what's more accurate is that he was coming off some kinda shoulder injury . But that didn't seem to slow him much. At least not that alone.
Cam Newton was considered a potential superstar... no question. Time will tell if that's true or not.
Stafford had injury issues at first didn't he? Anyway, he sure is the real deal now.
#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: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
There's no Andrew Luck in this draft, and there probably won't be one next year. Maybe Winston, but I don't see him as this once every 3 decades prospect like we called Luck.
I do. I think Winston is that good. I also love the kids attitude and the way he approaches the game and his teammates.
If you told me today that we could start the 2015 season with Luck or Winston and I had to decide today, it would be a tough call.. the only real factor that might cause me to choose Luck is that I've seen him do it at this level and all I have is belief that Winston can.. but I'm 99.9% certain he can.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,189 |
The play of Campbell and Hoyer I doubt will have much impact on what the Browns do in the draft.
Once the draft order has been established then we will know alot more.
If a team like the Falcons, ( teams who would not pick a qb ) Giants, maybe even the Steelers happen to have the second pick in the draft then I would expect the Browns to make a strong offer for the best QB available be that Bridgewater or Mariota.
Once the top two guys are off the board then it all is up in the air. It would depend on how the Browns grade the other QB prospects.
Between now and the end of the season the college quarterback class can move up or down the board.
Campbell can no doubt increase his value as an asset with continued good play. Hoyer has gained the favor of management but he is coming off an injury that may impede his progress and position on the depth chart.
Nothing but good can come out of the increased value of what previously has been two guys viewed as career backups.
But at the end of the season I am quite sure that Browns management (Banner/Chud/ Lombardi) still will want to get their guy. There are some guys of interest beyond the top two but at this point to early for me to get into.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,538
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,538 |
I agree with most of the posters. Hoyer and Campbell vie for starting spot and a Rookie holding a clipboard for a year or two.
I have a preference to see what Hoyer can do given experience and opportunity - he showed me enough that i have hope he can be a "good/very good" NFL QB.
I 100% think Weeden is going to be gone. Probably before the end of the year!
The more things change the more they stay the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,753 |
We actually seem to be pretty much on the same page here with very little exception.
If you were to ask me if this coaching staff would be surprised or shocked if Campbell played this way for the remainder of the season, I would say yes.
If you were asking me if this coaching staff expected Campbell to be an answer as our starting QB I'd say no.
What we're looking at is a mature QB bringing veteran leadership to a very young team. I believe you started out using words like shocked or surprised by Campbell's play and now have dwindled that down to "expected". There are miles apart between those things.
I feel they believed Campbell had the ability to come in and win games. I don't believe they had any confidence in Weeden from day 1. While he was still early in his career, the things they saw from him gave them every indication that he would not be an answer.
So whether he throws 2 td's or 3 td's I don't really feel is the question here. The question is did they think he was good enough to come in off the bench and when when/if Weeden faultered and win games. And I would say the answer to that question is yes.
With our running game or lack there of being what it is, I don't expect Campbell to be able to maintain this level of play myself.
But in all honesty, I don't think you go out and sign a veteran QB with the situation we were in with Weeden and not expect him to play well. If you don't have some level of confidence in a player, why would you sign them in the first place.
If an employer expects a person to fail, or not perform well, why would they hire them in the first place? Now we can quibble over the semantics all you like, but I would certainly hope people don't think this FO signs players they don't expect have the ability to play well.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Which QB Going Forward? (Next
Year)
|
|
