Text Size

Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Talk Browns football and discuss the NFL here.

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:22 pm

FUDU wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:Problem is that it's harder than fuck to get an elite QB (I don't even see one on the horizon), so you gotta hope the guy you got is gonna be good enough. Probably he won't be, but that's just the nature of sport.


Exactly. You can't sit around all your life waiting for a no miss elite QB prospect to come out of the draft when you have to build a football team. There are at most only a handful of elite QBs in the league at any one time, it's inherent with the label. However there are still elite QBs that don't win a ring every year.

At some point you need to build the football team, and even if you don't have an elite QB it is still the most important position on the field, so you need to upgrade it if/when it's possible. Then you roll your TEAM out there and take your chances. Like the chicken and the egg, which came first the ring or the elite label.


I think there are 2 schools of thought coming into the 2012 Draft:

1. Pass on Weeden, go with Colt, keep sucking until you're in position to finally draft an elite QB.

2. Upgrade the position with Weeden even if he's not elite.

(There's probably also a third school of thought that says that Colt was good enough to be a starter, but that school of thought is Kindergarten at best, so I will ignore it.)

I think with any other position on the team, the guy you take at #22 doesn't have to be "elite" as long as he's an upgrade at a position of need (and QB was a need). A lot of people would've been fine drafting Kendall Wright knowing full well that he would likely never be an "elite" WR, just a good player.

But since there is the perception/reality that you need an "elite" QB to win a championship, then some people feel you're better off tanking until you can get one. And I don't know that they're wrong. (Although, how much would it suck to tank this season just to get your pick between Matt Barkley and Geno Smith? Yuck.)

Now, if you want your team to improve even though there's no "elite" QB available then there's no reason to oppose the Weeden pick since it was a clear upgrade at a position of need (and a very important position to boot). The danger with this approach, though, is reflected in the Houstons and Baltimores of the league.

I think what has some people frustrated is the damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't nature of this draft after Holmgren missed on trading up for RG3.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby bac5665 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:55 pm

I really like the '12 draft, except for trading up to get T-Rex. Everyone but Heckert knew that was a bluff, and given the quality we got for lower rounds picks this year, I'm even less ok with having given those picks away.

But the rest? Hell yeah. We got the 3rd best QB prospect in the draft (I know that others have had more short term success, I'm talking projections,) a great offensive piece in T-Rex and depth everywhere, which is something we've never had before.

Should we have had the 2nd pick? Yeah. But it isn't HeckGrin's fault that St. Lo is fucking stupid. Again, we offered more, and they turned us down. Stone cold dumb. It's not our fault that we missed by 1 pick on their poorly designed blind auction. I'll go to my grave blaming the Rams for that one, not our FO.
User avatar
bac5665
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:15 pm
Location: Columbus Ohio
Favorite Player: Jason Kipnis
Least Favorite Player: Bug Selig

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:13 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
FUDU wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:Problem is that it's harder than fuck to get an elite QB (I don't even see one on the horizon), so you gotta hope the guy you got is gonna be good enough. Probably he won't be, but that's just the nature of sport.


Exactly. You can't sit around all your life waiting for a no miss elite QB prospect to come out of the draft when you have to build a football team. There are at most only a handful of elite QBs in the league at any one time, it's inherent with the label. However there are still elite QBs that don't win a ring every year.

At some point you need to build the football team, and even if you don't have an elite QB it is still the most important position on the field, so you need to upgrade it if/when it's possible. Then you roll your TEAM out there and take your chances. Like the chicken and the egg, which came first the ring or the elite label.


I think there are 2 schools of thought coming into the 2012 Draft:

1. Pass on Weeden, go with Colt, keep sucking until you're in position to finally draft an elite QB.

2. Upgrade the position with Weeden even if he's not elite.

(There's probably also a third school of thought that says that Colt was good enough to be a starter, but that school of thought is Kindergarten at best, so I will ignore it.)

I think with any other position on the team, the guy you take at #22 doesn't have to be "elite" as long as he's an upgrade at a position of need (and QB was a need). A lot of people would've been fine drafting Kendall Wright knowing full well that he would likely never be an "elite" WR, just a good player.

But since there is the perception/reality that you need an "elite" QB to win a championship, then some people feel you're better off tanking until you can get one. And I don't know that they're wrong. (Although, how much would it suck to tank this season just to get your pick between Matt Barkley and Geno Smith? Yuck.)

Now, if you want your team to improve even though there's no "elite" QB available then there's no reason to oppose the Weeden pick since it was a clear upgrade at a position of need (and a very important position to boot). The danger with this approach, though, is reflected in the Houstons and Baltimores of the league.

I think what has some people frustrated is the damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't nature of this draft after Holmgren missed on trading up for RG3.


Well, you virtually disqualified #1 by pointing out the "Meh-ness" of Barkley and Geno. Were we gonna go '12 & '13 with Colt-like performances at QB? I'm not sure that's tenable.

That said, if Swerb gets his wish, and Chip Kelly comes here, who's up for an Alex Smith/Geno Smith combo? :hic: :gah:
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Tue Dec 11, 2012 5:25 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:That said, if Swerb gets his wish, and Chip Kelly comes here, who's up for an Alex Smith/Geno Smith combo? :hic: :gah:


Ugh. Ye Gods.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby comish » Tue Dec 11, 2012 9:50 pm

Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Not trying to be a dick or a pessimist.

Well you sure as hell depress the shit out of me...you and Hiko both

JFC, just jump already

You're all like..."Hope is a moment now long past. The Shadow of Death is the one I cast"

No fucking lollipops for you


That quote is inspiring. Thank you.

Here's another one: "Hope in one hand and shit in the other and tell me which hand fills up faster." -Anon

Oh... I was in a store the other day that sells all kind of jerky and shit. They had gravy flavored lollipops. Beef, chicken and turkey (though I personally have difficulty distinguishing between chicken and turkey gravy, but I digress). I nearly puked just reading the label.


Well see that's where you go off the tracks.... I have no hope...I only have what I see

...and as for the pile of shit, I once dropped a load so big it took an entire company of Marines to conquer and put a flag on

..but I digress....

Who would you and Hiko have drafted with the 2 st rndrs last draft?

Where would this team be right now without TR and Weeds?

Who would be the QB?


/\ EXACTLY

Peeks, I love you man, but sometimes that very thinly veiled "The Browns never get anything right" agenda gets in the way of reality on the field.

This team is better....much better, and it is largely due to what the brass did in the offseason.

Are we REALLY still advocating the pick of Blackmon or Wright with Colt soft tossing them the ball?

Yikes

Be honest, when you are NOT sitting in a tree or driving to the ends of humanity for one of your kids' tournies, isn't this team MUCH MORE watchable now?

I couldn't take one more year of Colt...not even one more minute
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:36 pm

There are plenty of mediocre QBs in the world. You didn't need to get yours with the 22nd pick in the entire draft. And I said they're better. I said TRich is a good player who will get better with health. If you have a leaky roof and pay twice what you should for a new one you're better off and still an idiot. At least you're not getting wet. ;-) ;) :wink:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:39 pm

To answer the question, yes, they are more watchable. Again, that would be the case had they replaced last year's roster with the cast of Mike & Molly.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:11 am

peeker643 wrote:There are plenty of mediocre QBs in the world. You didn't need to get yours with the 22nd pick in the entire draft. And I said they're better. I said TRich is a good player who will get better with health. If you have a leaky roof and pay twice what you should for a new one you're better off and still an idiot. At least you're not getting wet. ;-) ;) :wink:

After a couple months, though, you stop beating yourself up about it.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:17 pm

Way to much is being made of him being the 22nd pick

Is someone really suggesting that a QB capable of winning a SB HAS to be had at the top of the 1st, never the bottom or the middle?

Then we hear that peeps around the league are only suggesting he's in the wrong system...which puts the onus on the HC in my book ...and as a result the frightening/meh/maybeagood thing possibilty that McDaniels would be the new HC because the system they suggest is what NE is running...and dumber than Weeden have looked worse early on and still succeeded.... C - A - T

Peeks' problem is he's surrounded by women.... but he is to be commended for remianing as manly as manly possible in his situation

Usually its marshmellows like mother who have 3 daughters... :thumb up: ... at least peek gets to go out and kill things on occasion...he's just confused here because he really doesn't have the time to think clearly being beholden to 4 women at one time....

The thought of which should scare the beejeebers out of everyone else
User avatar
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0
 
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:18 pm
Favorite Player: Killer Bean
Least Favorite Player: Alleghany Inbreds

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:50 pm

Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Is someone really suggesting that a QB capable of winning a SB HAS to be had at the top of the 1st, never the bottom or the middle?


My question is 'was Eli Manning an elite QB before February 2008?'
"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT
User avatar
Madre Hill, Superstar
Eternal Optimist
 
Posts: 4656
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:06 am
Location: Parma, OH
Favorite Player: The Playa
Least Favorite Player: The Game

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby e0y2e3 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:13 pm

Eli was elite during that playoff run. Very elite.
“Irony is wasted on the stupid” - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
e0y2e3
Et Tu, Brute?
 
Posts: 13982
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:41 pm
Favorite Player: Prosecutor
Least Favorite Player: motherscratcher

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:14 pm

Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Way to much is being made of him being the 22nd pick

Is someone really suggesting that a QB capable of winning a SB HAS to be had at the top of the 1st, never the bottom or the middle?



No sir. I'm not saying a SB winner can't come from any part of the draft, etc. I'm saying Weeden isn't good enough win SB, by the time you have a team capable of helping him he'll be retired and living in Boca and there were plenty of options between Colt and Weeden that wouldn't have cost what Weeden cost. People act like choice was either Colt or Weeden and that's an effing lie.


Last time-
Team is more watchable
Weeden>Colt
TRich is good back who will be more than that when healthy

Weeden wasn't worth #22 and TRich not worth trading 3 picks to move up a spot.

Keep deficit spending or doing stupid shit and it costs you. It doesn't cost you less just because the shit you had before was really shitty.

You guys are starting to remind me of Buckeye honks. ;-) ;) :wink:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:08 pm

Needs more male bonding ^^^^^
User avatar
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0
 
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:18 pm
Favorite Player: Killer Bean
Least Favorite Player: Alleghany Inbreds

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:37 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Way to much is being made of him being the 22nd pick

Is someone really suggesting that a QB capable of winning a SB HAS to be had at the top of the 1st, never the bottom or the middle?



No sir. I'm not saying a SB winner can't come from any part of the draft, etc. I'm saying Weeden isn't good enough win SB, by the time you have a team capable of helping him he'll be retired and living in Boca and there were plenty of options between Colt and Weeden that wouldn't have cost what Weeden cost. People act like choice was either Colt or Weeden and that's an effing lie.


Last time-
Team is more watchable
Weeden>Colt
TRich is good back who will be more than that when healthy

Weeden wasn't worth #22 and TRich not worth trading 3 picks to move up a spot.

Keep deficit spending or doing stupid shit and it costs you. It doesn't cost you less just because the shit you had before was really shitty.

You guys are starting to remind me of Buckeye honks. ;-) ;) :wink:


Could you elaborate on these other options from the offseason? Flynn? Kolb? If that's what you're referring to, then I'll take Weeds.
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Dec 12, 2012 5:05 pm

e0y2e3 wrote:Eli was elite during that playoff run. Very elite.


Let me rephrase it then, was Eli elite before that playoff run?
"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT
User avatar
Madre Hill, Superstar
Eternal Optimist
 
Posts: 4656
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:06 am
Location: Parma, OH
Favorite Player: The Playa
Least Favorite Player: The Game

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Dec 12, 2012 5:59 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Way to much is being made of him being the 22nd pick

Is someone really suggesting that a QB capable of winning a SB HAS to be had at the top of the 1st, never the bottom or the middle?



No sir. I'm not saying a SB winner can't come from any part of the draft, etc. I'm saying Weeden isn't good enough win SB, by the time you have a team capable of helping him he'll be retired and living in Boca and there were plenty of options between Colt and Weeden that wouldn't have cost what Weeden cost. People act like choice was either Colt or Weeden and that's an effing lie.


Last time-
Team is more watchable
Weeden>Colt
TRich is good back who will be more than that when healthy

Weeden wasn't worth #22 and TRich not worth trading 3 picks to move up a spot.

Keep deficit spending or doing stupid shit and it costs you. It doesn't cost you less just because the shit you had before was really shitty.

You guys are starting to remind me of Buckeye honks. ;-) ;) :wink:


Could you elaborate on these other options from the offseason? Flynn? Kolb? If that's what you're referring to, then I'll take Weeds.


Shee-it, I've been asking him to do that since the draft.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby e0y2e3 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:55 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
e0y2e3 wrote:Eli was elite during that playoff run. Very elite.


Let me rephrase it then, was Eli elite before that playoff run?


Eli always had the potential to be elite and when he realized that potential he won a Super Bowl. When he regressed he didn't (post '08) and when he got back to his peak last year he did again.
“Irony is wasted on the stupid” - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
e0y2e3
Et Tu, Brute?
 
Posts: 13982
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:41 pm
Favorite Player: Prosecutor
Least Favorite Player: motherscratcher

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby leadpipe » Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:19 pm

e0y2e3 wrote:
Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
e0y2e3 wrote:Eli was elite during that playoff run. Very elite.


Let me rephrase it then, was Eli elite before that playoff run?


Eli always had the potential to be elite and when he realized that potential he won a Super Bowl. When he regressed he didn't (post '08) and when he got back to his peak last year he did again.


Not sure what the logic is in starting this argument again.

Cause we can point to a guy who wasn't elite before, than was during the run like Eli, or we can shout Trent Dilfer!!!.....or we can look and see that about every other guy that either won that GD game - or played in it, was a Hall of Famer or playing at an MVP level that season.

Not sure why someone feeling Brandon Weeden ain't gonna be good enough to be in that game is being met with guff. Christ, MOST guys ain't good enough.

In the NFL, head Coach and QB combinations trump all - which is why Gary Kubiak/Matt Schaub got stomped last night, and won't get past the Beli/Brady, Fox/Manni, Tomlin/BB combos in the playoffs - no matter how good "Adrian Foster, RB" is.

And it's also why the Browns, with improved talent, and a SOFT schedule still can't win many games. A boob coach and a rookie QB trump the rest of the squad.

And you run through the passing game. Average yards per carry is at about an all-time high - cause everyone besides the Browns and Jets are running it the 2012 way, and NOBODY is drafting RB high - let along mortagaging picks for them, cause the position can be filled with 5th GD rounders.

Again, not worth going apeshit over, cause we'll all get to see Weeden for another 16 next year. And the guy clearly has more potential than Colt. Makes em' more watchable because of this. But I'd imagine if Colt was the QB this season we'd have 3-5 wins, and be a pretty shitty team. Kinda like this year. And if we'da picked up some rummy in free agency we'd have about 3-5 wins.

Bottom line though, is you need to be GOOD, not servicable. I'm afraid the last dozen shit years at QB has some of us looking at Weeden in a pretty bright light. Yeas, compared to that there's hope - compared to the real playas, I'm not so sure.

So, it's arguable how good Weeden will eventually be, what's not arguable is that you aren't "getting by with a game manager" unless you want to aim your goals at the exceptions, rather than the rule.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6617
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby comish » Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:35 pm

leadpipe wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
comish wrote:
Draft is looking like a solid B+ if not A now, huh pal? :salute:


No, it's not. Not in my opinion. The players are okay, but the acquisition costs have to be considered.

I like TRich just fine, but Doug Martin & Alfred Morris, et al are exhibit A why you don't trade away picks to move up a spot for a RB. I think TRich is fine, but the principle doesn't change. And you know my thoughts on Weeden. Schwartz has been excellent, JMJ has done nothing, John Hughes was a reach who has contributed nominally, Gordon has to be considered a 2013 2nd rounder (though it was a great move and one I liked when they made it), Travis Benjamin has been meh and Ryan Miller/Emanuelle Acho haven't contributed a thing. Billy Wynn has been okay.

Again, this roster was so pathetic in years before this that I think too may people are excited about finding midgets in a box of pygmies.

Not trying to be a dick or a pessimist. This team is better. It is on the "upswing". But a lot of that is because of how far down they were before.


That first round woulda been great when Mike Holmgren was on the sideline. For the year 20 and 12 it was awful.


It's "awful" when you net an RB that is about to break the club record for yards as a rookie?

Good Christ, man, I'm starting to think you took a hideous poker beat from somebody high up in the Browns organization.
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:36 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Way to much is being made of him being the 22nd pick

Is someone really suggesting that a QB capable of winning a SB HAS to be had at the top of the 1st, never the bottom or the middle?



No sir. I'm not saying a SB winner can't come from any part of the draft, etc. I'm saying Weeden isn't good enough win SB, by the time you have a team capable of helping him he'll be retired and living in Boca and there were plenty of options between Colt and Weeden that wouldn't have cost what Weeden cost. People act like choice was either Colt or Weeden and that's an effing lie.


Last time-
Team is more watchable
Weeden>Colt
TRich is good back who will be more than that when healthy

Weeden wasn't worth #22 and TRich not worth trading 3 picks to move up a spot.

Keep deficit spending or doing stupid shit and it costs you. It doesn't cost you less just because the shit you had before was really shitty.

You guys are starting to remind me of Buckeye honks. ;-) ;) :wink:


Could you elaborate on these other options from the offseason? Flynn? Kolb? If that's what you're referring to, then I'll take Weeds.


Shee-it, I've been asking him to do that since the draft.



And it's still pointless today to specify. You want better than Colt? Go down any roster, go through the draft with not only Luck, RG3, Tannehill, Weeden, Osweiler, Wilson, Cousins, et al. Go anywhere you want. Flynn woulda been better, Matt Moore woulda been better, guys like Mallet, McElroy, Carr, Alex Smith, Orton, Hanie, Clemens, etc.

All of them placeholders at worst, better than or no worse than Colt, none of them likely to cost anything close to 22 in the draft, some with potential. Free agents, trade opps, younger than or same age as Weeden.

All of whom would likely get you 3-5 wins just like Weeden will have at the end of the season.

Now, if you want to tell me that there was absolutely no one available other than Weeden at #22 I guess we'll have to part ways.

What's always conveniently forgotten is I'm fine with giving him next year because, as I also said, he needs it and he's earned it, but you're going to lose all credibility with me (which matters not, I understand) if you tell me Weeden at #22 was their only choice and that no one else out there gives you what that 29-yr old does.

Dime-a-dozen when we look back in ten years. Better than Colt though. Yee Haa!

Yet I'll be rooting for him hard on Sunday like everyone else.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby leadpipe » Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:45 pm

comish wrote:
leadpipe wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
comish wrote:
Draft is looking like a solid B+ if not A now, huh pal? :salute:


No, it's not. Not in my opinion. The players are okay, but the acquisition costs have to be considered.

I like TRich just fine, but Doug Martin & Alfred Morris, et al are exhibit A why you don't trade away picks to move up a spot for a RB. I think TRich is fine, but the principle doesn't change. And you know my thoughts on Weeden. Schwartz has been excellent, JMJ has done nothing, John Hughes was a reach who has contributed nominally, Gordon has to be considered a 2013 2nd rounder (though it was a great move and one I liked when they made it), Travis Benjamin has been meh and Ryan Miller/Emanuelle Acho haven't contributed a thing. Billy Wynn has been okay.

Again, this roster was so pathetic in years before this that I think too may people are excited about finding midgets in a box of pygmies.

Not trying to be a dick or a pessimist. This team is better. It is on the "upswing". But a lot of that is because of how far down they were before.


That first round woulda been great when Mike Holmgren was on the sideline. For the year 20 and 12 it was awful.


It's "awful" when you net an RB that is about to break the club record for yards as a rookie?

Good Christ, man, I'm starting to think you took a hideous poker beat from somebody high up in the Browns organization.


It's actually perfect that in 2012 someone on the Browns is breaking a rushing record. In an era when anyone but a God Damned fool is moving the ball thru the air - cause every single rule favors it - here's the Browns getting it 4 yards at a time.

Ask he Vikings how many championships they've won on the back of the best RB of recent years? How many playoff appearances?

Again, you can legally hold pass blocking, you can't touch a receiver, you can't touch the QB, hard hitting safeties are becoming extinct - the middle is open.

That's why you don't draft a running back first round - let alone trade up.

His peak at that position will be about 4-5 years.

That's why you don't draft a running back first round - let alone trade up.

Teams in recent years that are offensive juggernauts - Super Bowl teams are either A. Amongst the worst rushing teams in the league or B. Rushing with guys you've never heard of.

That's why you don't draft a running back first round-let alone trade up.

I've said all along, Trent Richardson will be a good running back.

It just doesn't matter.

Really, what is Trent Richardson and his 3.5 yards a carry doing for the 2012 Browns. If you replaced him with the league average you'd have the same GD team.

Rather have Alex Mack - a center - at his spot in the draft over being duped into giving up draft picks for a dinosaur position any day of the week. You can enjoy your running back in a passing league for 4 years, I'll enjoy my center in a passing league for 12.

So really, no poker bad beat, just up to date on how the game is working nowadays, how the ball is being moved, and how points are scored.

We celebrated T Rich's first NFL touchdown against the Bengals for all of about ten seconds - until Red hit some slot receiver we never heard of for the answer. If a total numbskull like Marvin Lewis is catching on, I'm sure we all will one day.

FWIW the Jets would probably move up for a RB as well. so you got that high powered O on your side.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6617
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby comish » Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:22 am

And I'm going to contest that obsolete or not, you STILL need a guy you can rely on to carry the ball. (Not to mention that the dude can CATCH the ball out of the backfield which is a nice weapon to have)

I play FF, I watch all the games, I KNOW how teams are moving the ball nowadays, and that you need a stud QB to cash in just about any league....not to mention at least ONE PPR machine receiver.

BUT

You still need a runner, should they have drafted him that high? Shrugs. It was one of 4 or 5 glaring needs on this team and they filled it with that pick, AND THEN PRECEEDED TO FILL (IMO effectively) MOST OF THEIR OTHER GLARING NEEDS AFTER. I'm still waiting to hear the name of the guy you boys think they should have drafted at that spot and am prepared to snicker now that the games have been played.

You also have to take into consideration that the brass NEEDED to make a splash...the fan base was near revolt. Taking T Rich and the Weed man helped energize that base....look at the attendace at training camp. You(and Lombardi)may call this panic...I call it business.

If Weeds doesn't make improvements next season, I will take my pummeling for this stance, but don't ya think, LP, that maybe, just maybe.....they got it more right than wrong this time?
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:40 am

Way too may bright people confusing 'better' with 'good' and letting that cloud both their memory and their perspective IMO.

'Better' is easy. Easier yet when the comps are Colt and Agent Hillis.

If better is good enough, congrats, you should be happy. Because they are better. They're not just not better than they could have been and not good enough to matter at the next level.

IMO (and it was when it happened) their best move was the Gordon move. Got them a potentially elite receiver and assured us they can't fuck up their 2nd round pick in April. That's perfect.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby comish » Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:45 am

They might be "good" with a coach who isn't a complete rube.....just sayin

Had they done things differently are you saying they would be headed to the playoffs?
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:51 am

comish wrote:They might be "good" with a coach who isn't a complete rube.....just sayin

Had they done things differently are you saying they would be headed to the playoffs?


That is a part of it for sure.

And, no, they wouldn't be headed to the playoffs with a better draft, this coach and no free agent signings before the year started. But they'd be better positioned to be there next year and beyond and they'd potentially have a far younger and more talented roster had #4 and #22 gone a different route.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby comish » Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:06 am

Still waiting for that pick at 4 that would have accomplished this for ya

For a 40 something you certainly are pretty hard on near retirement rookie QBs

The Browns will be the trendy pick to make the playoffs next year, by more than a few "experts"....you watch
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:22 am

comish wrote:Still waiting for that pick at 4 that would have accomplished this for ya

For a 40 something you certainly are pretty hard on near retirement rookie QBs

The Browns will be the trendy pick to make the playoffs next year, by more than a few "experts"....you watch


What are you waiting for? Anyone at #4 who wasn't a bust makes them better. Christ, they could have just taken Richardson there.

And that's what it's all about? Being some experts' trendy pick?

Sounds like you are more interested in not blowing and having some favorable national press than actually maximizing the picks and getting good as opposed to better.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby motherscratcher » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:34 am

Only guy I can think of on the radar at 4 would have been Mo Claiborne. That wouldn't ave been too bad, especially considering that vaste wasteland of suck the DAbs were for half the season there. But I'm not going to complain about TR there.

In real time I wasn't happy about them trading up a spot. It seemed unnecessary because TR probably would have been there regardless, and like LP says, it's not the most important position. In hind site, though, I'm not sure how much it hurt losing those picks. There are only so many spots on a roster. And we already have 4 college FAs.

I'm not sure we can assume tat those draft picks would have gotten us much different than Fort, Cooper, Gipson, and Bademosi anyway. Hell, those guys might have been the picks.

That doesn't make it a good decision in real time.
According to my sources CDT farts in the tub and bites the bubbles.
User avatar
motherscratcher
Little Larry Sellers
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: La La Land
Favorite Player: Ernie Camacho
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:41 am

leadpipe wrote:Not sure what the logic is in starting this argument again.


The logic is if comparing Brandon Weeden now to Eli Manning before he became Eli Manning, Super Bowl MVP.

Bottom line though, is you need to be GOOD, not servicable. I'm afraid the last dozen shit years at QB has some of us looking at Weeden in a pretty bright light. Yeas, compared to that there's hope - compared to the real playas, I'm not so sure.

So, it's arguable how good Weeden will eventually be, what's not arguable is that you aren't "getting by with a game manager" unless you want to aim your goals at the exceptions, rather than the rule.


Yup. I just think its arguable how good Weeds could eventually be and if that's good enough. The bar - which IMO is Eli / Roethlisberger - isn't completely out of his reach. Build him a team of players one through forty-five, he doesn't have to carry the team nearly as perfectly as Brady or Brees, and we'll find out if he's more Eli than Flacco.
"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT
User avatar
Madre Hill, Superstar
Eternal Optimist
 
Posts: 4656
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:06 am
Location: Parma, OH
Favorite Player: The Playa
Least Favorite Player: The Game

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby FUDU » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:01 am

I'm waiting for Richardson to be 100% healthy.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:06 am

peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Way to much is being made of him being the 22nd pick

Is someone really suggesting that a QB capable of winning a SB HAS to be had at the top of the 1st, never the bottom or the middle?



No sir. I'm not saying a SB winner can't come from any part of the draft, etc. I'm saying Weeden isn't good enough win SB, by the time you have a team capable of helping him he'll be retired and living in Boca and there were plenty of options between Colt and Weeden that wouldn't have cost what Weeden cost. People act like choice was either Colt or Weeden and that's an effing lie.


Last time-
Team is more watchable
Weeden>Colt
TRich is good back who will be more than that when healthy

Weeden wasn't worth #22 and TRich not worth trading 3 picks to move up a spot.

Keep deficit spending or doing stupid shit and it costs you. It doesn't cost you less just because the shit you had before was really shitty.

You guys are starting to remind me of Buckeye honks. ;-) ;) :wink:


Could you elaborate on these other options from the offseason? Flynn? Kolb? If that's what you're referring to, then I'll take Weeds.


Shee-it, I've been asking him to do that since the draft.



And it's still pointless today to specify. You want better than Colt? Go down any roster, go through the draft with not only Luck, RG3, Tannehill, Weeden, Osweiler, Wilson, Cousins, et al. Go anywhere you want. Flynn woulda been better, Matt Moore woulda been better, guys like Mallet, McElroy, Carr, Alex Smith, Orton, Hanie, Clemens, etc.

All of them placeholders at worst, better than or no worse than Colt, none of them likely to cost anything close to 22 in the draft, some with potential. Free agents, trade opps, younger than or same age as Weeden.

All of whom would likely get you 3-5 wins just like Weeden will have at the end of the season.

Now, if you want to tell me that there was absolutely no one available other than Weeden at #22 I guess we'll have to part ways.

What's always conveniently forgotten is I'm fine with giving him next year because, as I also said, he needs it and he's earned it, but you're going to lose all credibility with me (which matters not, I understand) if you tell me Weeden at #22 was their only choice and that no one else out there gives you what that 29-yr old does.

Dime-a-dozen when we look back in ten years. Better than Colt though. Yee Haa!

Yet I'll be rooting for him hard on Sunday like everyone else.


Translation - I don't have an answer/there is no answer.

Certainly understand that "Better Than Colt" doesn't mean good enough.

But you dance around the answer like it's a maypole (again). Just say "I would rather have signed Matt Flynn than drafted Weeden" or "I would rather have waited and drafted Brock Osweiler than drafted Weeden" if that's how you feel. We don't give a shit about your list of people that are "Better Than Colt" - what's your list for available options that were "Better Than Weeden"?
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby FUDU » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:39 am

peeker643 wrote:
Better than Colt though. Yee Haa!



Why you gotta be like that.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:45 am

Personally, I'd rather have Tannehill (and I'm not a huge fan of his though I do see a lot more upside with him over Weeden if also more flopability) and Doug Martin than Weeden TRich. I'd rather have Kalil/Martin or TRich/DeCastro. Hell, I'd rather have Kalil/DeCastro and then Weeden at 37 if you prefer.

I'd rather have Flynn and all my picks. I didn't like Weeden coming out for a myriad of reasons, all of which have been discussed.

I would have looked hard at dealing for a guy on another roster like Mallet/etc or insert name here and letting him watch Flynn for the first year while I drafted OL/RB/whatever. I would have kicked tires on Alex Smith too (and maybe they did).

I liked Martin and David Wilson coming out.

I said it before that Weeden was a pick that was more about saving someone's front office ass then it was for the long term or immediate benefit of the team on the field. I said it when we were sitting at Wright place when I didn't have benefit of hindsight.

Weeden is 'meh' and 22nd pick isn't where I would have drafted 'meh'. I would have probably had to think long and hard at 22 if other options had failed and I sincerely believe he would have been there. Look at the picks and teams between 22 and 37 and tell me who takes him.

On second thought, don't. It doesn't matter other than to say I don't think he's the answer there and that he'll ultimately show that to be the case.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:08 pm

Is there even one smidgeon of a take anywhere in cyberspace that suggests Flynn would have signed with the cesspool known as the Cleveland Browns?

People mocked Pete Carroll for his 1st round pick last draft...he has 9 sacks on arguably the best D in the league and if the Browns could look and play next yr like the Seahawks are doing right now,I'd be a happy man

Browns fans need to quit thinking and talking about the SB and who is a good enuff QB to get them there and be happy this team is looking better as the yr drags out
User avatar
Fire Marshall Bill 2.0
 
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:18 pm
Favorite Player: Killer Bean
Least Favorite Player: Alleghany Inbreds

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:22 pm

Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:Is there even one smidgeon of a take anywhere in cyberspace that suggests Flynn would have signed with the cesspool known as the Cleveland Browns?

People mocked Pete Carroll for his 1st round pick last draft...he has 9 sacks on arguably the best D in the league and if the Browns could look and play next yr like the Seahawks are doing right now,I'd be a happy man

Browns fans need to quit thinking and talking about the SB and who is a good enuff QB to get them there and be happy this team is looking better as the yr drags out


I think they could've signed him, but it would've cost them a pretty penny. He would not have been a cheap option. But, yes, that would've allowed them to take DeCastro or someone else at 22 instead of Weeden.

Personally, I'd rather Weeden than Flynn any day of the week, but if one feels that there's no chance that Weeden gets it done then I guess it doesn't matter the degree of failure between Weeden and Flynn.

Tannehill/Martin vs. Weeden/Richardson is a wash to me. Tanny has more upside, but also could be a bigger bust. He's been better than I thought he'd be, but since I thought he'd be Gabbert that's not saying much. I don't see him as a SB QB either, so I don't see us any better off having gone Tanny/Martin than what we did.

But I can see where one might and I respect that opinion.

EDIT - Peeks, were Flynn and Tannehill the only 2 options you'd have preferred?
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby comish » Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:35 pm

peeker643 wrote:
comish wrote:Still waiting for that pick at 4 that would have accomplished this for ya

For a 40 something you certainly are pretty hard on near retirement rookie QBs

The Browns will be the trendy pick to make the playoffs next year, by more than a few "experts"....you watch


What are you waiting for? Anyone at #4 who wasn't a bust makes them better. Christ, they could have just taken Richardson there.

And that's what it's all about? Being some experts' trendy pick?

Sounds like you are more interested in not blowing and having some favorable national press than actually maximizing the picks and getting good as opposed to better.


Maybe my thought process isn't going from brain to hand properly

I don't give a doughnut whether or not they are a trendy pick EITHER, but you are contesting that they would be closer to contention for the playoffs had they gone in a different route, and I guess I am saying that I disagree, AND I won't be alone. I believe this team will be "good" and even "better" next year.....if that makes me a fool and a homer than so be it.

You and Lead trying to get on Lombardi's staff for next year? ;-) ;) :wink:
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
User avatar
comish
Champion of Mediocrity
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: A local Pub

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:21 pm

Hiko- Preface this by saying after RG3 and Luck I don't think ANY of the QBs were a good option. Better than Colt? Yes. But not in and of themselves an option that are going to be long term. That's why I would have gone hard for a rostered guy and let that guy be the placeholder in under this coach. And that's a big part of why I wanted no QB. I don't think this staff is truly capable of developing one while all this other ancillary crap is going on. It was the totality of the situation and the absence of the guy who was so good he could overcome all of that that made me prefer no QB be drafted, especially in the 1st round. And that includes Tannehill.

That said, I think Tannehill, if you're definitely taking a QB in the draft come hell or high water, had the most upside after the top 2. He's an elite athlete, above average arm, etc. I think in that regard he would have been a better option than Weeden. Mix in the age factor....

Flynn's a guy. He showed he could play a bit when conditions (offense) was optimal. That wouldn't have been the case here and he would have been between 3-5 wins like anyone else.

And while I'm not harping on age it made (makes) no sense to me to bring in a 29 yr old rookie knowing there's a good chance that the offense he learns this year and the coach that teaches it to him is going to change. I get why the Trio did it but it was ass-saving move IMO. Now he's likely to be 30 and learning again and I'm also not sold on him being an advanced mind in terms of that learning. Yes, he'll understand NFL defenses and the speed of the game and that's necessary. But he should understand the speed part by now and he still holds the ball too long or actually drifts into pressure at times.

The point being they could have plugged in almost anyone and they could have found a QB via free agency or trade. Even if you keep everything else the same and sub DeCastro for Weeden you have TRich, Decastro, Schwartz, Gordon. You eliminate one of Pinkston Lauvao in favor of DeCastro and you put a guy under center you know is going to be marginal (as Weeden has been with some good and some bad) and you're much better off for longer than the way the went.

I'm not saying they're not better. Believe me. I see development and growth and talent. But I think they're farther along had Holmgren not tried to save his job with the Weeden move.

That's why specific names aren't used regarding QB options. Nearly anyone would have been an upgrade IMO and you could have furthered your development.

All opinion. I reserve the right to delete this when Weeden is All-Pro.

I'm not arguing at all they're not better. They are. And I guess that's the important thing. I just think the Weeden pick retarded the growth and development of the talent base to a degree.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:13 pm

I just don't know how you can blame Holmgren/Heckert from trying to save their asses/jobs by upgrading the QB position. What you preferred they would have done is career suicide. You can't expect these guys to put what's best for the team ahead of what's best for them.

They knew perfectly well that entering the 2012 season with Colt McCoy at QB was the same as walking into Lerner's office and taking a dump on his desk. Lerner's such a tool that he STILL might not have done anything, but in the NFL you can only fail for so bad for so long before you get canned (unless your name is Norv).

When you're desperate to win, you make desperate moves. You don't worry about the long term when you've got to win in the short term to survive.

Regardless, I think that when RG3 and Luck stopped being possibilities, it was pick your poison at the QB position. Some poisons just led to nastier deaths than others.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Gradysmanldy » Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:46 pm

I think Tannehill would have been exactly the same as trotting out Colt this year and for the future; he performed well in early part of the season because he was already familiar (to an extent) with the offense and there wasn't a book on him. Last few weeks have been a complete car wreck.

Would have been a complete car wreck from day 1 in this system, with this coach. Doug Martin (if he wasn't even on the browns board) wouldn't have made enough of a difference in the on-the-field product to make it palatable, and i'm reasonably sure the trio knew it.

I think that the level of play Weeden has shown over the last 5-6 weeks is what they expected from him; I think they expected to have a more functional run game (similar to the 2010 team) and enough offense to get by in the short dink and dunk/short slant/screen game to mask Weedens shortcomings. I think they reasonably expected to get 6-7 wins with that mentality and have enough growth to justify keeping their jobs.

Richardsons lack of explosive play making ability in the second half of the season combined with Haden's suspsension and injuries to the d-line submarined that effort; they had to rely on the pass, which left them sinking or swimming with Weeden.....and Weeds worst flaw, that i've seen, is how he performs in the 3/4th quarters with the game on the line. Against the Giants, Eagles, Bills, Cincy, Ravens1, Colts.....when teams know he's passing, his accuracy goes out the door. Might be the pressure, might be the inadequacy of the system.

I said at the draft and i'll say again; Weeden with 37 would have been fine, by me. He's definitely going through a tough spell and hitting the wall right now, and I thought he regressed on a lot of drives against KC in the first half and Oakland, but he's still done nothing to suggest he can't eclipse Flacco as a qb....and again, that Ravens team was a dropped pass away from playing for all the chips.

At this point I'd say he's just as good of a passer as any of the other rookies, which is absolutely saying something given where he should have been drafted; question is going to be whether he's as stupid as I think he might be, at which point we'll be looking at trading up for the flavor du jour in the 2014 draft. (I don't think we'll be in the top 5 of the draft after next season, so it's going to take some extra cheese)

Worst case scenario is that we DO get a solid HC/GM combo in here for next season, and that combined with the development of the supporting cast that we expect to see (Little, Gordon, Trich, DB's) will keep us in Cincy/Seattle/NYJ purgatory mode where we CANT lure the FA or get the high pick we need.

It's a crazy system, for sure.

</ramble>
Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.
User avatar
Gradysmanldy
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:58 pm
Favorite Player: Melts Parmageddon
Least Favorite Player: The East Coast media

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby bac5665 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:03 pm

Gradysmanldy wrote:Worst case scenario is that we DO get a solid HC/GM combo in here for next season, and that combined with the development of the supporting cast that we expect to see (Little, Gordon, Trich, DB's) will keep us in Cincy/Seattle/NYJ purgatory mode where we CANT lure the FA or get the high pick we need.

It's a crazy system, for sure.

</ramble>


That's actually closer to the best case scenario. The worst case scenario is that they fire Heckert and replace him with someone worse, i.e. average or worse, and we replace Shurmur with another bad H.C, which again, is the average one. Then we're screwed for 2-5 years with this rebuild as dead as Mangini's was. Why can't we hire a team president the same year we hire a FO? That would be great, instead of this every other year crap.
User avatar
bac5665
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:15 pm
Location: Columbus Ohio
Favorite Player: Jason Kipnis
Least Favorite Player: Bug Selig

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:06 pm

Hiko- I said it was a desperate move and I said I know why they made it. That doesn't make it a good move or one I'm willing to live with in terms of the player represented by it. Not that I have choice. But it doesn't mean I'm going to like it or endorse it or find something that's not there just because Weeden>Colt.

Gradys- Might just be me but I'm not all that comfortable with a QB who falls to pieces when he has to pass. That's kind of a buzz kill for me in looking at QBs ;-) ;) :wink:

I also fail to see how Martin would have provided less than what Richardson has, injuries and coaching fully considered. TRich has averaged 3.5 yards per carry. Which is 41st out of 46 guys with 85 carries or more. I mean, that's Daniel THomas and Michael Bush production.

I disagree a guy like Martin wouldn't have made enough of an impact on the field. TRich has made a very minor impact on the field and he's heralded here. Productive players make an impact and are palatable.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:03 pm

peeker643 wrote:That doesn't make it a good move or one I'm willing to live with in terms of the player represented by it. Not that I have choice.


No, we don't. We have to live with it no matter how we feel about it.

And since the alternatives were a cup of the same poison... [shrug]

I think that Weeden's cardinal sin was that he was Matt Schaub in a draft that also contained Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. And apparently you can't win a title in the NFL anymore with a Matt Schaub.
Last edited by Hikohadon on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:12 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:That doesn't make it a good move or one I'm willing to live with in terms of the player represented by it. Not that I have choice.


No, you don't.


I didn't (nor did you) when Cuddles was in control. Did that stop us from expressing our opinions?

No, it didn't.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:13 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:That doesn't make it a good move or one I'm willing to live with in terms of the player represented by it. Not that I have choice.


No, you don't.


I didn't (nor did you) when Cuddles was in control. Did that stop us from expressing our opinions?

No, it didn't.


Read my edit above - thought you might take it that way once I read it.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:19 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:That doesn't make it a good move or one I'm willing to live with in terms of the player represented by it. Not that I have choice.


No, you don't.


I didn't (nor did you) when Cuddles was in control. Did that stop us from expressing our opinions?

No, it didn't.


Read my edit above - thought you might take it that way once I read it.


Got ya. I'll be there Sunday with my 12 yr old rooting hard for Schaub against Rodgers. Is what it is though I wish it wasn't.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:20 pm

I guess I'm saying I don't care how much we paid for the roof at this point. The roof is what it is.

And if Cincy loses tonight the Browns are guaranteed to be alive one more week if they win, so that would make Sunday's game a de facto playoff game.

That sounds like more fun to me than facing the harsh reality of the current NFL passing rules.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:21 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:That doesn't make it a good move or one I'm willing to live with in terms of the player represented by it. Not that I have choice.


No, you don't.


I didn't (nor did you) when Cuddles was in control. Did that stop us from expressing our opinions?

No, it didn't.


Read my edit above - thought you might take it that way once I read it.


Got ya. I'll be there Sunday with my 12 yr old rooting hard for Schaub against Rodgers. Is what it is though I wish it wasn't.


I'm thinking Rodgers won't be in. It'll be Matt Flynn.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:23 pm

Hikohadon wrote:I guess I'm saying I don't care how much we paid for the roof at this point. The roof is what it is.

And if Cincy loses tonight the Browns are guaranteed to be alive one more week if they win, so that would make Sunday's game a de facto playoff game.

That sounds like more fun to me than facing the harsh reality of the current NFL passing rules.


I'm with ya on all of it from Tuesday til 1pm Sunday. Then reality bites my ass and pisses me off and I can't help myself but be bitter.

And I dig. My issue is that I can't help but feel we overpaid for a roof that's still dripping. ;-) ;) :wink:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22739
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:32 pm

peeker643 wrote:I'm with ya on all of it from Tuesday til 1pm Sunday. Then reality bites my ass and pisses me off and I can't help myself but be bitter.

And I dig. My issue is that I can't help but feel we overpaid for a roof that's still dripping. ;-) ;) :wink:


I hear ya. I wait all week for the Browns to play and then when the game starts I almost immediately turn the channel. I have no faith and I'm still working on caring less.

I hear that roofs tend to leak less after they've had a year or so to settle, but that doesn't mean it'll ever win any awards. I can easily see a late 80's scenario, which would be a lot more fun than now. I know that's not the ultimate goal, but... whatever.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Chef's @ Brownies - Romeo and Juliettes return

Unread postby Gradysmanldy » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:51 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:That doesn't make it a good move or one I'm willing to live with in terms of the player represented by it. Not that I have choice.


No, you don't.


I didn't (nor did you) when Cuddles was in control. Did that stop us from expressing our opinions?

No, it didn't.


Read my edit above - thought you might take it that way once I read it.



Got ya. I'll be there Sunday with my 12 yr old rooting hard for Schaub against Rodgers. Is what it is though I wish it wasn't.


I'm thinking Rodgers won't be in. It'll be Matt Flynn.

:spar:


Can't get a single person to take this bet with me, at work. Even a soda. I'm 100% sure RGIII plays, just a feeling.
Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.
User avatar
Gradysmanldy
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:58 pm
Favorite Player: Melts Parmageddon
Least Favorite Player: The East Coast media

PreviousNext

Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ybot and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: ybot and 1 guest