Text Size

Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Browns roster talent level 2013

Talk Browns football and discuss the NFL here.

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby leadpipe » Fri Sep 06, 2013 7:56 pm

Real good QB's don't stay on bad teams for long.

With few exceptions (and again, many of those exceptions pounded out in time) top ten teams have top ten QB's and bottom ten teams have bottom 10 QB's.

If Weeds is a playa he'll make a lot of things look better - even on this team.

But all that aside, really, no matter who is around, if the guy can play, we'll know it. Lotta REAL IMPORTANT stuff that ain't necessarily result based in dealing with that position.

For Weeds, (and many young QB's) how fast the game slows down is real important. Cause he's gotta start going thru progressions, and he's gotta get a better feel for what's around him in the pocket. I would argue that this shit happening is more important than the rest of the GD team combined in regard to the future - cause if it don't happen, the rest of the GD team ain't gonna matter anyway.

And expectations are different than 10 years ago. Probably not all that fair, but the game has gotten so silly QB driven that you have a lot more things that are MUSTS from that position. if you're gonna win big. This is true from a first rounder to a free agent - hays in the barn. He's here. Can he do it, or can't he. Falling into a situation where you can just game manage is becoming rarer and rarer.

The Schaub and Red Rifle examples....true, they aren't winning as much with Josh Cooper, but they aren't REALLY winning with Andre Johnson or Green. They'll get over the top when their QB's don't play like game managers. To win those three games in January Cincy has got to SCORE. Put a game manager of last year's Niners and you'll get the same year they had two years ago. Harbaugh realized this, rolls the dice with someone he feels is above game manager, and they are in the Bowl.

At the end of the day I think supporting cast and QB, aren't nearly as related as they used to be. To be sure, an excellent supporting cast helps anyone, but it ain't gonna help the guy that's short of the required prerecs - whereas in years past a cast could help out quite a bit.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6584
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby Hikohadon » Fri Sep 06, 2013 9:15 pm

leadpipe wrote:Real good QB's don't stay on bad teams for long.

With few exceptions (and again, many of those exceptions pounded out in time) top ten teams have top ten QB's and bottom ten teams have bottom 10 QB's.

If Weeds is a playa he'll make a lot of things look better - even on this team.

But all that aside, really, no matter who is around, if the guy can play, we'll know it. Lotta REAL IMPORTANT stuff that ain't necessarily result based in dealing with that position.

For Weeds, (and many young QB's) how fast the game slows down is real important. Cause he's gotta start going thru progressions, and he's gotta get a better feel for what's around him in the pocket. I would argue that this shit happening is more important than the rest of the GD team combined in regard to the future - cause if it don't happen, the rest of the GD team ain't gonna matter anyway.

And expectations are different than 10 years ago. Probably not all that fair, but the game has gotten so silly QB driven that you have a lot more things that are MUSTS from that position. if you're gonna win big. This is true from a first rounder to a free agent - hays in the barn. He's here. Can he do it, or can't he. Falling into a situation where you can just game manage is becoming rarer and rarer.

The Schaub and Red Rifle examples....true, they aren't winning as much with Josh Cooper, but they aren't REALLY winning with Andre Johnson or Green. They'll get over the top when their QB's don't play like game managers. To win those three games in January Cincy has got to SCORE. Put a game manager of last year's Niners and you'll get the same year they had two years ago. Harbaugh realized this, rolls the dice with someone he feels is above game manager, and they are in the Bowl.

At the end of the day I think supporting cast and QB, aren't nearly as related as they used to be. To be sure, an excellent supporting cast helps anyone, but it ain't gonna help the guy that's short of the required prerecs - whereas in years past a cast could help out quite a bit.


None of what you say is untrue. Still is a fact that if you want to move a QB that you have hopes for from Level X to Level Y, you need to provide him with as many weapons as possible. You can hope that he'll magically get from X to Y just because "good QB's make that jump", but with this stance what you're really hoping is that he'll fail so you can get "your guy". Because only a handful of guys develop into great QB's from meh without help.

What would Flacco be if the Browns had drafted him? POS? Romo? Cutler? Phil Rivers? Eli?

NOT to say AT ALL that I'm putting Weeden in their category (some people see the need to read between lines so I have to be overly clear). Just that if you take a QB that needs developing and surround him with nothing, he will go no where and never develop, as it is likely that none of those guys would've done had shitty teams like the Browns drafted and neglected them.

Anyway, my only point is that if you take a QB that desperately needs development and give him nothing to work with, expecting him to magically develop is asinine (even if the likelihood that he never would develop anyway remains very real).

ADDITIONALLY, I recognize that once Gordon returns, whomever is QB should have at least the base minimum of weapons to show development, if they're ever gonna show it. Just acknowledging that the weapons the QB will have for the first 2 weeks are subpar, and I highly doubt with Little as your #1 and Benjamin as your #2 you'll see anything from a mediocre-on-down QB other than what you've already seen.

All this is a long-winded way of saying that Weeden will suck, that it's not necessarily indicative of how he'll look when Gordon comes back, but he'll probably still suck anyway, and that the WR corps for the first 2 weeks blows.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4302
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby Hikohadon » Fri Sep 06, 2013 9:15 pm

Double post.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4302
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby leadpipe » Fri Sep 06, 2013 10:51 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Real good QB's don't stay on bad teams for long.

With few exceptions (and again, many of those exceptions pounded out in time) top ten teams have top ten QB's and bottom ten teams have bottom 10 QB's.

If Weeds is a playa he'll make a lot of things look better - even on this team.

But all that aside, really, no matter who is around, if the guy can play, we'll know it. Lotta REAL IMPORTANT stuff that ain't necessarily result based in dealing with that position.

For Weeds, (and many young QB's) how fast the game slows down is real important. Cause he's gotta start going thru progressions, and he's gotta get a better feel for what's around him in the pocket. I would argue that this shit happening is more important than the rest of the GD team combined in regard to the future - cause if it don't happen, the rest of the GD team ain't gonna matter anyway.

And expectations are different than 10 years ago. Probably not all that fair, but the game has gotten so silly QB driven that you have a lot more things that are MUSTS from that position. if you're gonna win big. This is true from a first rounder to a free agent - hays in the barn. He's here. Can he do it, or can't he. Falling into a situation where you can just game manage is becoming rarer and rarer.

The Schaub and Red Rifle examples....true, they aren't winning as much with Josh Cooper, but they aren't REALLY winning with Andre Johnson or Green. They'll get over the top when their QB's don't play like game managers. To win those three games in January Cincy has got to SCORE. Put a game manager of last year's Niners and you'll get the same year they had two years ago. Harbaugh realized this, rolls the dice with someone he feels is above game manager, and they are in the Bowl.

At the end of the day I think supporting cast and QB, aren't nearly as related as they used to be. To be sure, an excellent supporting cast helps anyone, but it ain't gonna help the guy that's short of the required prerecs - whereas in years past a cast could help out quite a bit.


None of what you say is untrue. Still is a fact that if you want to move a QB that you have hopes for from Level X to Level Y, you need to provide him with as many weapons as possible. You can hope that he'll magically get from X to Y just because "good QB's make that jump", but with this stance what you're really hoping is that he'll fail so you can get "your guy". Because only a handful of guys develop into great QB's from meh without help.

What would Flacco be if the Browns had drafted him? POS? Romo? Cutler? Phil Rivers? Eli?

NOT to say AT ALL that I'm putting Weeden in their category (some people see the need to read between lines so I have to be overly clear). Just that if you take a QB that needs developing and surround him with nothing, he will go no where and never develop, as it is likely that none of those guys would've done had shitty teams like the Browns drafted and neglected them.

Anyway, my only point is that if you take a QB that desperately needs development and give him nothing to work with, expecting him to magically develop is asinine (even if the likelihood that he never would develop anyway remains very real).

ADDITIONALLY, I recognize that once Gordon returns, whomever is QB should have at least the base minimum of weapons to show development, if they're ever gonna show it. Just acknowledging that the weapons the QB will have for the first 2 weeks are subpar, and I highly doubt with Little as your #1 and Benjamin as your #2 you'll see anything from a mediocre-on-down QB other than what you've already seen.

All this is a long-winded way of saying that Weeden will suck, that it's not necessarily indicative of how he'll look when Gordon comes back, but he'll probably still suck anyway, and that the WR corps for the first 2 weeks blows.


Your last paragraph...we're saying the same thing. Gordon coming back and improving the receiving core...if Weeden blows, he's still gonna blow, and if he does what he needs to do, he, and the team would be better whether Gordon showed up at all.

Another poster boy - Sanchez. Beginning of last year, when some were still holding out hope, it was "gotta get him some weapons..." No, really, Sanchez plays the game waaay to slow. That was/is the problem. If Sanchez processed the game faster the same Jets offense would be light years better than if they added a couple more good offensive players and he still played slow. He throws 9,000 pick 6's a year cause he's LATE. He'd be late to Larry Fitzgerald as easily as he was late to Santtilon Cotchryss.

I'm with ya on better players surrounding will help, but it's been reduced to almost insignificant big picture.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6584
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby mattvan1 » Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:02 pm

Good points by Lead and Hiko.

Sorry to break up the flow, but thought this was interesting.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/09/06/browns-have-nine-undrafted-rookies-entering-week-one/
I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever.
- CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team
User avatar
mattvan1
 
Posts: 3673
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby Hikohadon » Sat Sep 07, 2013 1:47 am

leadpipe wrote:Your last paragraph...we're saying the same thing. Gordon coming back and improving the receiving core...if Weeden blows, he's still gonna blow, and if he does what he needs to do, he, and the team would be better whether Gordon showed up at all.

Another poster boy - Sanchez. Beginning of last year, when some were still holding out hope, it was "gotta get him some weapons..." No, really, Sanchez plays the game waaay to slow. That was/is the problem. If Sanchez processed the game faster the same Jets offense would be light years better than if they added a couple more good offensive players and he still played slow. He throws 9,000 pick 6's a year cause he's LATE. He'd be late to Larry Fitzgerald as easily as he was late to Santtilon Cotchryss.

I'm with ya on better players surrounding will help, but it's been reduced to almost insignificant big picture.


But Sanchez got 4 years and a top defense and a really good running game (at first). He got a legit-ish chance. And he still sucked.

A lot of QB's that ended up OK after a few years of seasoning wouldn't have gotten that legit chance here. And if Brady Quinn went to the NYJ instead of Sanchez, then maybe he "leads" the team to a couple AFC Championship games before getting revealed as the fraud he is.

So what I'm NOT saying is that a QB will blow or not blow whether or not their clear #1 WR is playing. Those QB's in development, they need everything they can get, and it makes a huge difference sometimes. In many cases, they end up getting exposed as frauds anyway, like Sanchez. And it can lead to false hope on a poor product - where would Matt Stafford be without Calvin Johnson? Unemployed.

But if for some bizarre reason Stafford actually develops into a good NFL QB this season, it will only be because Calvin gave him enough time to not get benched/replaced, because I'm convinced that Stafford would be getting Sanchezed right now if he had Sanchez's skill players.

In all likelihood, the Sanchezes and Staffords of the world show their true colors sooner than later anyway. Same for Weeden. I think I had 15% confidence that he could become a really good QB last year, now it's probably down to 5%. But I'd prefer that he had a full arsenal so that he could prove his unworth totally on his own merits, and I think having shit to work with for the first two weeks hurts his 5% chance.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4302
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby Hikohadon » Sat Sep 07, 2013 1:48 am

mattvan1 wrote:Good points by Lead and Hiko.

Sorry to break up the flow, but thought this was interesting.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/09/06/browns-have-nine-undrafted-rookies-entering-week-one/


It's cause the front office is so brilliant, dontcha know?

All those other suckas will recognize when the Browns win the SB.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4302
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby jb » Sat Sep 07, 2013 4:48 pm

Hikohadon wrote:Great QB's make everyone on the team better to the point of being able to take a pack of Littles, Benjamins, Besses, and Coopers and win with them. There aren't many of those.

Middle of the pack QB's (the Daltons and Schaubs and, oh, a shit ton of other guys, lots of them first round picks) need really good talent around them to be effective. They don't win consistently with Littles, Benjamins, Besses, and Coopers.

Weeden isn't even middle of the pack yet, so handing him that deck of cards isn't conducive to anything except shitting the bed for Ted. Unless Richardson is transcendent, something I'll need to see to believe.

Gordon can't get back soon enough.



I tend to agree with this but also with what some of Speeker explains.

We'll be able to see if Weeds improves or not but I can't expect good thing from these scroats even if he does.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby jb » Sat Sep 07, 2013 4:57 pm

leadpipe wrote:Real good QB's don't stay on bad teams for long.

With few exceptions (and again, many of those exceptions pounded out in time) top ten teams have top ten QB's and bottom ten teams have bottom 10 QB's.

If Weeds is a playa he'll make a lot of things look better - even on this team.

But all that aside, really, no matter who is around, if the guy can play, we'll know it. Lotta REAL IMPORTANT stuff that ain't necessarily result based in dealing with that position.

For Weeds, (and many young QB's) how fast the game slows down is real important. Cause he's gotta start going thru progressions, and he's gotta get a better feel for what's around him in the pocket. I would argue that this shit happening is more important than the rest of the GD team combined in regard to the future - cause if it don't happen, the rest of the GD team ain't gonna matter anyway.

And expectations are different than 10 years ago. Probably not all that fair, but the game has gotten so silly QB driven that you have a lot more things that are MUSTS from that position. if you're gonna win big. This is true from a first rounder to a free agent - hays in the barn. He's here. Can he do it, or can't he. Falling into a situation where you can just game manage is becoming rarer and rarer.

The Schaub and Red Rifle examples....true, they aren't winning as much with Josh Cooper, but they aren't REALLY winning with Andre Johnson or Green. They'll get over the top when their QB's don't play like game managers. To win those three games in January Cincy has got to SCORE. Put a game manager of last year's Niners and you'll get the same year they had two years ago. Harbaugh realized this, rolls the dice with someone he feels is above game manager, and they are in the Bowl.

At the end of the day I think supporting cast and QB, aren't nearly as related as they used to be. To be sure, an excellent supporting cast helps anyone, but it ain't gonna help the guy that's short of the required prerecs - whereas in years past a cast could help out quite a bit.


92.7% of this post is oversimplified nonsense.

Football remains the ultimate TEAM sport.

Show me a QB on time with Demeryus Thomas & Ill show you a broken tacle and a TD.

Show me a QB on time with Gordon jogging the wrong route & Ill show you a pick 6.

If you're not a coach knowing the play & assignments u don't know the dif.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby jb » Sat Sep 07, 2013 5:59 pm

JacksonDysonJackson wrote:Ledging before Game 1 is an interesting development.



Well now u just quit.

No worries disagreeing but this is just a lame disengagement from the topic.

You're being deliberately dense.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby motherscratcher » Sun Sep 08, 2013 4:53 pm

Banner: "No. We are not asking for a free pass this year or any year. They should expect the team to be better. They should expect the team to play hard. They should expect it to be obvious that things are different. I'm happy being held to that standard, and I'm happy having everybody held to that standard.

Clearly
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: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby leadpipe » Sun Sep 08, 2013 5:49 pm

jb wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Real good QB's don't stay on bad teams for long.

With few exceptions (and again, many of those exceptions pounded out in time) top ten teams have top ten QB's and bottom ten teams have bottom 10 QB's.

If Weeds is a playa he'll make a lot of things look better - even on this team.

But all that aside, really, no matter who is around, if the guy can play, we'll know it. Lotta REAL IMPORTANT stuff that ain't necessarily result based in dealing with that position.

For Weeds, (and many young QB's) how fast the game slows down is real important. Cause he's gotta start going thru progressions, and he's gotta get a better feel for what's around him in the pocket. I would argue that this shit happening is more important than the rest of the GD team combined in regard to the future - cause if it don't happen, the rest of the GD team ain't gonna matter anyway.

And expectations are different than 10 years ago. Probably not all that fair, but the game has gotten so silly QB driven that you have a lot more things that are MUSTS from that position. if you're gonna win big. This is true from a first rounder to a free agent - hays in the barn. He's here. Can he do it, or can't he. Falling into a situation where you can just game manage is becoming rarer and rarer.

The Schaub and Red Rifle examples....true, they aren't winning as much with Josh Cooper, but they aren't REALLY winning with Andre Johnson or Green. They'll get over the top when their QB's don't play like game managers. To win those three games in January Cincy has got to SCORE. Put a game manager of last year's Niners and you'll get the same year they had two years ago. Harbaugh realized this, rolls the dice with someone he feels is above game manager, and they are in the Bowl.

At the end of the day I think supporting cast and QB, aren't nearly as related as they used to be. To be sure, an excellent supporting cast helps anyone, but it ain't gonna help the guy that's short of the required prerecs - whereas in years past a cast could help out quite a bit.


92.7% of this post is oversimplified nonsense.

Football remains the ultimate TEAM sport.

Show me a QB on time with Demeryus Thomas & Ill show you a broken tacle and a TD.

Show me a QB on time with Gordon jogging the wrong route & Ill show you a pick 6.

If you're not a coach knowing the play & assignments u don't know the dif.


Oversimplified?

No attempt to be complicated.

Team sport? 2013? OK.

Good QB win, bad QB lose. With exceptions sprinkled in along the way.

And I've been shown the guy that hooked up with D Thomas on a .500 team.

And then I saw the team right after that get a real QB have the conferences best record.

And yeah, the plays aren't coming into my helmet at home, but if you think Mark Sanchez if playing the game on time, we're watching a different sport.

Again, simplified. Football is a TEAM sport. But it is a HELL OF A LOT LESS A TEAM SPORT than it was 20 years ago. There has NEVER been a larger value on one player in that league. And it has always been valuable in modern football, but never this valuable.

Hell, how many rules do they gotta change?
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6584
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 » Mon Sep 09, 2013 7:20 am

I remember people here and everywhere else sucking on Sanchez's schlong and insisting he was the Real Deal...

His rookie season.... :eyeroll
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: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby jb » Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:49 am

Fire Marshall Bill 2.0 wrote:I remember people here and everywhere else sucking on Sanchez's schlong and insisting he was the Real Deal...

His rookie season.... :eyeroll



That's a bingo.

And I now officially take back that I said you never had great sports takes.

Perfect foil to Piper's FF world oversimplification of the ultimate team sport and in 2 sentences.


:clap:


This is NFL football not a packet of sea monkies.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby jb » Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:54 am

leadpipe wrote:
jb wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Real good QB's don't stay on bad teams for long.

With few exceptions (and again, many of those exceptions pounded out in time) top ten teams have top ten QB's and bottom ten teams have bottom 10 QB's.

If Weeds is a playa he'll make a lot of things look better - even on this team.

But all that aside, really, no matter who is around, if the guy can play, we'll know it. Lotta REAL IMPORTANT stuff that ain't necessarily result based in dealing with that position.

For Weeds, (and many young QB's) how fast the game slows down is real important. Cause he's gotta start going thru progressions, and he's gotta get a better feel for what's around him in the pocket. I would argue that this shit happening is more important than the rest of the GD team combined in regard to the future - cause if it don't happen, the rest of the GD team ain't gonna matter anyway.

And expectations are different than 10 years ago. Probably not all that fair, but the game has gotten so silly QB driven that you have a lot more things that are MUSTS from that position. if you're gonna win big. This is true from a first rounder to a free agent - hays in the barn. He's here. Can he do it, or can't he. Falling into a situation where you can just game manage is becoming rarer and rarer.

The Schaub and Red Rifle examples....true, they aren't winning as much with Josh Cooper, but they aren't REALLY winning with Andre Johnson or Green. They'll get over the top when their QB's don't play like game managers. To win those three games in January Cincy has got to SCORE. Put a game manager of last year's Niners and you'll get the same year they had two years ago. Harbaugh realized this, rolls the dice with someone he feels is above game manager, and they are in the Bowl.

At the end of the day I think supporting cast and QB, aren't nearly as related as they used to be. To be sure, an excellent supporting cast helps anyone, but it ain't gonna help the guy that's short of the required prerecs - whereas in years past a cast could help out quite a bit.


92.7% of this post is oversimplified nonsense.

Football remains the ultimate TEAM sport.

Show me a QB on time with Demeryus Thomas & Ill show you a broken tacle and a TD.

Show me a QB on time with Gordon jogging the wrong route & Ill show you a pick 6.

If you're not a coach knowing the play & assignments u don't know the dif.


Oversimplified?

No attempt to be complicated.

Team sport? 2013? OK.

Good QB win, bad QB lose. With exceptions sprinkled in along the way.

And I've been shown the guy that hooked up with D Thomas on a .500 team.

And then I saw the team right after that get a real QB have the conferences best record.

And yeah, the plays aren't coming into my helmet at home, but if you think Mark Sanchez if playing the game on time, we're watching a different sport.

Again, simplified. Football is a TEAM sport. But it is a HELL OF A LOT LESS A TEAM SPORT than it was 20 years ago. There has NEVER been a larger value on one player in that league. And it has always been valuable in modern football, but never this valuable.

Hell, how many rules do they gotta change?



Lets cut thru the crap.

Weedon doesn't look like the answer & I didn't see much if any improvement.


Put Peyton Manning on the Browns yesterday & tell me what happens.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby leadpipe » Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:05 am

jb wrote:
leadpipe wrote:
jb wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Real good QB's don't stay on bad teams for long.

With few exceptions (and again, many of those exceptions pounded out in time) top ten teams have top ten QB's and bottom ten teams have bottom 10 QB's.

If Weeds is a playa he'll make a lot of things look better - even on this team.

But all that aside, really, no matter who is around, if the guy can play, we'll know it. Lotta REAL IMPORTANT stuff that ain't necessarily result based in dealing with that position.

For Weeds, (and many young QB's) how fast the game slows down is real important. Cause he's gotta start going thru progressions, and he's gotta get a better feel for what's around him in the pocket. I would argue that this shit happening is more important than the rest of the GD team combined in regard to the future - cause if it don't happen, the rest of the GD team ain't gonna matter anyway.

And expectations are different than 10 years ago. Probably not all that fair, but the game has gotten so silly QB driven that you have a lot more things that are MUSTS from that position. if you're gonna win big. This is true from a first rounder to a free agent - hays in the barn. He's here. Can he do it, or can't he. Falling into a situation where you can just game manage is becoming rarer and rarer.

The Schaub and Red Rifle examples....true, they aren't winning as much with Josh Cooper, but they aren't REALLY winning with Andre Johnson or Green. They'll get over the top when their QB's don't play like game managers. To win those three games in January Cincy has got to SCORE. Put a game manager of last year's Niners and you'll get the same year they had two years ago. Harbaugh realized this, rolls the dice with someone he feels is above game manager, and they are in the Bowl.

At the end of the day I think supporting cast and QB, aren't nearly as related as they used to be. To be sure, an excellent supporting cast helps anyone, but it ain't gonna help the guy that's short of the required prerecs - whereas in years past a cast could help out quite a bit.


92.7% of this post is oversimplified nonsense.

Football remains the ultimate TEAM sport.

Show me a QB on time with Demeryus Thomas & Ill show you a broken tacle and a TD.

Show me a QB on time with Gordon jogging the wrong route & Ill show you a pick 6.

If you're not a coach knowing the play & assignments u don't know the dif.


Oversimplified?

No attempt to be complicated.

Team sport? 2013? OK.

Good QB win, bad QB lose. With exceptions sprinkled in along the way.

And I've been shown the guy that hooked up with D Thomas on a .500 team.

And then I saw the team right after that get a real QB have the conferences best record.

And yeah, the plays aren't coming into my helmet at home, but if you think Mark Sanchez if playing the game on time, we're watching a different sport.

Again, simplified. Football is a TEAM sport. But it is a HELL OF A LOT LESS A TEAM SPORT than it was 20 years ago. There has NEVER been a larger value on one player in that league. And it has always been valuable in modern football, but never this valuable.

Hell, how many rules do they gotta change?



Lets cut thru the crap.

Weedon doesn't look like the answer & I didn't see much if any improvement.


Put Peyton Manning on the Browns yesterday & tell me what happens.


They'd a been better.

And by week 6 they'd be even better.

Weeds got a ton of pressure yesterday. Again, that's where the game is going. How the hell else are you gonna stop these ridiculous passing games against these ridiculous rules that foster them?

So the things you need to do against pressure, such as pocket feel, and seeing what the hell is going on out there - who might come open off the blitz...these are things a good mosern QB does that Weeden either can't or can;t yet.

Bottom line, for EVERY QB, there's gonna be a hell of a lot more games with heavy pressure, than not. How the hell do you think the Bills stayed close yesterday? So, if you can;t deal with it, you are of zero use. Cause that's what your gonna see. Look at the NFL playoffs/Super Bowl last year. Involved A TON of teams that could bring heavy pressure - and ya still needed to hang 40 to win.

So, Peyton Manning would probably double the 4 wins WEEDS in gonna have. There are plenty of examples (including both sides of it involving Manning) in the last several years.

Got yourself a QB, ya got yourself a team.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6584
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby pod2dawg » Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:37 am

Marcus Mariota should be available at 3 or 4.
User avatar
pod2dawg
Warrior Poet aka Thread Killer
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:34 pm
Favorite Player: Phil Gordon
Least Favorite Player: Lane Kiffin

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby pup » Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:14 pm

JB,

I was fooled again. I am an idiot. My apologies.

Regards,

Pup
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12020
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Re: Browns roster talent level 2013

Unread postby jb » Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:04 pm

pup wrote:JB,

I was fooled again. I am an idiot. My apologies.

Regards,

Pup



Today Chud used the young TE's as an excuse of sorts.

The axiom holds true. SSDD. Just have to see if new guys are better than the old guys and wait 3 years. As it was it is.

And we're talking Mike Lombardi and the guy who steeped in and presided over the eagles demise from a SB contending team to mediocrity when he gained personnel control.

So breath not held.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Previous

Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Who is online

In total there are 3 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 3 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: No registered users and 3 guests