Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 12:41 am
by bookelly » Tue May 01, 2012 5:35 am
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 8:34 am
by leadpipe » Tue May 01, 2012 8:48 am
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 9:40 am
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 9:49 am
by Prosecutor » Tue May 01, 2012 9:50 am
what will make the receivers look good is the running back. He will make everybody look better. The receivers, what will make them look good, is if they catch the ball better than they caught it last year. We dropped way too many balls and that wasn’t the quarterbacks fault. I don’t care if bring back Otto Graham, the receivers have to catch the ball. They will be better, for a lot of reasons. That’s why no one is in a panic about how the draft went as far as how our receivers went. We will not drop the ball like we dropped it last year. We will have a running game to go with our passing game. Those things by themselves it will be better.”
by FUDU » Tue May 01, 2012 10:36 am
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 10:48 am
Prosecutor wrote:The company line, courtesy of Mike Holmgren:what will make the receivers look good is the running back. He will make everybody look better. The receivers, what will make them look good, is if they catch the ball better than they caught it last year. We dropped way too many balls and that wasn’t the quarterbacks fault. I don’t care if bring back Otto Graham, the receivers have to catch the ball. They will be better, for a lot of reasons. That’s why no one is in a panic about how the draft went as far as how our receivers went. We will not drop the ball like we dropped it last year. We will have a running game to go with our passing game. Those things by themselves it will be better.”
I expect the emphasis in training camp will be on catching the GD football, not trying to find an "uncoverable" WR. They're going to wear out those JUGS machines.
There was also a statement about Benjamin having a lot of upside and they expect him to improve with exposure to NFL level coaching.
Obviously the Browns are expecting a ripple effect to help the passing game. TR will force opposing defenses to focus on stopping the run. This will open up play action passes. The QB will have more time to throw than last year (Schwartz and more experienced guards will also help), which will give the receivers more time to get open. With time to throw and a QB with a legitimate NFL arm and a WR with deep speed to stretch the secondary, not to mention a dangerous check-down option in Richardson, the passing game should be significantly improved. Holmgren sounds very confident it will be, despite the surprising decision not to take a WR in the first three picks.
by rebelwithoutaclue » Tue May 01, 2012 10:54 am
jta1975 wrote:Good points so far and catching the ball will help.....I understand you can't get it all in the draft but they should know that too.
Management should not have put themselves in that predicament and that is part of Peeker's argument. Not addressing the WR position at all during free agency was a mistake. They didn't have to go after Vincent Jackson but they came away with bagels and put themselves in a bind.
They should have improved the group a little at least. Now we are down to Mark Clayton, Patrick Crayton or some other team's castoff.
I will admit if Green Bay cuts dies with Donald Driver I wouldn't mind paying a vet for some OJT for the WR group in this offense but I am pretty sure Driver wouldn't want to come to Cleveland over any team that had a legit shot at a championship.
I understand the guy is ancient, I wouldn't be paying for production. I would be paying for all the other stuff he would bring.....minus the dancing.
by FUDU » Tue May 01, 2012 10:55 am
by pod2dawg » Tue May 01, 2012 10:55 am
JCoz wrote: .........I have seen worse WR cores be part of very effective offenses.....
by Gradysmanldy » Tue May 01, 2012 12:36 pm
FUDU wrote:Holmgren mentioned Otto Graham.
HE GETS IT!
by Gradysmanldy » Tue May 01, 2012 12:56 pm
So the receivers will be 2010 good?
That's tremendous.
Can't wait.
Jugs Machines? Really? You understand that's about as valuable as someone being able to hit batting practice fastballs from the Jugs machines?
I can hit BP fastballs from a Jugs machine. I can catch footballs from a Jugs machine. None of that means shit when you get in a game.
Not a single thing.
I can't tell you how many thousands of footballs I put into Jugs machines that receivers couldn't miss. Receivers that never made it in the NFL.
by Hikohadon » Tue May 01, 2012 2:09 pm
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 2:10 pm
peeker643 wrote:So the receivers will be 2010 good?
That's tremendous.
Can't wait.
Jugs Machines? Really? You understand that's about as valuable as someone being able to hit batting practice fastballs from the Jugs machines?
I can hit BP fastballs from a Jugs machine. I can catch footballs from a Jugs machine. None of that means shit when you get in a game.
Not a single thing.
I can't tell you how many thousands of footballs I put into Jugs machines that receivers couldn't miss. Receivers that never made it in the NFL.
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 7:21 pm
by justmebd » Tue May 01, 2012 7:27 pm

by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 7:30 pm
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 8:09 pm
jta1975 wrote:Sounds like hope is what we are banking on. And as I said before sure Little led the team in drops but in reality his percentage of drops compared to others on the team was not the worst.
Like I said in another post. Cleveland had 2 of the top 10 in the league and 4 of the top 11 in the AFC when it comes to drops. Little caught 61 balls and then next WR (Cribbs) caught 40 that means the rest of those guys on the list were just as much a factor if not more.
People can live in a bubble and rip on Little but the real sad part of the situation in my eyes is that a WR who was going into his second year at the position and coming off of a year football layoff needed to be targeted as much as he did. That says all I need to know about the WR group as a whole.
The group needed an uprgrade no matter if they drop fewer passes or not. At some point talent has to be addressed with more than hope.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue May 01, 2012 8:24 pm
Hikohadon wrote:Then we will all stand in a big circle, aim at the guy across from us, and pull the triggers in unison.
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 8:29 pm
JCoz wrote:jta1975 wrote:Sounds like hope is what we are banking on. And as I said before sure Little led the team in drops but in reality his percentage of drops compared to others on the team was not the worst.
Like I said in another post. Cleveland had 2 of the top 10 in the league and 4 of the top 11 in the AFC when it comes to drops. Little caught 61 balls and then next WR (Cribbs) caught 40 that means the rest of those guys on the list were just as much a factor if not more.
People can live in a bubble and rip on Little but the real sad part of the situation in my eyes is that a WR who was going into his second year at the position and coming off of a year football layoff needed to be targeted as much as he did. That says all I need to know about the WR group as a whole.
The group needed an uprgrade no matter if they drop fewer passes or not. At some point talent has to be addressed with more than hope.
I dont think so. Hope as far as the drops going down? Yes, but there are logical reasons for the passing game to improve even if the Browns repeat their performace regarding drops.
I dont think anyone argues that the Browns are close to set at the WR position. And I doubt many are happy about the lack of attention from the FO in offseason in general.
I think there is far less hope in something magincal happening in the WRing core than there is despair. The browns had several chances to draft WR's to help and didn't. I dont think that fooled anyone into think we actually have good receivers.
by motherscratcher » Tue May 01, 2012 8:35 pm
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 9:32 pm
motherscratcher wrote:How much improvement in receiver play can we expect with a (hopefully) improved QB, a much improve O Line, and another year in the system?
There has to be some, right?
Also, what are the chances that an adequate stop gap WR can be picked up when teams cut down rosters?
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 9:33 pm
jta1975 wrote:JCoz wrote:jta1975 wrote:Sounds like hope is what we are banking on. And as I said before sure Little led the team in drops but in reality his percentage of drops compared to others on the team was not the worst.
Like I said in another post. Cleveland had 2 of the top 10 in the league and 4 of the top 11 in the AFC when it comes to drops. Little caught 61 balls and then next WR (Cribbs) caught 40 that means the rest of those guys on the list were just as much a factor if not more.
People can live in a bubble and rip on Little but the real sad part of the situation in my eyes is that a WR who was going into his second year at the position and coming off of a year football layoff needed to be targeted as much as he did. That says all I need to know about the WR group as a whole.
The group needed an uprgrade no matter if they drop fewer passes or not. At some point talent has to be addressed with more than hope.
I dont think so. Hope as far as the drops going down? Yes, but there are logical reasons for the passing game to improve even if the Browns repeat their performace regarding drops.
I dont think anyone argues that the Browns are close to set at the WR position. And I doubt many are happy about the lack of attention from the FO in offseason in general.
I think there is far less hope in something magincal happening in the WRing core than there is despair. The browns had several chances to draft WR's to help and didn't. I dont think that fooled anyone into think we actually have good receivers.
Please help me understand because now I am really confused. You just said with repeat performance from a drop standpoint there are logical reasons the passing game will be better. Can you please elaborate because if less drops isn't #1 on this list I think the list is useless.
by JCoz » Tue May 01, 2012 9:40 pm
jta1975 wrote:motherscratcher wrote:How much improvement in receiver play can we expect with a (hopefully) improved QB, a much improve O Line, and another year in the system?
There has to be some, right?
Also, what are the chances that an adequate stop gap WR can be picked up when teams cut down rosters?
I agree with all the things you listed but I also would have like to address the talent standpoint in some aspect. I started the post because I wanted to probe some ideas about upgrading the talent at the position.
I agree that there are some factors that as a fan we can cling to as reasons why the passing game will be better I am not arguing that point because I believe it also.
From a pure talent aspect I think they should have improved the group. I have the same general belief in the reasons that offer hope. I want to talk about actual players because I also understand that if the reasons that offer hope for improvement fail talent can sometimes trump circumstances and the talent level is low for that group and it didn't need to stay that way for another year.
What teams have older players they might cut, what teams have a abundance of talent at the position. Are there any free agents left people think can help? Any trades make sense? I already know the company lines when it comes to rational reasons why the passing game will be better but if those don't hold water how can we improve the talent or are we stuck till next year?
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 9:42 pm
JCoz wrote:jta1975 wrote:motherscratcher wrote:How much improvement in receiver play can we expect with a (hopefully) improved QB, a much improve O Line, and another year in the system?
There has to be some, right?
Also, what are the chances that an adequate stop gap WR can be picked up when teams cut down rosters?
I agree with all the things you listed but I also would have like to address the talent standpoint in some aspect. I started the post because I wanted to probe some ideas about upgrading the talent at the position.
I agree that there are some factors that as a fan we can cling to as reasons why the passing game will be better I am not arguing that point because I believe it also.
From a pure talent aspect I think they should have improved the group. I have the same general belief in the reasons that offer hope. I want to talk about actual players because I also understand that if the reasons that offer hope for improvement fail talent can sometimes trump circumstances and the talent level is low for that group and it didn't need to stay that way for another year.
What teams have older players they might cut, what teams have a abundance of talent at the position. Are there any free agents left people think can help? Any trades make sense? I already know the company lines when it comes to rational reasons why the passing game will be better but if those don't hold water how can we improve the talent or are we stuck till next year?
Again, I don't think anyone thinks that WR doesn't beedi be upgraded. Driver could get cut, Dane Sanzenbacher could get cut with the additions Chicago made. But I find it really hard to get my hopes up that this regime is really going to go looking to add talent worth talking about when they seem so disinterested in it from the way the rest of this offseason went.
by jb » Tue May 01, 2012 9:55 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue May 01, 2012 9:57 pm
by jb » Tue May 01, 2012 9:58 pm
jta1975 wrote: so I am trying to figure out how to win games this year.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Tue May 01, 2012 10:00 pm
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 10:03 pm
jb wrote:Unless the Mayans were correct, we can draft one next year. Too many holes for one year.
Then again, there are no "can't cover" WR's on Green Bay.. But there is Aaron Rogers and one hell of an offensive system and plenty of good receivers.
But there's no Larry Fitz and GB's O produces can't cover receivers. Why is that?
by jta1975 » Tue May 01, 2012 10:04 pm
jb wrote:jta1975 wrote: so I am trying to figure out how to win games this year.
Why?
It's been awful for years and we are finally within striking distance of having enough talent and continuity to be relevant with one more draft.
The schedule is a bitty. I'm down with another 5 win season.
by Fire Marshall Bill » Tue May 01, 2012 10:05 pm
jb wrote:Unless the Mayans were correct, we can draft one next year. Too many holes for one year.
Then again, there are no "can't cover" WR's on Green Bay.. But there is Aaron Rogers and one hell of an offensive system and plenty of good receivers.
But there's no Larry Fitz and GB's O produces can't cover receivers. Why is that?
by jb » Tue May 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Fire Marshall Bill wrote:jb wrote:Unless the Mayans were correct, we can draft one next year. Too many holes for one year.
Then again, there are no "can't cover" WR's on Green Bay.. But there is Aaron Rogers and one hell of an offensive system and plenty of good receivers.
But there's no Larry Fitz and GB's O produces can't cover receivers. Why is that?
Rogers did a McCoy impersonation in the playoffs....ie: he was on his ass a lot
by peeker643 » Tue May 01, 2012 10:21 pm
jta1975 wrote:jb wrote:Unless the Mayans were correct, we can draft one next year. Too many holes for one year.
Then again, there are no "can't cover" WR's on Green Bay.. But there is Aaron Rogers and one hell of an offensive system and plenty of good receivers.
But there's no Larry Fitz and GB's O produces can't cover receivers. Why is that?
Can't even compare Jordy Nelson,James Jones, Donald Driver, Greg Jennings from a talent standpoint to our group but I agree without a doubt they have a STUD QB.
by jb » Tue May 01, 2012 10:26 pm
jta1975 wrote:jb wrote:Unless the Mayans were correct, we can draft one next year. Too many holes for one year.
Then again, there are no "can't cover" WR's on Green Bay.. But there is Aaron Rogers and one hell of an offensive system and plenty of good receivers.
But there's no Larry Fitz and GB's O produces can't cover receivers. Why is that?
Can't even compare Jordy Nelson,James Jones, Donald Driver, Greg Jennings from a talent standpoint to our group but I agree without a doubt they have a STUD QB.
by jb » Tue May 01, 2012 10:28 pm
jta1975 wrote:jb wrote:jta1975 wrote: so I am trying to figure out how to win games this year.
Why?
It's been awful for years and we are finally within striking distance of having enough talent and continuity to be relevant with one more draft.
The schedule is a bitty. I'm down with another 5 win season.
One way to look at it and as much as I love the draft, I equally hate losing.
by jb » Tue May 01, 2012 10:28 pm
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Sweet!
Within striking distance of being relevant.
gun.jpg
by Gradysmanldy » Tue May 01, 2012 11:36 pm
by Hikohadon » Wed May 02, 2012 9:55 am
peeker643 wrote:I think there are a lot of players between Larry Fitz and the Browns group of receivers. The Packers group is, as a whole, between Fitz and the Browns.
I heard the last 4 months how shitty Kevin Kolb is. Yet Fitz caught 80 balls with that shitty QB situation and had 1500 yards.
by Prosecutor » Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm
They [the Browns wide receivers] will be better, for a lot of reasons. That’s why no one is in a panic about how the draft went as far as how our receivers went. We will not drop the ball like we dropped it last year. - Mike Holmgren
by peeker643 » Wed May 02, 2012 3:18 pm
Hikohadon wrote:Too early to say if they fixed the QB spot yet? Of course. If they got Luck or RG3, you could say the same thing (to a lesser extent). But they at least got a guy that has a CHANCE of being a good NFL QB. Colt had no chance, even if his WR corps was Fitz, Calvin Johnson, and Andre Johnson in the slot.
by General » Wed May 02, 2012 3:38 pm

by motherscratcher » Wed May 02, 2012 4:32 pm
peeker643 wrote:Hikohadon wrote:Too early to say if they fixed the QB spot yet? Of course. If they got Luck or RG3, you could say the same thing (to a lesser extent). But they at least got a guy that has a CHANCE of being a good NFL QB. Colt had no chance, even if his WR corps was Fitz, Calvin Johnson, and Andre Johnson in the slot.
Let me ignore the most horrific hyperbole I've ever seen on this site in your last sentence and focus on a fundamental problem I have with the othr part of the paragraph.
Who drafted Colt?
Who made the mistake of spending a relatively valuable pick on a weak-armed midget with a stage daddy who you say can't benefit from the three best receivers in the game?
The experts, right? The ones I can't question or complain about suddenly, right? They drafted Colt and they probably shoulda known about his arm and his height and his old man, no?
They drafted Colt. They signed Jake Delhomme and paid him maybe the most ridiculous $25m ever paid out in the NFL. They brought in a backup like Seneca Wallace who refuses to be a mentor to young QBs, yes?
And I'm expected to believe that they got it right with Weeden and did so at 22? And I suppose I should believe the fact he's almost 30 will preclude him from having to learn the league and take his lumps for the next two years to the point when he's headed toward 32 or so, he may be the right guy, right?
You see nothing at all in any of this that limits my faith and confidence in the same assholes who gave you all of the above suddently swinging it 180 the other way Thursday night when they took a guy at 22 that wasn't on their 1st round board?
Y'all can receive it warmly. I'm an eye-rolling, head shaking, lol-ing motherfucking disbelever right now.
Keep the 'Gotta Have Faith or Ya Got Nothing at All' shit on this one.
I have hope. Very little, but I have hope.
That's not faith. And anyone that has it needs to look at themselves and ask why the fuck they do if you ask me.
Goddamn. If wives and girlfriends treated ya like this front office does you'd wake up and walk, no? You wouldn't let them keep walking all over ya like we do. How many times she gonna fuck your friend and say she won't again?
I don't get it.
by peeker643 » Wed May 02, 2012 4:37 pm
motherscratcher wrote:peeker643 wrote:Hikohadon wrote:Too early to say if they fixed the QB spot yet? Of course. If they got Luck or RG3, you could say the same thing (to a lesser extent). But they at least got a guy that has a CHANCE of being a good NFL QB. Colt had no chance, even if his WR corps was Fitz, Calvin Johnson, and Andre Johnson in the slot.
Let me ignore the most horrific hyperbole I've ever seen on this site in your last sentence and focus on a fundamental problem I have with the othr part of the paragraph.
Who drafted Colt?
Who made the mistake of spending a relatively valuable pick on a weak-armed midget with a stage daddy who you say can't benefit from the three best receivers in the game?
The experts, right? The ones I can't question or complain about suddenly, right? They drafted Colt and they probably shoulda known about his arm and his height and his old man, no?
They drafted Colt. They signed Jake Delhomme and paid him maybe the most ridiculous $25m ever paid out in the NFL. They brought in a backup like Seneca Wallace who refuses to be a mentor to young QBs, yes?
And I'm expected to believe that they got it right with Weeden and did so at 22? And I suppose I should believe the fact he's almost 30 will preclude him from having to learn the league and take his lumps for the next two years to the point when he's headed toward 32 or so, he may be the right guy, right?
You see nothing at all in any of this that limits my faith and confidence in the same assholes who gave you all of the above suddently swinging it 180 the other way Thursday night when they took a guy at 22 that wasn't on their 1st round board?
Y'all can receive it warmly. I'm an eye-rolling, head shaking, lol-ing motherfucking disbelever right now.
Keep the 'Gotta Have Faith or Ya Got Nothing at All' shit on this one.
I have hope. Very little, but I have hope.
That's not faith. And anyone that has it needs to look at themselves and ask why the fuck they do if you ask me.
Goddamn. If wives and girlfriends treated ya like this front office does you'd wake up and walk, no? You wouldn't let them keep walking all over ya like we do. How many times she gonna fuck your friend and say she won't again?
I don't get it.
It's a little disingenuous to put it this way though. It's not like this regime has to pull a 180 and turn it completely around to make a good decision. I agree with every damn thing you just said as it pertains to Colt, the draft, and the Weeden pick.
But to say they have to turn a 180 is kind of implying that they've done nothing except fuck up after fuckup. they've done nothing right..
Why isn't it just as legitimate to say that tehy drafted Haden when a lot of people thought he was too slow and not worth the 7th pick. They drafted Sheard when nobody had heard of him. They drafted Taylor and Ward and it looks like those guys might be fine players in the league. So, drafting Weeden and hitting a home run with it is right in line with all of the good things that this regime has done in the last 2 years.
That would be ridiculous, right? Ridiculous to note all of the good things and ignore completely the many fuckups and missteps.
If Weeden works out its' not like this regime pulled a 180 out of it.s ass. This regime has it's successes and failures, just like every other team.
by motherscratcher » Wed May 02, 2012 5:05 pm
peeker643 wrote:Because I was speaking about the QB in relation to making the receivers better.
Of course they've had hits.
Now tell me why I should believe they got this Weeden thing right again?
by peeker643 » Wed May 02, 2012 5:20 pm
motherscratcher wrote:peeker643 wrote:Because I was speaking about the QB in relation to making the receivers better.
Of course they've had hits.
Now tell me why I should believe they got this Weeden thing right again?
Because of Joe Haden, duh. Joe Haden is good, so obviously Weeden will be too, right? Isn't that how this works?
I guess I misunderstand you. I thought you were saying that due to the fuckups of drafting Colt and (allegedly) reaching for Weeden, we really have no solid basis for thinking that they got the Weeden thing right, except for blind hope.
by Xukuth » Wed May 02, 2012 11:42 pm
by OldDawg » Thu May 03, 2012 12:45 am


Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
