Ohio Chatter DEV

Commander of Awesome

Y-Town Steelhound;590357 wrote:I love how any time an OSU player is mentioned in any discussion relating to the NFL, some people have nothing better to say than "take off your scarlet and gray glasses". What the Browns actually need?

I understand what your trying to say, but the mention of OSU and how good X player is and how the Browns should draft that guy does tend to get out of hand for obvious reasons on Browns threads.

Y-Town Steelhound

Commander of Awesome;590401 wrote:I understand what your trying to say, but the mention of OSU and how good X player is and how the Browns should draft that guy does tend to get out of hand for obvious reasons on Browns threads.

That's true. My point is that there are some on both sides. Some people simply bring up a player's name because they went to OSU. Conversely, some people completely disregard a player if they went to OSU and anyone who has an objective opinion on that person is considered a homer.

I think the Sanzenbacher argument stands on its own regardless of where he went to school. He's just a good football player and would be an asset to the Browns so I think he's worth discussing.

Commander of Awesome

I think he is a solid football player, no doubt and could certainly help us, I think he could be a Joe J type, dont see anything above a 3rd WR though. Which is the issue, we have enough 3rd WRs on this team and a capable #2 (MoMass). We get him Robo the 4th or Stuckey? Doubt we keep both.

like_that

Commander of Awesome;590439 wrote:I think he is a solid football player, no doubt and could certainly help us, I think he could be a Joe J type, dont see anything above a 3rd WR though. Which is the issue, we have enough 3rd WRs on this team and a capable #2 (MoMass). We get him Robo the 4th or Stuckey? Doubt we keep both.

Exactly, thus why there is no reason to draft him. The Browns have many other needs other than drafting another #3 wr.

Writerbuckeye

The Browns need to address an aging DL first. Then get a stud WR, and an inside LB. Then another CB. And finally, a RT/RG (hopefully he can play both) along with someone young to start grooming for right guard. This all assumes we can sign the folks we've got now who are going to be free agents. If they don't end up re-signing Dawson, put kicker on that list of needs.

shook_17

Writerbuckeye;590638 wrote:The Browns need to address an aging DL first. Then get a stud WR, and an inside LB. Then another CB. And finally, a RT/RG (hopefully he can play both) along with someone young to start grooming for right guard. This all assumes we can sign the folks we've got now who are going to be free agents. If they don't end up re-signing Dawson, put kicker on that list of needs.

what stud reciever are you gonna get in the second round? julio jones, aj green or justin blackmon in the first round

wes_mantooth

shook_17;590683 wrote:what stud reciever are you gonna get in the second round? julio jones, aj green or justin blackmon in the first round

if you take Writer's approach..I am sure he is saying that you are going via free agency.

shook_17

wes_mantooth;590687 wrote:if you take Writer's approach..I am sure he is saying that you are going via free agency.

for sure. if we could land sindey rice or vincent jackson that would be greatttt.

zach24oz

I would love to get Sideny Rice in a Browns uni...but there is no way that would happen. Hope I am wrong but I just can't see him coming to Cleveland...That would be a pretty decent wr corps though...Rice, Jones/Green, MoMass, TE Watson & Moore. But if they signed a receiver like Rice I don't think they would take a wr as their first rounder and look more at a DB or LB...

thedynasty1998

Y-Town Steelhound;590406 wrote:That's true. My point is that there are some on both sides. Some people simply bring up a player's name because they went to OSU. Conversely, some people completely disregard a player if they went to OSU and anyone who has an objective opinion on that person is considered a homer.

I think the Sanzenbacher argument stands on its own regardless of where he went to school. He's just a good football player and would be an asset to the Browns so I think he's worth discussing.

What a couple people have failed to realize is that when I brought up Sanzenbacher, I used him as an example because of peoples familiarity with him. The Browns need someone like him. A tough WR can can get open in short yardage. The Patriots have about 5 of them and look at how good they are in the short yardage passing game. I know it's mostly due to Brady, but they built that offense around those little quick receivers who can find openings and are showing that you can have success with just that.

mucalum49

thedynasty1998;591065 wrote:What a couple people have failed to realize is that when I brought up Sanzenbacher, I used him as an example because of peoples familiarity with him. The Browns need someone like him. A tough WR can can get open in short yardage. The Patriots have about 5 of them and look at how good they are in the short yardage passing game. I know it's mostly due to Brady, but they built that offense around those little quick receivers who can find openings and are showing that you can have success with just that.

Dane Sanzenbacher is a Wes Welker/Julian Edelman in the making. I'd like to see him in Cleveland but unless we release Robiskie or Stuckey I don't see us getting him.

thedynasty1998

mucalum49;591122 wrote:Dane Sanzenbacher is a Wes Welker/Julian Edelman in the making. I'd like to see him in Cleveland but unless we release Robiskie or Stuckey I don't see us getting him.

Would it be a shock if Robiskie was cut? I don't think so.

And he's nowhere near the player Welker is. Welker is much much quicker.

mucalum49

No I don't think it is a stretch at all. Another guy I forgot about is Carlton Mitchell. Is he even on special teams?

Commander of Awesome

Mitchell plays on ST some games, it depends on if he's active or not. He's also played some on offese, as he's a great blocker at WR. He's had a few WR reverses called for him as well. I think they drafted him knowing he was project, I wouldn't expect much out of him.

like_that

Sanzenbacher is going to be no where close to being like Welker if he Browns do not get a legit #1 WR. If the Browns get a legit #1 WR then Robo and Momass will be a lot more productice.

Commander of Awesome

like_that;591161 wrote:Sanzenbacher is going to be no where close to being like Welker if he Browns do not get a legit #1 WR. If the Browns get a legit #1 WR then Robo and Momass will be a lot more productice.

Waiting for Dynasty to chime in saying "thats what he obv meant!" blah blah blah. BC he OBVIOUSLY only meant him as an example even though he didn't state it. lolfail.

Y-Town Steelhound

like_that;591161 wrote:Sanzenbacher is going to be no where close to being like Welker if he Browns do not get a legit #1 WR. If the Browns get a legit #1 WR then Robo and Momass will be a lot more productice.

There's truth to this. Anyone remember how productive MoMass was last year as a rookie #2 when stonehands was still here? He's not quite good enough to be a #1, but if they get a number 1 to draw some coverage off him he can be at his best.

Robo has always been mind-boggling to me. How someone who has grown up with a father as an NFL wide receivers coach can be so fundamentally bad at playing the position is beyond me. Hopefully he can find his niche, but patience is beginning to grow thin. dynasty mentioned the quick receivers who are good at getting open on short routes and that's what the Browns need if they're running the show with Colt McCoy.

thedynasty1998

thedynasty1998;590073 wrote:I think Mass is a decent WR, but they need a vertical threat and someone you know can get open on a 3rd and 4. They just don't have one of those guys they can rely on right now. A guy I would love for them to draft is Sanzenbacher. I think he's exactly the type of WR that would make them much better.

Why I continue to get called out is funny. But here is my original post, so I did say he's "the type of WR that would make them much better" along with saying they need a vertical threat.

thedynasty1998

Y-Town Steelhound;591170 wrote:There's truth to this. Anyone remember how productive MoMass was last year as a rookie #2 when stonehands was still here? He's not quite good enough to be a #1, but if they get a number 1 to draw some coverage off him he can be at his best.

Robo has always been mind-boggling to me. How someone who has grown up with a father as an NFL wide receivers coach can be so fundamentally bad at playing the position is beyond me. Hopefully he can find his niche, but patience is beginning to grow thin. dynasty mentioned the quick receivers who are good at getting open on short routes and that's what the Browns need if they're running the show with Colt McCoy.

MoMass is the typical #2 and I absolutely have confidence he can excel in that role. That's why they need a #1 who can stretch the field and a slot who can get open in gaps.

thedynasty1998

Commander of Awesome;591163 wrote:Waiting for Dynasty to chime in saying "thats what he obv meant!" blah blah blah. BC he OBVIOUSLY only meant him as an example even though he didn't state it. lolfail.

Your act really is getting tiresome. If you don't like what I say, then just ignore it. Why put such an emphasis on my posts if you think I'm an idiot? I really don't even mind, but I'm sure others on here don't read a post where you blatantly try to call me out when you just make up statements that are proven to be false.

Commander of Awesome

Y-Town Steelhound;591170 wrote:There's truth to this. Anyone remember how productive MoMass was last year as a rookie #2 when stonehands was still here?

I don't. 34 catches, 600 yds and 3 tds. Thats 39 yds a game. Granted he had DA and Quinn chucking him the ball, but I would hardly consider that productiive. Thats like a 3rd WR's stats on half the teams in the league.

Edwards was traded in what the 4th game of the season last year?
http://www.nfl.com/players/mohamedmassaquoi/gamelogs?id=MAS318574&season=2009

Gaylon didn't even play against the Bengals, MoMass's best game of his career.
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009100401/2009/REG4/bengals@browns#tab:analyze

Thats a wrong conception that I hear consistently though. MoMass was just as mediocre if not WORSE with Leon around. Granted he was there for 3 games, but I just dont see, nor do I have evidence towards the contrary that MoMass can be a #2.

thedynasty1998;591201 wrote:MoMass is the typical #2 and I absolutely have confidence he can excel in that role. That's why they need a #1 who can stretch the field and a slot who can get open in gaps.

Based on what? Funny how when you go back and look, and not spout shit from your high horse (dynasty, lol idiot) it becomes clear that MoMass is nothing but avg at best. There isn't any evidence to suggest that he can be a viable/productive #2 WR in this league. So you telling me its a gut feeling? Good thing since you're so clairvoyant.

thedynasty1998

Commander of Awesome;591218 wrote:Based on what? Funny how when you go back and look, and not spout shit from your high horse (dynasty, lol idiot) it becomes clear that MoMass is nothing but avg at best. There isn't any evidence to suggest that he can be a viable/productive #2 WR in this league. So you telling me its a gut feeling? Good thing since you're so clairvoyant.

Andre Johnson wouldn't have been productive if he had Quinn, Anderson, Delhomme and McCoy throwing him the ball.

And are most #2 WR's in the NFL not considered average? That is what makes them a #2.

Thanks for calling me an idiot though, not sure why that was needed...

Commander of Awesome

Your welcome, but you've earned it! Your post trolling is second only to Capone. Except he doesn't try to hide it and be a passive aggressive pussy.

thedynasty1998

Commander of Awesome;591232 wrote:Your welcome, but you've earned it! Your post trolling is second only to Capone. Except he doesn't try to hide it and be a passive aggressive pussy.

Answer me two questions:
1. What do you consider a troll? A real definition would be great.
2. How do I fit that definition?

BTW, it's "you're" and not your. My CC education taught me that.

And I'm not quite sure how I would be considered a pussy, by you. I'm not hiding from you. You know who I am. You continue to hide. Doesn't take a genius to figure out who the pussy is.

Commander of Awesome

thedynasty1998;591239 wrote: BTW, it's "you're" and not your. My CC education taught me that.

"you're" = "you are"; its a contraction (he's all confused now)
lolfail. IPOTW.

Archive

Week 13: Cleveland Browns (4-7) at Miami Dolphins (6-5)