Halftime Green Bay game

[Hikohadon]

Halftime thoughts:

Why Shurmur why? How many times in this PRACTICE game have you failed to give your offense the opportunity? How many times in the PRACTICE game have you called run plays when getting your 3rd string RB carries isn't nearly as important as getting your rookie QB experience? Why you cutting off Weeden's balls at this formatory stage?

I called Weeden "douche" for the first time. As in "Why are you checking down, DOUCHE? Even Colt McCoy can do that, DOUCHE?"

It's a practice game. If you're willing to throw a 6 yard pass on 3rd and 10, you should be willing to throw a bomb or two just to get your blood pumping.

Took till that pass to Norwood right before half before he finally showed that arm. That's been 2 passes so far this whole preseason where I saw the arm that he showed in school.

[Hikohadon]

I am now officially alarmed.

It has nothing to do with our team. It has everything to do with how shitty GB's run game is, how shitty their O line is, how shitty their Run D is, how shallow they are all over the place (except WR), and how they were still 15-1 last year just because they have one of the top 3 QB's in the game.

If the NFL keeps trending towards the QB position, then the NFL will soon become as shitty as the NBA.

[LarsHancock]

So, I think what you're saying is that we could win 11 games this year, right?

As teams load up to rush the QB and stop the pass, a power running team like the Browns suddenly can sneak in and wreak havoc. Last night showed that we are a run first team, and what's wrong with that, especially with a rookie QB? Our O line mauled the Pack, who, yes, sucks at run D but still it was impressive the relative ease with which we were able to run the ball. And when called upon to throw, Weeden was sharp, accurate, and has a gun, and when the receivers held onto the ball, the offense hummed.

Everything in the league is cyclical. A great QB makes a huge difference, and that is especially true today. But the league constantly adjusts, and the pendulum could swing to great defenses, great running games, or great punters (in which case, Super Bowl).

The NFL isn't a farce... yet. And the Browns showed a little spark of life that gives us hope. Don't kill our precious preseason hope, not yet, not today. Let us live the fantasy for a week or two.

[Hikohadon]

The NFL isn't a farce... yet. And the Browns showed a little spark of life that gives us hope. Don't kill our precious preseason hope, not yet, not today. Let us live the fantasy for a week or two.

Not trying to kill anything, just stating that imho the way that the NFL is currently comprised, the Browns will only go as far as Brandon Weeden takes them.

[JCoz]

I guess I'm confused as to how this wasn't apparent before yesterday. We had the worst two defenses in the history of the Super Bowl competing for the Lombardi last season (statistically speaking), and history shows a clear need for an exceptional QB to win it all, exceptions to the rule noted.

[peeker643]

I thought Weeden was poised and solid. I mentioned the check downs too. Not sure if that was game plan to develop some confidence for OL or Weeden getting antsy and looking for easier throw. Run blocking was better. Can't get past thought that staff went that route to develop that confidence and give them successes to build on.

Saw big block by Pinkston on Jackson's 3rd and 8 nine yard run. Josh Gordon is starting to alarm me but a month ago he wasn't sure if or where he'd be playing. Doesn't mean he can't look engaged though.

[pup]

Sure, Weeden has a big arm, but I am pretty sure Pat's system is still going to be geared closer to short underneath routes. The opening of that stuff by having an arm that is able to beat you deep is more important than actually beating you deep.

[FUDU]

Hiko the trend is interesting to follow and will be for a a few seasons. The NFL is actually getting smaller, so that plays into this whole cyclical thing about the trends of the game. It doesn't change the fact that the QB will always be very important and that you'll need a very good one relatively speaking) to win (history supports that). But there will come a tipping point and being one of those first teams to tip it would be nice, you know to be ahead of the curve for a change instead of being 8 years behind it.

[Hikohadon]

I guess I'm confused as to how this wasn't apparent before yesterday. We had the worst two defenses in the history of the Super Bowl competing for the Lombardi last season (statistically speaking), and history shows a clear need for an exceptional QB to win it all, exceptions to the rule noted.

It was apparent, just not to this degree. I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

[FUDU]

I guess I'm confused as to how this wasn't apparent before yesterday. We had the worst two defenses in the history of the Super Bowl competing for the Lombardi last season (statistically speaking), and history shows a clear need for an exceptional QB to win it all, exceptions to the rule noted.

It was apparent, just not to this degree. I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

I don't feel it would unreasonable to also suggest it speaks of how coaching has really been amplified in this league. Having a system, knowing what it needs, and with some luck finding the perfect few pieces to work it.

Because really it only takes a few pieces.

[Hikohadon]

Of the "top" teams, how many wins do they have if they lose their starting QB for the season?

GB - 4
NE - I know they won 11 when Brady went down last time, but as currently apprised, 6
PIT - 8
NYG - 6
BAL - 10
HOU - 10
SF - 10
NO - 6

[skatingtripods]

Oneil Cousins just flagged again.

[JCoz]

I guess I'm confused as to how this wasn't apparent before yesterday. We had the worst two defenses in the history of the Super Bowl competing for the Lombardi last season (statistically speaking), and history shows a clear need for an exceptional QB to win it all, exceptions to the rule noted.

It was apparent, just not to this degree. I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

Meh.. I dont think they were that bad sans rodgers last year, They could have gone for 7-9 wins possibly with Flynn.

Yesterday they missing an awful lot of players and it remains to be seen just what that real team looks like. You can take very little away from a Preseason game like that.

[Hikohadon]

It certainly raises the question what Cleveland's record might be if Rodgers were the QB.

[JCoz]

I guess I'm confused as to how this wasn't apparent before yesterday. We had the worst two defenses in the history of the Super Bowl competing for the Lombardi last season (statistically speaking), and history shows a clear need for an exceptional QB to win it all, exceptions to the rule noted.

It was apparent, just not to this degree. I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

I don't feel it would unreasonable to also suggest it speaks of how coaching has really been amplified in this league. Having a system, knowing what it needs, and with some luck finding the perfect few pieces to work it.

Because really it only takes a few pieces.

This is just as true. Put Paddy in charge of San Fran last season and see how far they go.

[jb]

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

[Hikohadon]

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

[Rat_Tail]

I was watching the game online and it was through the Packers feed. Their announcers kept talking about Colt McCoy and how the Packers could become very interested in him if Harrell continues to blow.

So what's the lowest you take for Colt? Or would you rather the Browns hang on to him unless a team "overspends"

[jb]

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

Nope.

The pats and saints are also way too QB dependant, just like the Pack. They are all 4 - 5 win teams if those guys are out all season. That's how the NFL is now.

[Prosecutor]

I guess I'm confused as to how this wasn't apparent before yesterday. We had the worst two defenses in the history of the Super Bowl competing for the Lombardi last season (statistically speaking), and history shows a clear need for an exceptional QB to win it all, exceptions to the rule noted.

It was apparent, just not to this degree. I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

Last year they brought in Matt Flynn for two games and he had a QB rating of 124 vs Rodgers 122. Too small a sample size, but it shows that with a solid OL and a great receiving corps any QB can put up good numbers and win games. The GB announcers last night were saying the Packers have the best WRs in the league from top to bottom, and nobody else is even in the conversation. Exhibit 1 is Donald Driver, who doesn't even start.

They would still win a lot of games without Rodgers, as long as the backup was Flynn and not Harrell.

[Hikohadon]

I guess I'm confused as to how this wasn't apparent before yesterday. We had the worst two defenses in the history of the Super Bowl competing for the Lombardi last season (statistically speaking), and history shows a clear need for an exceptional QB to win it all, exceptions to the rule noted.

It was apparent, just not to this degree. I guess the Colts were another example last year, but I felt that was more an anomaly than the norm.

Green Bay is a legit 4 win team without Aaron Rodgers, but will win 12-14 games with him. That's just way too big a difference for one guy to make.

Last year they brought in Matt Flynn for two games and he had a QB rating of 124 vs Rodgers 122. Too small a sample size, but it shows that with a solid OL and a great receiving corps any QB can put up good numbers and win games. The GB announcers last night were saying the Packers have the best WRs in the league from top to bottom, and nobody else is even in the conversation. Exhibit 1 is Donald Driver, who doesn't even start.

They would still win a lot of games without Rodgers, as long as the backup was Flynn and not Harrell.

I ain't talkin' about GB of last year, I'm talking about THIS GB team.

You take Rodgers off THIS GB team, they win 4 games.

PS - GB does NOT have a solid line.

[Hikohadon]

Re-watching the game right now b/c I'm in a football mood and I don't have a lot going on. One play, focusing on Schwartz, he got beat and his feet moved at a speed that I haven't seen at RT in many a moon and recovered and got the guy blocked.

I need some video capture device to show the play, but it came about 9:30 left in 1Q on 3rd and 20 of the first drive.

Gives one hope.

Also, watching the Dolphins tonight some to see how Tannehill played (ah-ight), and struck by how slow they look compared to the Browns Defense last night. Those are words I thought I'd never say.

[Hikohadon]

To quote Bernie during the telecast when Graham Harrell was in the game:

"Not everybody is an Aaron Rodgers, but boy when you're not afraid, or when you don't have that fear of the QB, how you can just stuff the run and just stick it up in there and dare them to throw the ball... God, the safeties are like 7 yards, 8, 9 guys hovering around the line of scrimmage."

Which is the most plain analysis of why Colt isn't starting any more that I can think of.