Text Size

Cleveland Browns & The NFL

so, uh, Alex Smith?

Talk Browns football and discuss the NFL here.

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup

so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Triple-S » Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:31 pm

Keith Britton ‏ @ KeithBritton86
Source has told me # Browns are one of the teams # 49ers QB Alex Smith is interested in.


It couldn't hurt I guess.

It could possibly be a waste of money when all is said and done, but I think that having him, Weeds and some 3-7th round rookie all compete for the job is not a bad idea.

Then let Chud/Norv pick the guy they want.

and then if it all fails (which generally happens anyway), go draft Manziel or Bridgewater in the first in 2014.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6379
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Gradysmanldy » Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:37 pm

You know, if Shurmur was kept for another year, I wouldn't have minded them foisting Alex Smith on him; he's got some WCO experience, short accurate passing game, etc....I just don't see him having the skill set to run Norvud's vertical game. Who knows.

I don't think Alex is looking to compete for a starting job; I think there's enough opportunity (KC, Jax, NYJ, etc) where he can get a guaranteed starting gig.
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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:42 am

Triple-S wrote:
Keith Britton ‏ @ KeithBritton86
Source has told me # Browns are one of the teams # 49ers QB Alex Smith is interested in.


My source has told me that Alex Smith is interested in any team remotely interested in a new starting QB. He also said I could post his picture here for verification:

Image
"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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Triple-S » Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:09 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
Triple-S wrote:
Keith Britton ‏ @ KeithBritton86
Source has told me # Browns are one of the teams # 49ers QB Alex Smith is interested in.


My source has told me that Alex Smith is interested in any team remotely interested in a new starting QB. He also said I could post his picture here for verification:

Image


I had no idea Hiko was in the millitary. :salute:
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6379
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:12 pm

I'd be fine with Smith.

More than enough arm to fall comfortably between Colt and Weeden.

He's also younger, more mature, more athletic, faster, quicker and way, WAY smarter than Weeden.

Not sure if he's a long term answer but with options available I'd take him in a NY minute over what we have and what else is available.

He actually grew/excelled under Norv in SF in the year they were together and part of dude's problem was always 4 or 5 OC's in his 7 years.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:38 pm

That dude has way too much hair to be me.

Alex Smith is King of Meh. But whatever, so is every other option.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 1:58 pm

Keith Britton ‏ @ KeithBritton86
Source has told me # Browns are one of the teams # 49ers QB Alex Smith is interested in.


Yes, along with Buffalo, Arizona, Kansas City, Philadelphia, New York Jets, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Minnesota, Oakland and any other team where he might be able to land a starting job.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:59 pm

Well, if 'meh' is partly responsible for 13-3 in 2011 with 6 game winning drives and just 5 ints and helps go 7-2-1 in the next season, sign me up for 'meh'.

Dude's 6'4", 220lbs and athletic. Arm is fine but not howitzer. Pretty much doubled Weeds' Wonderlic, has a nice mix of calm and fire (both of which make him better than Colt's immaturity and Weeden's emotionless state).

Not saying he's an All-Pro annually but he makes the right decisions and gets the ball where it should go. You don't have to eliminate half the field like they did w/Weeden after Week 1 AND they have a shit-ton of money to spend and Norv likes him.

A lot of teams want the guy because he's better than what they have.

I'm in that camp and think the guy can play some.

His 90.7 last year compares favorably with Eli and Flacco and his 104.1 this year was higher than Kaepernick (who I like A LOT more, don't get me wrong). I'd put Gordon and Little in same boat w/2011 Crabtree and Kyle Williams (if not beyond) and TRich will suffice as a poor man's Gore ;-) ;) :wink:

Yes, I think if Smith is here and is your main offensive move (along with getting a FA G) then you focus on defense and getting guys who can play Horton's 3-4 defense (and you need many) and you have a decent football team next season while keeping an eye on the QB class of 2014.

Or we can stick with Weeden and make me completely Bird Flu-sick.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Toxicadam » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:07 pm

Alex Smith is not a playmaker, he is a game manager. Which is fine to have if you have an outstanding defense and solid run game. The Browns have neither and Alex Smith will crumble under any kind of adversity.

Mark Sanchez 2.0
User avatar
Toxicadam
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:53 am

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby TouchEmAllTime » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:11 pm

I wouldn't mind at all, we only have one WR that can stretch the field right now (two if you want to count Benjamin catching one long pass last year), so how vertical can we go at this point anyway?
Bring the NHL to C-Town.
User avatar
TouchEmAllTime
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 3:43 pm
Location: Boardman
Favorite Player: James Haslam
Least Favorite Player: 2013 #1 Pick

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:13 pm

This play sticks out. Unless it was a case of just managing to throw the football precisely where it had to be with just a wee bit on the line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jloashD3Flg
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:18 pm

Ignore the horrible premise and music. Look at the athleticism, arm strength and ball placement and tell me it's not a substantial step up from what we have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNnRbJf3bZk
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:24 pm

peeker643 wrote:Well, if 'meh' is partly responsible for 13-3 in 2011 with 6 game winning drives and just 5 ints and helps go 7-2-1 in the next season, sign me up for 'meh'.

Dude's 6'4", 220lbs and athletic. Arm is fine but not howitzer. Pretty much doubled Weeds' Wonderlic, has a nice mix of calm and fire (both of which make him better than Colt's immaturity and Weeden's emotionless state).

Not saying he's an All-Pro annually but he makes the right decisions and gets the ball where it should go. You don't have to eliminate half the field like they did w/Weeden after Week 1 AND they have a shit-ton of money to spend and Norv likes him.

A lot of teams want the guy because he's better than what they have.

I'm in that camp and think the guy can play some.

His 90.7 last year compares favorably with Eli and Flacco and his 104.1 this year was higher than Kaepernick (who I like A LOT more, don't get me wrong). I'd put Gordon and Little in same boat w/2011 Crabtree and Kyle Williams (if not beyond) and TRich will suffice as a poor man's Gore ;-) ;) :wink:

Yes, I think if Smith is here and is your main offensive move (along with getting a FA G) then you focus on defense and getting guys who can play Horton's 3-4 defense (and you need many) and you have a decent football team next season while keeping an eye on the QB class of 2014.

Or we can stick with Weeden and make me completely Bird Flu-sick.


I couldn't care less who they trot out at QB next year so long as it isn't Colt Fucking McCoy (that's actually part of his name now - we all have our pet peeves). I feel like there isn't an interesting option available on the team, in the draft (haven't looked that close at that, tho), via Free Agency, or via trade - and that includes Alex Smith.

He might be better than what we have, but that's hardly Oscar-worthy.

I'm no more excited about a Browns team starting Alex Smith than I am about a Browns team starting like 20 other guys. But that's probably just me.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:32 pm

Again, Hiko, I'm not saying the search ends with Smith. I'm saying he's substantially better than what they have. f people were okay with Weeden because he was "better than Colt" than what are they upset about with Smith.

Again, good mechanics, nice high, quick release, good poise in pocket and athleticism out of it and he throws the football through windows like good QBs do.

In looking at all these clips and (to be fair most are highlight clips and not every throw) it's clear that he's capable of being more than game manager in my opinion and he's substantially better than the guys here now or the others available.

That's all.

If he's here I'm good with it. If he's not, I hope someone else is and I believe someone else will be.

Younger, faster, smarter, more experienced, more athletic. 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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:42 pm

Nothing gives me more confidence for next season than claiming you want a vertical offense, then giving a Delhomme contract to the noodle arm who started the Super Bowl carrying a clipboard.
"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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:46 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:Nothing gives me more confidence for next season than claiming you want a vertical offense, then giving a Delhomme contract to the noodle arm who started the Super Bowl carrying a clipboard.


No doubt and I was waiting to see which illustrious board member would equate not having Flacco's or Rodger's arm to being noodle-armed. Because clearly you're Colt or your're Kaepernick. There are no in-betweens.

Congrats!!!

You go ahead and keep that big-armed, bright, athletic guy you have now.

:lmfao:
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:46 pm

peeker643 wrote:Again, Hiko, I'm not saying the search ends with Smith. I'm saying he's substantially better than what they have. f people were okay with Weeden because he was "better than Colt" than what are they upset about with Smith.

Again, good mechanics, nice high, quick release, good poise in pocket and athleticism out of it and he throws the football through windows like good QBs do.

In looking at all these clips and (to be fair most are highlight clips and not every throw) it's clear that he's capable of being more than game manager in my opinion and he's substantially better than the guys here now or the others available.

That's all.

If he's here I'm good with it. If he's not, I hope someone else is and I believe someone else will be.

Younger, faster, smarter, more experienced, more athletic. Better.


I think that Smith is likely an upgrade. I also stated previously that if you can upgrade at that (or any) position, then you do that, even if it's a slight upgrade. The only reason you go with the lesser player is if you feel they will eventually be the greater talent, which I doubt Weeden would be.

But the Browns going into next season with Alex Smith at QB makes me maybe 1% more excited, moving me up from "There Must Be Some Bowling To Watch On Another Channel" to "I Think I'll Take A Nap".

He's a mediocre player in my view, and that has absolutely nothing to do with any other QB in the NFL. If he ends up here, I hope he proves me wrong and becomes the kind of player that doesn't get benched by Super Bowl contenders in the middle of the season for guys that have never started a game.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:56 pm

IMO you need a healthy mix of the following three to be an effective QB in the NFL and what you don't have can't be a glaring deficiency:

1. Good arm
2. Brains
3. Athleticism

If you're above average in all three you're in pretty good shape.
If you're well above average in two or three we're talking that elusive 'elite' guy.

IMO Smith has a lot of 2, is above average in 3 and is middle of the road on #1. Which puts him middle of the road in all likelihood. Probably will suffer in less than optimal situations and excel when everything around him is above average.

Compare and contrast with our guy.

#1? Check
#2? Fail
#3? Fail.

A lot of other things go into overall effectiveness, obviously (like maturity- A Colt and Weeden downfall, poise- A Weeden downfall, courage to make a throw in a situation- Another Colt downfall, etc) but 1-3 are the starting points.

I believe Smith would be a huge upgrade over any of current troika. That's why I'm interested.

All y'all's mileage may vary. It's all good.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby TouchEmAllTime » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:57 pm

Granted the highlights video is only going to show all the pro's but that vid showed and ability to throw the ball over the defender, avoid pressure, that he knows when to run, he threw on the run, threw through defenders, and didn't lock his eyes on only one WR. Again, obviously that video is only the positives, but he did demonstrate a skill set that a meh player couldn't.
Bring the NHL to C-Town.
User avatar
TouchEmAllTime
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 3:43 pm
Location: Boardman
Favorite Player: James Haslam
Least Favorite Player: 2013 #1 Pick

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:02 pm

peeker643 wrote:No doubt and I was waiting to see which illustrious board member would equate not having Flacco's or Rodger's arm to being noodle-armed. Because clearly you're Colt or your're Kaepernick. There are no in-betweens.

Congrats!!!

You go ahead and keep that big-armed, bright, athletic guy you have now.


If we do sign him, can we get this thread thumbtacked for every postseason game we somehow amazingly come up short again? Granted we actually make the postseason and don't finish 9-7 and wind up watching the Bengals in the Wild Card?

Yes, he's 'better' than Weeds was last season. Maybe we can get a discount deal on Andy Dalton, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Stafford, Matt Ryan, Jay Cutler, Kyle Orton, Josh Freeman, or Christian Ponder too. Sure you're starting a known quantity JAG at QB and your best hope at a Lombardi is sliding your way into facing Jim Fossil and Kerry Collins in the Super Bowl, but hey it beats everyone else we've had since the Return! Improvement! :hic:
"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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:04 pm

TouchEmAllTime wrote:Granted the highlights video is only going to show all the pro's but that vid showed and ability to throw the ball over the defender, avoid pressure, that he knows when to run, he threw on the run, threw through defenders, and didn't lock his eyes on only one WR. Again, obviously that video is only the positives, but he did demonstrate a skill set that a meh player couldn't.


He can make 90% of the throws while seeing 100% of the field and he's not looking to run immediately. Plenty of those throws came while the pocket collapsed and he's also able to break contain and escape the pocket where he was accurate on the move or could hurt you with his legs. Not a game breaking/take it to the house runner, per se, but he can hurt you.

Good velocity on the slants, back shoulder throws were there, and touch to throw over and between LBs and DBs also there. He works well from under center, is mechanically sound and takes care of the football.

More game manager than playmaker? Not sure about that. He sure made more plays when the quality around him improved.

Was he beaten out by a guy you might take first today if you were starting a team? Yep.

Rough break.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:05 pm

peeker643 wrote:I believe Smith would be a huge upgrade over any of current troika. That's why I'm interested.


The Texans and Falcons are still a punchline, just to a different joke.

You want better who can be better than Weeds, sure, we can do that. Just give us someone who can be better than Smith too.
"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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:09 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
peeker643 wrote:No doubt and I was waiting to see which illustrious board member would equate not having Flacco's or Rodger's arm to being noodle-armed. Because clearly you're Colt or your're Kaepernick. There are no in-betweens.

Congrats!!!

You go ahead and keep that big-armed, bright, athletic guy you have now.


If we do sign him, can we get this thread thumbtacked for every postseason game we somehow amazingly come up short again? Granted we actually make the postseason and don't finish 9-7 and wind up watching the Bengals in the Wild Card?

Yes, he's 'better' than Weeds was last season. Maybe we can get a discount deal on Andy Dalton, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Stafford, Matt Ryan, Jay Cutler, Kyle Orton, Josh Freeman, or Christian Ponder too. Sure you're starting a known quantity JAG at QB and your best hope at a Lombardi is sliding your way into facing Jim Fossil and Kerry Collins in the Super Bowl, but hey it beats everyone else we've had since the Return! Improvement! :hic:


No. Why not just watch 5-11 or 4-12 every year and pray a guy you stupidly overdrafted just gets it once he hits 30yrs old in Week 2? Why not just be shitty and hope? And the entire point is there is not another guy out there to be had. How come you're not asking for a discount deal on Rodgers or Kaepernick?

And despite your attempt to be clever, if you wouldn't take Stafford or Ryan and you're putting them in the "Just better than Weeds was last year' group, then you may need to up the doseage on whatever you're being prescribed.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:10 pm

peeker643 wrote:IMO you need a healthy mix of the following three to be an effective QB in the NFL and what you don't have can't be a glaring deficiency:

1. Good arm
2. Brains
3. Athleticism

If you're above average in all three you're in pretty good shape.
If you're well above average in two or three we're talking that elusive 'elite' guy.

IMO Smith has a lot of 2, is above average in 3 and is middle of the road on #1. Which puts him middle of the road in all likelihood. Probably will suffer in less than optimal situations and excel when everything around him is above average.

Compare and contrast with our guy.

#1? Check
#2? Fail
#3? Fail.

A lot of other things go into overall effectiveness, obviously (like maturity- A Colt and Weeden downfall, poise- A Weeden downfall, courage to make a throw in a situation- Another Colt downfall, etc) but 1-3 are the starting points.

I believe Smith would be a huge upgrade over any of current troika. That's why I'm interested.

All y'all's mileage may vary. It's all good.


You'll have to show me the evidence that this guy has these special brains you refer to, since he always came across to me as a dipshit and they only opened up the playbook when they brought Kaepernick in (but that might just be because of Smith's physical limitations).

Let's put it this way:

While acknowledging that Weeden was an upgrade from Colt, you still weren't interested in Weeden.

While acknowledging that Smith is an upgrade from Weeden, I'm still not interested in Smith.

You clearly think he'll be a much bigger upgrade than I do, and that is a slam on Smith more than a compliment to Weeden/Colt/Thad Lewis.

But if you sign him as a free agent, at least it doesn't HURT you. Ain't no big thang to me either way.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:12 pm

peeker643 wrote:And despite your attempt to be clever, if you wouldn't take Stafford or Ryan and you're putting them in the "Just better than Weeds was last year' group, then you may need to up the doseage on whatever you're being prescribed.


Stat Padford and Matty 'I Beat Pete Carroll And All I Got Was This T-Shirt' Ice?

Again, the Browns are a punchline. So are the Falcons and Texans. You don't fix one by joining the other.
"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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:13 pm

TouchEmAllTime wrote:Granted the highlights video is only going to show all the pro's but that vid showed and ability to throw the ball over the defender, avoid pressure, that he knows when to run, he threw on the run, threw through defenders, and didn't lock his eyes on only one WR. Again, obviously that video is only the positives, but he did demonstrate a skill set that a meh player couldn't.


I've seen 8 years of meh that trumps that highlight video.

We're arguing about Alex Smith. Not a good QB... not a good QB... we talkin' about Alex Smith.

But hey, why not? Not like they're goin' anywhere anyway.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:13 pm

Hikohadon wrote:But if you sign him as a free agent, at least it doesn't HURT you. Ain't no big thang to me either way.


You sure about that, or are we banking on Banner's advanced degree in caponomics?
"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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:13 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
peeker643 wrote:I believe Smith would be a huge upgrade over any of current troika. That's why I'm interested.


The Texans and Falcons are still a punchline, just to a different joke.

You want better who can be better than Weeds, sure, we can do that. Just give us someone who can be better than Smith too.


Then just go get Rodgers, Doug.

Simple. All done.

Or wait til you have a couple first round picks, draft #4 and there are two potential HoFers sitting at 1 and 2 and move up for them. That's the other really aeasy and surefire way to improve.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:21 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:But if you sign him as a free agent, at least it doesn't HURT you. Ain't no big thang to me either way.


You sure about that, or are we banking on Banner's advanced degree in caponomics?


I'm banking on the Browns not having enough good players to worry about going over the cap even if they sign Average Smith. And if they do and they have to cut a few, will anyone notice?
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:21 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:IMO you need a healthy mix of the following three to be an effective QB in the NFL and what you don't have can't be a glaring deficiency:

1. Good arm
2. Brains
3. Athleticism

If you're above average in all three you're in pretty good shape.
If you're well above average in two or three we're talking that elusive 'elite' guy.

IMO Smith has a lot of 2, is above average in 3 and is middle of the road on #1. Which puts him middle of the road in all likelihood. Probably will suffer in less than optimal situations and excel when everything around him is above average.

Compare and contrast with our guy.

#1? Check
#2? Fail
#3? Fail.

A lot of other things go into overall effectiveness, obviously (like maturity- A Colt and Weeden downfall, poise- A Weeden downfall, courage to make a throw in a situation- Another Colt downfall, etc) but 1-3 are the starting points.

I believe Smith would be a huge upgrade over any of current troika. That's why I'm interested.

All y'all's mileage may vary. It's all good.


You'll have to show me the evidence that this guy has these special brains you refer to, since he always came across to me as a dipshit and they only opened up the playbook when they brought Kaepernick in (but that might just be because of Smith's physical limitations).

Let's put it this way:

While acknowledging that Weeden was an upgrade from Colt, you still weren't interested in Weeden.

While acknowledging that Smith is an upgrade from Weeden, I'm still not interested in Smith.

You clearly think he'll be a much bigger upgrade than I do, and that is a slam on Smith more than a compliment to Weeden/Colt/Thad Lewis.

But if you sign him as a free agent, at least it doesn't HURT you. Ain't no big thang to me either way.


I don't think Weeden is an upgrade from Colt. Not in any, real meaningful way. With either of them at the helm you're winning 3-5 games a year.

Same guy, different guys in terms of results at the end of each season.

Smith has proven in the last two years he's not an issue on a good team. I think Brandolt McWeeden is a negative number every year in wins. I think Smith is neutral at worst and allows you to spend just money so you can address other glaring concerns. Then, when you're at a level where those concerns have been addressed, you address the Smith situation if necessary.

You don't go from starting line to finish line in one step. You have to get closer. I think Smith at least gets you in the pack. Not your goal, but closer to it.

If people prefer to stand there after the gun goes off and hope the finish line comes closer to them, I' not sure what to tell them. It's probably not going to happen?
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:24 pm

peeker643 wrote:Then just go get Rodgers, Doug.

Simple. All done.

Or wait til you have a couple first round picks, draft #4 and there are two potential HoFers sitting at 1 and 2 and move up for them. That's the other really aeasy and surefire way to improve.


Where was Kaepernick drafted again?
"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: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:24 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
peeker643 wrote:And despite your attempt to be clever, if you wouldn't take Stafford or Ryan and you're putting them in the "Just better than Weeds was last year' group, then you may need to up the doseage on whatever you're being prescribed.


Stat Padford and Matty 'I Beat Pete Carroll And All I Got Was This T-Shirt' Ice?

Again, the Browns are a punchline. So are the Falcons and Texans. You don't fix one by joining the other.



Ryan > Schaub. He was a Roddy White slip away from likely facing another guy you guys are convinced is a shitbird in Flacco.

Let's just bank on Brandon developing into a stud. I'm fie with that. Or wait til we have the very first pick so we can draft Alex Smith or David Carr.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:32 pm

peeker643 wrote:I don't think Weeden is an upgrade from Colt. Not in any, real meaningful way. With either of them at the helm you're winning 3-5 games a year.

Same guy, different guys in terms of results at the end of each season.

Smith has proven in the last two years he's not an issue on a good team. I think Brandolt McWeeden is a negative number every year in wins. I think Smith is neutral at worst and allows you to spend just money so you can address other glaring concerns. Then, when you're at a level where those concerns have been addressed, you address the Smith situation if necessary.

You don't go from starting line to finish line in one step. You have to get closer. I think Smith at least gets you in the pack. Not your goal, but closer to it.

If people prefer to stand there after the gun goes off and hope the finish line comes closer to them, I' not sure what to tell them. It's probably not going to happen?


Average Smith has shown that he can be a non-deterrent when on a good team.

He has also shown that he can suck balls just as bad as the Weedens and Cassels and Quinns of the league when on a bad team. I don't think this team is good enough yet overall to even sniff contention with an Average Smith at the helm.

Like I said, you clearly value his game more than I do. And, like I said, I couldn't care less if they sign him or not. He's not worth getting worked up over one way or the other.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:41 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:I don't think Weeden is an upgrade from Colt. Not in any, real meaningful way. With either of them at the helm you're winning 3-5 games a year.

Same guy, different guys in terms of results at the end of each season.

Smith has proven in the last two years he's not an issue on a good team. I think Brandolt McWeeden is a negative number every year in wins. I think Smith is neutral at worst and allows you to spend just money so you can address other glaring concerns. Then, when you're at a level where those concerns have been addressed, you address the Smith situation if necessary.

You don't go from starting line to finish line in one step. You have to get closer. I think Smith at least gets you in the pack. Not your goal, but closer to it.

If people prefer to stand there after the gun goes off and hope the finish line comes closer to them, I' not sure what to tell them. It's probably not going to happen?


Average Smith has shown that he can be a non-deterrent when on a good team.

He has also shown that he can suck balls just as bad as the Weedens and Cassels and Quinns of the league when on a bad team. I don't think this team is good enough yet overall to even sniff contention with an Average Smith at the helm.

Like I said, you clearly value his game more than I do. And, like I said, I couldn't care less if they sign him or not. He's not worth getting worked up over one way or the other.


I agree. But if I can get him for money alone (and no picks), then I'm doing it.

And even the best QBs have been known to 'suck balls' when everything around them is shit.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:51 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:I don't think Weeden is an upgrade from Colt. Not in any, real meaningful way. With either of them at the helm you're winning 3-5 games a year.

Same guy, different guys in terms of results at the end of each season.

Smith has proven in the last two years he's not an issue on a good team. I think Brandolt McWeeden is a negative number every year in wins. I think Smith is neutral at worst and allows you to spend just money so you can address other glaring concerns. Then, when you're at a level where those concerns have been addressed, you address the Smith situation if necessary.

You don't go from starting line to finish line in one step. You have to get closer. I think Smith at least gets you in the pack. Not your goal, but closer to it.

If people prefer to stand there after the gun goes off and hope the finish line comes closer to them, I' not sure what to tell them. It's probably not going to happen?


Average Smith has shown that he can be a non-deterrent when on a good team.

He has also shown that he can suck balls just as bad as the Weedens and Cassels and Quinns of the league when on a bad team. I don't think this team is good enough yet overall to even sniff contention with an Average Smith at the helm.

Like I said, you clearly value his game more than I do. And, like I said, I couldn't care less if they sign him or not. He's not worth getting worked up over one way or the other.


I agree. But if I can get him for money alone (and no picks), then I'm doing it.

And even the best QBs have been known to 'suck balls' when everything around them is shit.


Not like he did (if the Peyton Manning/Colts/Andrew Luck situation teaches us anything it's that the "best" QB's make a huge difference), but as I said fine with getting him in FA. I don't want them trading for or using high draft picks on any of these options.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby bookelly » Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:28 am

The 9'ers have a 72 hour window to trade him. If they do, he's under contract for 7.5 mil. for the next 2 years. So if you want him you either have to offer a pick and pay the 7.5 mil, or pay him a huge signing bonus and a likely much higher salary.

Since the trade window is so short, the 49'ers likely won't demand much more than a 3rd or 4th round pick to get him. Maybe even 5th.

I would gladly give up my 4th for a relatively cheap Smith under contract for two years. I'd probably even go with a 3rd.
Nobody, I mean nobody, voluntarily becomes a Cleveland sports fan.

"This team could fuck up a ham sandwich." -CDT
User avatar
bookelly
Happy Easter!!
 
Posts: 3494
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Favorite Player: My bunny hunny
Least Favorite Player: Elmer Fudd

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:55 am

bookelly wrote:The 9'ers have a 72 hour window to trade him. If they do, he's under contract for 7.5 mil. for the next 2 years. So if you want him you either have to offer a pick and pay the 7.5 mil, or pay him a huge signing bonus and a likely much higher salary.

Since the trade window is so short, the 49'ers likely won't demand much more than a 3rd or 4th round pick to get him. Maybe even 5th.

I would gladly give up my 4th for a relatively cheap Smith under contract for two years. I'd probably even go with a 3rd.


I have two immediate thoughts on that:

Weeden is so brutally bad I'd like to see Smith here; and

Weeden is so brutally bad that you may well not have to pay picks and $7.5million per year to improve there.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:36 am

bookelly wrote:The 9'ers have a 72 hour window to trade him. If they do, he's under contract for 7.5 mil. for the next 2 years. So if you want him you either have to offer a pick and pay the 7.5 mil, or pay him a huge signing bonus and a likely much higher salary.

Since the trade window is so short, the 49'ers likely won't demand much more than a 3rd or 4th round pick to get him. Maybe even 5th.

I would gladly give up my 4th for a relatively cheap Smith under contract for two years. I'd probably even go with a 3rd.


I have two immediate thoughts on that:

A high 3rd is probably too much for Alex Smith.

Peeks is again banned from discussing Weeden on pain of boring us into a coma.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby scrambler » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:22 pm

I think anyone who thinks Alex Smith isn't just an upgrade but a MASSIVE upgrade is borderline psychotic. In his last game before his concussion and losing his job Smith had a perfect game qb rating against the vaunted Ray Horton Arizona defense going 18 for 19 for 232 yards on a Monday night. I think he had the highest qbr in the league before his injury. Regarding his alleged intelligence the wikipedia says he passed 12 AP tests in high school, got his bachelors degree in two years at Utah and in his junior ahtletic year was taking masters courses in economics and as mentioned doubled Weeden's wonderlic score.

IN Smith's disatrous rookie year he was 21, not 29 and improved dramatically his second year under Norv, then the serious shoulder injuries came. Returning from those injuries he's been a very good NFL qb, even decent under Singletary then improving markedly again with Harbaugh. Before the invasion of the new style quarterback (Wilson, RG3, Kaepernick), the only qbs more athletic than Smith were Vick and rodgers, that's it.

The organization should do everything they can possibly do to get Alex Smith here.
Period.
scrambler
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 10:58 am
Location: Idaho
Favorite Player: Charlie Spikes
Least Favorite Player: Oelkers/Yett

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:25 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
bookelly wrote:The 9'ers have a 72 hour window to trade him. If they do, he's under contract for 7.5 mil. for the next 2 years. So if you want him you either have to offer a pick and pay the 7.5 mil, or pay him a huge signing bonus and a likely much higher salary.

Since the trade window is so short, the 49'ers likely won't demand much more than a 3rd or 4th round pick to get him. Maybe even 5th.

I would gladly give up my 4th for a relatively cheap Smith under contract for two years. I'd probably even go with a 3rd.


I have two immediate thoughts on that:

A high 3rd is probably too much for Alex Smith.

Peeks is again banned from discussing Weeden on pain of boring us into a coma.


Whatever. You're still defensive about supporting that abortion. All based on the very same logic that should you have you salivating over any upgrade.

And you're whining about the whining is as boring as the whining.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:26 pm

scrambler wrote:I think anyone who thinks Alex Smith isn't just an upgrade but a MASSIVE upgrade is borderline psychotic.


I'm fine with that characterization, Alex.

PS - You are mediocre.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:29 pm

scrambler wrote:I think anyone who thinks Alex Smith isn't just an upgrade but a MASSIVE upgrade is borderline psychotic. In his last game before his concussion and losing his job Smith had a perfect game qb rating against the vaunted Ray Horton Arizona defense going 18 for 19 for 232 yards on a Monday night. I think he had the highest qbr in the league before his injury. Regarding his alleged intelligence the wikipedia says he passed 12 AP tests in high school, got his bachelors degree in two years at Utah and in his junior ahtletic year was taking masters courses in economics and as mentioned doubled Weeden's wonderlic score.

IN Smith's disatrous rookie year he was 21, not 29 and improved dramatically his second year under Norv, then the serious shoulder injuries came. Returning from those injuries he's been a very good NFL qb, even decent under Singletary then improving markedly again with Harbaugh. Before the invasion of the new style quarterback (Wilson, RG3, Kaepernick), the only qbs more athletic than Smith were Vick and rodgers, that's it.

The organization should do everything they can possibly do to get Alex Smith here.
Period.


Its pretty much the same people who supported taking an eldery, unathletic hick/hump at 22 in the name of improvement who don't see that Smith is a big improvement.

That should not surprise you.

In fact, it makes absolutely perfect sense.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:30 pm

peeker643 wrote:And you're whining about the whining is as boring as the whining.


Let's both stop then and make the whole world happy. :thumb up:
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:36 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:And you're whining about the whining is as boring as the whining.


Let's both stop then and make the whole world happy. :thumb up:


We can't make the whole world happy. I've done the math and it's not going to happen.

We had one of two or three worst QBs in the league last year. Name him what you want or don't refer to him at all.

That needs to improve. Not 'he' needs to improve, because he was a bad fit from jump. Good luck to him.

I think Smith helps you move up to middle of the pack. I wonder if people have watched the same guy I've watched the last week or if they're still clinging to a fool's hope that the situation here will improve with the same guy?

I don't understand it.

I want him gone. I thought he stunk, I think he stinks and I believe he always will. If I saw honest room for him to be what Smith already is I'd be fine with staying the course. I don't.

Therefore, a HUGE part of my argument for Smith is the current QB situation here. If you don't want to hear it, tune out. I won't be offended.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:00 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:And you're whining about the whining is as boring as the whining.


Let's both stop then and make the whole world happy. :thumb up:


We can't make the whole world happy. I've done the math and it's not going to happen.

We had one of two or three worst QBs in the league last year. Name him what you want or don't refer to him at all.

That needs to improve. Not 'he' needs to improve, because he was a bad fit from jump. Good luck to him.

I think Smith helps you move up to middle of the pack. I wonder if people have watched the same guy I've watched the last week or if they're still clinging to a fool's hope that the situation here will improve with the same guy?

I don't understand it.

I want him gone. I thought he stunk, I think he stinks and I believe he always will. If I saw honest room for him to be what Smith already is I'd be fine with staying the course. I don't.

Therefore, a HUGE part of my argument for Smith is the current QB situation here. If you don't want to hear it, tune out. I won't be offended.


I'm already on record saying that he would be an improvement.

I don't think he's a HUGE improvement over a whole massive lot of people because he's mediocre.

My take on Alex Smith has absolutely NOTHING to do with Weeden. I couldn't care less if Weeden is on the team next year or not. He could be in the CFL for all I care and I'm not getting excited about Alex Smith.

If your reason for wanting Alex Smith is Anyone-But-Weeden, then that's just as stupid as you purport the Anyone-But-Colt take to be last year. I know it's difficult for you since Weeden has clearly wronged you in some personal matter, but try and argue in support of Alex Smith (or anyone) as if all the QB's currently on the Browns retired (they're so damn old) and moved to Malaysia.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby leadpipe » Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:14 pm

A high third is not close to too much for Alex Smith.

Whether you or I would do it is besides the point. It's just the value at that single position is so high right now, the CHANCE guys are going to be worth more than 10 years ago.

A totally unproven guy like Mallet will get more than the same unproven a few years ago.

I don't want either - and I'm a guy that thinks about the same of Weeden as peeker. It's just that you aren't getting these guys with late 6th round picks anymore.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6612
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:25 pm

leadpipe wrote:A high third is not close to too much for Alex Smith.

Whether you or I would do it is besides the point. It's just the value at that single position is so high right now, the CHANCE guys are going to be worth more than 10 years ago.

A totally unproven guy like Mallet will get more than the same unproven a few years ago.

I don't want either - and I'm a guy that thinks about the same of Weeden as peeker. It's just that you aren't getting these guys with late 6th round picks anymore.


While totally understanding your point, I still feel that the player you get with that high 3rd should be of much greater long-term value to the team than what Alex Smith would be (provided we had a competent GM, of course, which is naturally questionable). There's likely a QB in this draft that can be had with that high 3rd whose long-term potential is much higher than Alex Smith's.

Now, for someone that believes that Alex Smith is going to be The Answer at QB, hell no, a high third isn't too high. If Lombardi feels like he is, then a high third is really a bargain.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:32 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:And you're whining about the whining is as boring as the whining.


Let's both stop then and make the whole world happy. :thumb up:


We can't make the whole world happy. I've done the math and it's not going to happen.

We had one of two or three worst QBs in the league last year. Name him what you want or don't refer to him at all.

That needs to improve. Not 'he' needs to improve, because he was a bad fit from jump. Good luck to him.

I think Smith helps you move up to middle of the pack. I wonder if people have watched the same guy I've watched the last week or if they're still clinging to a fool's hope that the situation here will improve with the same guy?

I don't understand it.

I want him gone. I thought he stunk, I think he stinks and I believe he always will. If I saw honest room for him to be what Smith already is I'd be fine with staying the course. I don't.

Therefore, a HUGE part of my argument for Smith is the current QB situation here. If you don't want to hear it, tune out. I won't be offended.



I know it's difficult for you since Weeden has clearly wronged you in some personal matter, but try and argue in support of Alex Smith (or anyone) as if all the QB's currently on the Browns retired (they're so damn old) and moved to Malaysia.


I must be a fool. I thought the faster, smarter, more experienced, more athletic, better-in-every way thing did that.

And Weeden hasn't wronged me, he was just wrong from jump. Holding onto him because you were okay initially is ignorant and flat-out dumb.

Prove to me he's the guy. Very simple.....go.
"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: 22723
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:37 pm

peeker643 wrote:I must be a fool. I thought the faster, smarter, more experienced, more athletic, better-in-every way thing did that.

And Weeden hasn't wronged me, he was just wrong from jump. Holding onto him because you were okay initially is ignorant and flat-out dumb.

Prove to me he's the guy. Very simple.....go.


Lord god... ::doh::

I don't need to prove shit b/c I don't give a shit about Weeden. You're the only one talking about Weeden, numb nuts.

The conversation was TRYING to be about Alex Smith, not He Who Shall Not Be Named. As far as I'm concerned, they have NOTHING to do with each other because I'm pretty sure they're going to replace Weeden with SOMEONE, so he's very likely not going to be part of the equation anyway.

"Alex Smith is better than Weeden" doesn't mean anything to me. Neither does "Alex Smith is WAY better than Weeden". Because neither of them makes me noticeably more excited to get Alex Smith than [insert a whole buncha names here] because I feel that Alex Smith is Mediocre, and it took him a long fucking time just to get that far.

If you want me to get excited about Alex Fucking Smith, you'd have to compare him favorably to GOOD QB's.

Otherwise, he's still King of Meh.

EDIT - And I still acknowledge that he's probably the best option that will be available (at least for the short term). Just that if the Browns fail to get him, I'm not gonna lose a ton of sleep over it.
Last edited by Hikohadon on Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4337
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: so, uh, Alex Smith?

Unread postby bac5665 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:47 pm

I probably take a hard look at Smith. He was a guy that went from washed up to 1 play away from the super bowl and played great this year too.

We need a QB who can get us to the Super Bowl. There are no sure things out there. The only question is what options are available that have what odds of ending up successful. It seems to me that Alex Smith is likely to be the best option available. So, depending on price, I go get him.

I'm not gonna proclaim him to be Joe Montana without seeing him play. But I do think that he has shown that in the right situation he can play. And CLE is a better situation than most of us are comfortable admitting. We have some talent and, hopefully, some honest-to-Zeus competent coaches who can make this team watchable.

That said, I still haven't written off Weeden yet; I saw flashes from him and that team quit last year around the time that he started really getting bad. I can see him doing much, much better his second year with competent coaches.

The worst part about all of this is that it is Lombardi's job to decide which plan is better. That terrifies me. But either plan has a chance of working and a chance of being a complete failure.
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

Next

Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], ybot and 2 guests

Who is online

In total there are 4 users online :: 2 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (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: Bing [Bot], ybot and 2 guests