DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Hoyer/McCown Debate and Scheme Fit/Cohesion

Eagles
Young's record as a starter to 1-2 on the season.[60]

Buffalo Bills

Young signed a one-year deal with the Buffalo Bills on May 11, 2012.[61] The Bills released him on August 27, 2012.[62]

Green Bay Packers

On August 6, 2013, Young signed a one-year contract with the Green Bay Packers.[63] He was released on August 31, 2013.

Cleveland Browns

On May 1, 2014, Young signed a one-year contract with the Cleveland Browns.[64] He was released on May 12, 2014.[65]

6 too many.

holy crap, thats browns coaching staff contract length to actual time spent with team ratio type of numbers.

wonder how much he got paid out of those

I'm guessing very little in the scheme of football salaries. None of that time would have many if any game checks. It would be interesting to see what he made, I agree. They had to pay him something, right?

more than i made im sure.

It goes way back in my memory, but I ask myself, could Kurt Warner have come out of nowhere if Isaac Bruce wasn't already on that team making circus touchdown grabs, with a couple years experience at it.

If so, then I guess it'd would'd, bode(ed) well if Josh Gordon wasn't suspended, if the Browns hoped to have a similar break out at Qb.(if's and buts, yada yada)
It takes 2 to complete a pass, keep the team together.

I was having this convo with a Bears fan yesterday. McCown is horrible. There's no shining that turd. People like to point to that stretch but according to him very few in Chicago were sorry to see him go. Hoyer wasn't great but he is very much so a down grade from Hoyer IMO.

The only thing I can think is that Haslam has assured Farmer and company they have through at least next year. They're building a really solid football team with depth and a decent D but they've essentially installed a lawnmower engine in a monster truck. They're going into the season willingly hobbled, knowing they're probably going to lose their probowl center in the process but basically sucking for a shot at Jones or Cook. They may actually win too many games in the process but they have stocked the lines and ignored key skill positions and talked about building around the position this year. I think they know full well that McCown brings them a very good shot at 4-12 or 5-11 through pure bafoonery. Of course they could go on a Dilfer-esque 2000 Ravens run but... I doubt it.

Barring that then next year, it's insert QB and receiver and start your engines. It's a gamble to be sure and one they could never ever come remotely close to admitting. It does seem like the fact align with this reasoning. Thoughts?

... and will accept abusive texts from his general manger without complaint.

Been saying the same thing myself, their tanking the season for a shot at a franchise QB. They start JF and the team either sinks or swims, and if they have to play McCown they know its likely they win no more then a game. Hello 2-14, hello franchise QB. Mission accomplished...

They keep Hoyer he plays they win enough to be on the outside looking in. They don't have to listen to fans complain about Hoyer starting when JF sucks.

This season is about finding out once and for all about JF and losing when he fails. I would say they got this thing wrapped up.

Bradford has nothing to do with it.



The bottom line is this: The team still has hopes that Johnny Manziel is going to be "the guy" and that Hoyer wasn't going to be the type of veteran who was going to help Manziel.

Some might even call Hoyer a selfish player.

The more Hoyer played last year, the more uncomfortable he looked. Hoyer never did set the world on fire, and as the season went on he looked worse and worse on the field. His throws.. his footwork.. his demeanor all suffered as time went on.

I was a Hoyer fan at the start of the year. Did not want Manziel drafted or playing, but by the time Manziel did start, I had to agree that Hoyer needed to be benched. Unfortunately, Manziel needed to stay on the bench as well.

By the time the season was over, I was ready to see Shaw named the starter and have Tebow signed as his backup. As much as I hate to say it, I see McCown as an improvement over the way Hoyer looked when the 2014 season ended.

If it really and seriously is close between them, I'd agree, you play Johnny and let the live reps help him improve even more. If not, let him continue to be Johnny Bench and hope his continued hard work will allow him to earn the starting role.

This is the stupidity that has been repeatedly posted that is a lie. Show me one thing that says Hoyer wouldn't help JF. Oh you mean last year when the Browns benched Hoyer and Hoyer said "I will do all I can to help JF get ready to start", thats what tipped you off he wouldn't help. What you said is a lie a lie that has been repeated countless times none the less a lie.

I cannot believe the lies that have been MADE UP to somehow discredit Hoyer.......

What's the matter the TRUTH isn't good enough?

Where does the "panic and Bradford" come into play if their end goal, as you have stated so many times, was to orchestrate a situation whereas there is no competition to Manziel giving him the automatic day one start?

So after calling "this exact scenario months ago" you describe how the Browns desperately tried to sign Bradford, clearly the opposite of your scenario claiming they would "clear the deck for Manziel so he would have less competition for the starting QB job."

So which is it, clear the deck of competition to aid Manziel or desperately try to sign Bradford as the starter?


mac, those two things don't add up.

Personally, I think the idea of clearing the deck for Manziel to have no competition for the starting job is kind of a load of crap. I don't think the Browns would have offered a 1st round pick for Sam Bradford if they were interested in just handing the starting job to Manziel. I also severely doubt there would have been all that "gossip" about moving up to #2 for Marcus Mariota. McCown being signed was probably the best option they felt they had at the time and was a safety net in case Farmer/Haslam were not able to land anyone else via trade or the draft. Hoyer wanted more money than he was worth, Bradford and Mariota didn't work out. Now it's down to McCown being the starter unless Manziel can convincingly win the starting job. While I don't think he's a REAL option, if Connor Shaw dazzles in camp and the preseason he might get his name into the mix as well.

Hoyer stamped his own way out of town.

He proved a handful of things last year with the Browns.

-When everything around him clicks at a high level, he can be effective.
-When everything around him isn't clicking, he's not very good.
-His mechanics and accuracy got worse as the season progressed.
-Didn't handle his benching all that well, was kind of a diva at times about taking blame for his bad play and team losses.
-Wanted starter type money to re-sign.

Some other things worth pointing out regarding Hoyer and the 2014 season...

-Wins against the Saints, Titans, Bucs, Raiders and Falcons (All bad).
-Threw 8 INT's in 4 games at one point.
-Had a drought where he lead 1 TD drive in 29 possessions. (A rushing TD by Crowell I might add).
-Threw a passing TD in the 2nd quarter vs. Houston, didn't throw another until 4th quarter vs. Carolina.
-Completely ineffective against Jacksonville, Houston, Buffalo and Indianapolis.

I liked Brian Hoyer. I still do.

He had some very nice moments, but he's a 30 year old backup with a below average NFL arm. When our running game was clicking on all cylinders and our defense was keeping the score low and generating their 21 interceptions, he was able to do enough to squeak out some wins, which was great.

Fact is the guy just didn't do enough to prove he's our future, his mechanics and arm wore down as the season went along, and he wasn't able to carry the team when the running game wasn't working and the games were on the line. (Jacksonville, Houston, Buffalo, Indianapolis).


This is no way an endorsement for Manziel or McCown.

I'm just not sure why so many Browns fans feel that Hoyer isn't replaceable.

Our offensive line is healthy, and got better with the addition of Cameron Erving. Our running backs are deeper with the addition of Duke Johnson. We lost Miles Austin but added Dwayne Bowe, Brian Hartline and Vince Mayle to our wide receiver group. Over on defense our pass rush is getting Armonty Bryant back and we added Nate Orchard. The defensive line got a strong shot in the arm with the addition of Shelton, Cooper and Starks and our secondary added Tramon Williams and will have Justin Gilbert/K'Williams in year two.

On paper this team is better everywhere.

I'm hoping a strong running game, and defense will help either McCown or Manziel produce some wins. I believe it can. (though I maybe in the minority).

Farmer, Pettine and Haslam I'm sure are all crossing their fingers that Manziel shows enough improvement to win the job, or that McCown can just be smart and efficient and simply manage games for us.

I'm not exactly excited about our QB situation, but I don't think Hoyer would have made us a hell of a lot better. In fact I think losing Shanahan was worse for this team.

Or, FO showed they can better McCown and Hoyer. Nothing in the rules disallowing Farmer from waiving McCown if they got Bradford.

I'm still puzzled. Why is Hoyer any different than any other veteran who had a team draft his position in the first round?

With his injury last year, no team would sign him. Hoyer needed the Browns. If he did well, Browns pay him as a starter trade Manziel. Hoyer started out fine but couldn't sustain.

Hoyer had short success with the Browns. He did not have equal with three other teams. As a GM, who are you gambling gives you the best odds of sustained wins? If you are Hoyer, is there any hope Browns are committed to you for a long term contract based on level of play the entire season?

Manziel checking into rehab wasn't a vote of confidence. Hoyer wanting a long term commitment to be the starter. If I was Hoyer, I most certainly want to test the market, and if I was Farmer, I cannot sit around waiting QB availability if Hoyer did get a better offer.

In my opinion, long term Manziel is the least expensive investment. McCown at the very least is serviceable, and I am not forced to pay a high price if another option comes available.

If that is dysfunctional than so be it.

I have cut and pasted the following which I posted in another thread....

We don't know all that they did to address the QB situation. We read what was reported, but nobody here was in the offices to know everything they did in terms of trying to work trades, talking to free agents, working out a mutually agreeable deal with Hoyer, etc, etc. I see all these opinions attributing nefarious intentions to Haslam or Farmer or Pettine which seem ludicrous to me.

They made an investment in Manziel. So far the return doesn't look promising, but it's too early to pass a final judgement. Hoyer believed he had a particular value, the Browns believed he had a different value, and they couldn't agree. So the Browns looked at different options. They signed McCown to replace Hoyer. Then they started looking around to see if they could to better. They tried for Bradford but they couldn't offer what the Rams wanted in return. Then the Eagles traded for Bradford, so the Browns put an inquiry in case the Eagles might be willing to trade him. Sound business moves that didn't pan out. They then explored trading up to go after Mariota, but the cost was too high. I don't see an evil master plan here, just a team with a weak link trying to fix it with limited options.

Incredibly logical response describing our situation.

1st part

I assume you and I can agree the 1st part may be true the second part is a lie according to you?

2nd part

Oh from what I know they are paying McCown more money then Hoyer is getting. I will put this whole thing down as a lie, I'm sure you understand.

I think is a key line.

Everyone talks about what we did, and how it was wrong.

What other options out there were there that we're going to be 100% perfect?

None.

The FA QB crop was terrible, as it usually is, the one guy with "potential" in Ryan Mallet most likely wasn't going to leave Houston..

People were complaining that we didn't sign Mark Sanchez for Christ sakes...

We didn't draft Teddy or Carr, that's over and done with.. Might as well complain today about not drafting Big Ben or Rodgers..

All these topics about who we could of drafted, or traded for in the last month or so.. All of them had questions. Some big questions, wth also huge price tags..

We have what we have, because that's pretty much all that was available this year.

Overall as a team, right now, I could see us being successful, if not up and down in stretches.. We potentially have the set up to start 3-0 (regardless of who's starting), as those first 3 teams have as many questions as we do.. And from there, who knows..

If Manziel is even remotely close to ready to go to start the season, I would start him.. And I would give him all the leash he needs to either run, or hang himself.. In a basic run first offense, with he veteran WRs we have, I see no reason he or McCown can't be successful..

We don't have the best situation obviously.. But it's about as good as it could be.

You can't be serious about that... It doesn't have enough "conspiracy theory" value to make it believeable

Tab thats not the way I remember it. Farmer was suppose to get back to Hoyer in a 2 week span, then he went out and signed McCown and Hoyer was done. Up to that point there hadn't been any serious negotiations.

I don't think the money was the sole driving force to negotiations that many have allowed themselves to believe. More so then anything Hoyer wanted a chance to earn the starters position.

But I don't know why we keep debating this issue. I think Hoyer is an example of poor management because he was a winner any way anyone chooses to slice and dice it. Was he perfect? NO. But he did something here that no one else seemed to be able to do (win) and I think letting him go in loo of having some one better to replace him with was a bad mistake. And I also think it is one of those deals where the Browns FO cut off their nose to spite their face.

There was something underlying that we all don't know about that caused the FO to never support Hoyer in a real way. That is my opinion, and it wasn't born from not signing Hoyer it was born last year at the close of camp culminating in not re-signing Hoyer. Hoyer was never treated fairly for whatever reason and its something I have consistently said.

1. You don't know what they offered BH. Might be the same thing they gave JM.

2. People need to get over all the Bradford rumors. I'm sure RF made inquiries to what was needed. Turned out to be to much. Does not mean we really offered anything. All we know is what was reported. Nobody knows what was offered and what was talked about. Just because you ask what it would take does not mean that we would have done it. In fact since we did not do it, I would say it was all just talk. Nothing wrong with making calls and asking.

3. If BH wanted to be hear, guess what? He would be hear. But since we would not name him the starter, he left. See Ya.

4. It was reported over and over, that Ray would not part with our 2nd 1st rd. pick. So I would say those rumors about giving up 2 firsts for Bradford or Mariota are just that: Rumors. We tried to better ourselves, but the cost was to high. All this bickering about Bradford needs to stop. It was just a inquiry to see what would happen, nothing more or less. We would not sell the farm for a busted QB. To me that means logic.

It made sense to keep Hoyer. He knew the team and they knew him. But they also knew his limitations and from their point of view, he wasn't worth what he was asking. It made sense that once he had turned down their offer, they signed someone roughly comparable. Hoyer/Manziel was the baseline, and McCown/Manziel gave them roughly the same baseline. You can argue which one is better than the other, but in the end they are both back up quality QBs.

Once the baseline was maintained, they sought to improve but the options were limited, they were unwilling to pay the ransom demanded by potential trading partners. They didn't act out of desperation.

"Hoyer re-iterated that he'd love to continue playing for his hometown team -- and raise his children here -- but that he can't base his decision on that.

"Would it be convenient for me to come back? Yeah,'' he said. "But I don't want to make one of the biggest decisions in my life based off of convenience. Obviously being from here, I was here last year, I love my teammates, I love the coaches, yeah, it's definitely up on the top of the list. At the same point, I want to make sure I make the best decision for me at this point in my career, and my family. I'm going to take my time and make the best decision possible.''

He stressed that he wants a chance to start, and indicated that the best chance for that might be elsewhere."

"Haslam confirmed there is still mutual interest in bringing Hoyer back.

“Brian is a potential option for quarterback, just like a lot of other people are,” the owner said.

Haslam also addressed a report that the Browns might be willing to trade their two first-round picks (12th and 19th overall) to land back in the top five of the draft and select a quarterback.

“One, that’s Ray’s call,” Haslam said. “Two, we said we would do what’s necessary to solve the quarterback situation. That will be a call that Ray will make.”

The bottom line: As of Feb. 11, every option remains on the table for the Browns at the quarterback position."

Link

In case you geniuses don't know it, Hoyer plays for another team now.

Wasn't it during the midst of when negotiations were supposed to be taking place that Textgate broke? I also recall when asked about it that Hoyer said he was VERY interested in finding out what the texts said.

It was uncomfortable enough of a conversation between Pet and Farm. Can't imagine how that conversation would go between Farm and Hoyer...

#1 Just because McCown is getting more than Hoyer doesn't mean Hoyer didn't turn down a better offer from the Browns than he eventually signed for with the Texans.

#2 What I understand is that you publicly called me a liar.

Brother I think you need to read what you wrote the 2 parts conflict with each other so one of them has to be false.

What I do know is that both sides agreed to talk at a later date, and that meeting never took place because the Browns went out and signed McCown.

This FO was only going to re-sign Hoyer if there was no other option available they viewed McCown as Hoyers equal and have stated as much (which is total hogwash BTW)so I presume (stupid me) they would at least place the same monetary value on Hoyer as McCown (perhaps a bit more), and Hoyer signed for less money then they are paying McCown, I would assume Hoyer was being fair long before our Teflon FO, that is if you can get folks to go past their hoped for outcome instead of what is to me obvious. The Browns low balled Hoyer, but they both agreed to speak at a later date. Hoyer signed for less money therefore our FO was willing to pay more to McCown just to be rid of McCown's equal by their own admission.

Which goes right back to what I have said all along this FO was never supportive of Hoyer, I'm not sure why I suspect several reasons were involved. But to always blame Hoyer when you say you don't know actually shows where your at, and what lengths your willing to go to drive that point home. If it makes you feel better your not the only one who can't separate fact from fiction. Or more likely have been blinded by what you hope is true rather then what is likely true.

What about the statement "Hoyer believed he had a particular value, the Browns believed he had a different value, and they couldn't agree" is a deliberate falsehood intended to deceive? What proof do you have to offer that there weren't talks between Hoyer's camp and the Browns that weren't reported? I have an opinion, you have an opinion. They are both based on scant facts because the process is private. I choose to be optimistic in my opinion, you choose to be pessimistic. Again, what have I said that is a lie?

You either know or you don't know, therefore one of the statements is false.

From all of what is KNOWN the Browns low balled Hoyer, that fact is born out by the fact he signed for way less money then all the board GM's predicted he was asking for. He was consistently hammered for asking for too much without knowing what he asked for, but at this point its accurate to say he was asking for far less then the board GM's said he was, but still the lie is repeated.

Its obvious to me that the Browns NEVER made Hoyer a serious offer and only kept the lines of communication open just in case all else failed. Any deal not getting done all falls on the Browns its just to obvious to be otherwise but the lie persists because like you people want to believe the Browns were always fair and supportive of Hoyer, and they weren't and this proves it. Throw on top of that, that the Browns were willing to stomach a huge downgrade at the position or the supposed equal (wink, wink) signing of McCown, and you have sealed the deal.

But the lie persists even when the FACTS say otherwise.

Oh you say nobody really knows then repeat the lie that has been told until it is the truth in some peoples minds.

You either believe the actual evidence or you believe what you want to believe, which is a lie.

Your response verifies my point! Hoyer believed he had one value, the Browns believed he had a different value. They did not agree.

Meanwhile you are taking a difference of opinion and making statements about my moral character. You have no right. I have never before, on any forum I have ever been a part of, used an ignore button. Here comes the first. Have a good life.

Sucks being proven wrong don't it?