Archive

2014 Cleveland Browns Offseason Thread

  • Laley23
    Devils Advocate;1584063 wrote:I tend to agree, If he is on the field for 80 defensive plays a game, He should have more tackles.

    OTOH, What if the Browns had an offense and He only had 60 plays a game. Maybe he's gassed and does not do well playing an extra quarter every game.
    Dont agree or disagree.

    Personally, I just expect a lot more game changing plays from a rush end or LB that high. He had a few of them, even had a few in a single game (forget who it was against). But on the whole, offenses didnt worry about him and he never really had that big time play that changed a game.

    I wasnt expecting numbers better than Kiko Alonso necessarily, but you want some of the plays that Kiko made. Game changing plays that your ordinary player just doesnt make. Because Mingo didnt make any, you tend to look at him as more ordinary and less like a top 10 pick.
  • like_that
    Laley23;1584082 wrote:Dont agree or disagree.

    Personally, I just expect a lot more game changing plays from a rush end or LB that high. He had a few of them, even had a few in a single game (forget who it was against). But on the whole, offenses didnt worry about him and he never really had that big time play that changed a game.

    I wasnt expecting numbers better than Kiko Alonso necessarily, but you want some of the plays that Kiko made. Game changing plays that your ordinary player just doesnt make. Because Mingo didnt make any, you tend to look at him as more ordinary and less like a top 10 pick.
    The jury is still out on Mingo IMO. Going a little too far to call him a busy. He has the potential and the resiliency to be a successful DE/OLB. Even though most people nowadays think players should be at all pro levels immediately, in actuality most guys take a few years to develop. Id like to see how Mingo does this upcoming season with more weight on him.
  • Laley23
    like_that;1584089 wrote:The jury is still out on Mingo IMO. Going a little too far to call him a busy. He has the potential and the resiliency to be a successful DE/OLB. Even though most people nowadays think players should be at all pro levels immediately, in actuality most guys take a few years to develop. Id like to see how Mingo does this upcoming season with more weight on him.
    I agree. I was just pointing out to sleeper that if Tannehill and RG3 are busts after 2 years at the QB position, Mingo is a bust as a rush end/olb after 1 year.
  • sleeper
    DeyDurkie5;1584079 wrote:LOL if andrew luck was on the browns, we would've won the super bowl last year. I'm done talking about this with you as you clearly value a linebacker from the mac over a potential franchise QB.
    Oh, what if Peyton Manning was on the Browns? Clearly Peyton Manning could run train on the best defense in the league and beat the Seahawks.

    You're so delusional. Manziel is not Luck and you failed to address every other QB on there except ELI. All of them were highly touted by the analysts and only 1 has a Super bowl ring to his name.
  • se-alum
    sleeper;1584022 wrote:Right, the Redskins weren't just a QB away. How'd that work out for them? Same with Indy, one QB away and they can't even make the AFC finals. How'd Tannehill and one QB away Dolphins pan out? Matt Ryan has been a QB for what, 7 years now and the Falcons were just one QB, super bowl contenders though.

    Now look at my model; the Chiefs draft BPA available and trade for Alex Smith = PLAYOFFS and one of the best records in the league. Seattle Seahawks, focus on drafting the BPA and won the super bowl over the best QB in the game. LOL
    Indy was a QB away?? LOL, do you even watch football? They dumped almost their entire team, and they still aren't that talented, Luck is just that good.
  • lhslep134
    DeyDurkie5;1583987 wrote:Lol sleeper you arent handicapped with sam Bradford contracts dumbie. New bargaining agreement killed that. Keep trying though
    Actually they were. Bradford's contract was part of the old CBA.
  • se-alum
    Bottomline, first round QB's win the vast majority of the Super Bowls. sleeper like to use "top 10" instead of first round to skew his argument.
  • se-alum
    Laley23;1584094 wrote:I agree. I was just pointing out to sleeper that if Tannehill and RG3 are busts after 2 years at the QB position, Mingo is a bust as a rush end/olb after 1 year.
    Funny how RGIII is suddenly a bust, after a very good rookie season, and a season where he was clearly not fully healthy.
  • lhslep134
    Al Bundy;1584024 wrote:You choose last year as the sample size when you said they had one of the best defenses in the league when Miller was there. The stats show that was false statement, and they played better without him.
    The stats show that the Broncos were the 5th best defense with a healthy full season from Von Miller in 2012 and the 15th best defense last with him for only 9 games.

    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

    http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2012
  • Terry_Tate
    lhslep134;1584099 wrote:Actually they were. Bradford's contract was part of the old CBA.
    Think you just misread it. Durkie was saying the Browns wouldn't be hamstrung because of the new CBA, disproving sleepers point that the Browns could have happen what happened to the Rams. Sleepers troll game is usually better than that, had a completely wrong point there.
  • lhslep134
    Terry_Tate;1584103 wrote:Think you just misread it. Durkie was saying the Browns wouldn't be hamstrung because of the new CBA, disproving sleepers point that the Browns could have happen what happened to the Rams. Sleepers troll game is usually better than that, had a completely wrong point there.
    Gotcha, yeah Durkie's right about that.
  • sleeper
    se-alum;1584100 wrote:Bottomline, first round QB's win the vast majority of the Super Bowls. sleeper like to use "top 10" instead of first round to skew his argument.
    What pick range do the Browns have? I'm not skewing anything.
  • DeyDurkie5
    sleeper;1584095 wrote:Oh, what if Peyton Manning was on the Browns? Clearly Peyton Manning could run train on the best defense in the league and beat the Seahawks.

    You're so delusional. Manziel is not Luck and you failed to address every other QB on there except ELI. All of them were highly touted by the analysts and only 1 has a Super bowl ring to his name.
    Let's look at the last 15 years and the super bowl winning QB's.

    Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
    Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
    Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rogers (MVP), 3TDs
    Super Bowl 46: Eli Manning (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 47: Joe Flacco (MVP), 3TDs
    Super Bowl 48: Russell Wilson, 2TDs

    Telling me that you don't need a QB to win the super bowl? That you need a fucking linebacker?!
  • sleeper
    DeyDurkie5;1584107 wrote:Let's look at the last 15 years and the super bowl winning QB's.

    Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
    Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
    Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rogers (MVP), 3TDs
    Super Bowl 46: Eli Manning (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 47: Joe Flacco (MVP), 3TDs
    Super Bowl 48: Russell Wilson, 2TDs

    Telling me that you don't need a QB to win the super bowl? That you need a fucking linebacker?!
    Posts the defensive rankings for each team. Thanks.
  • sleeper
    Also I don't see many top 10 drafted QBs in there. I think the only one is Eli Manning; nice try though.
  • sleeper
    Plus, if any of these QBs were worth a shit, why doesn't the Texans go ahead and draft one of them? It's fairly obvious these QBs are worthless pieces of shit that will never win anything otherwise the Browns at #4 would never have the opportunity to pick them up. For all this so called football knowledge that most of you spew, you really don't know jack. This is the same boards that gushed over Weeden when he was first drafted and now all of sudden, 2 years later, want to continue to draft QBs that will never pan out. Nice work!
  • lhslep134
    DeyDurkie5;1584107 wrote:Let's look at the last 15 years and the super bowl winning QB's.

    Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
    Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
    Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs
    Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rogers (MVP), 3TDs
    Super Bowl 46: Eli Manning (MVP), 1 TD
    Super Bowl 47: Joe Flacco (MVP), 3TDs
    Super Bowl 48: Russell Wilson, 2TDs

    Telling me that you don't need a QB to win the super bowl? That you need a fucking linebacker?!
    The bolded (with the exception of Wilson statistically) are all mediocre to above average QBs who rode great defensive performances.

    I'm not saying I agree with with Sleeper, but you're not telling the whole story.
  • SportsAndLady
    sleeper;1584110 wrote:Plus, if any of these QBs were worth a shit, why doesn't the Texans go ahead and draft one of them? It's fairly obvious these QBs are worthless pieces of shit that will never win anything otherwise the Browns at #4 would never have the opportunity to pick them up. For all this so called football knowledge that most of you spew, you really don't know jack. This is the same boards that gushed over Weeden when he was first drafted and now all of sudden, 2 years later, want to continue to draft QBs that will never pan out. Nice work!
    Lol. You've had some pretty horrible logic lately on this, but this takes the cake.
  • se-alum
    Patriots were 2nd.
    Steelers were 4th
    Colts were 23rd
    Giants were 17th
    Steelers were 1st
    Saints defense was 20th
    Packers defense was 2nd
    Giants defense was 25th
    Ravens was 12th
    Seattle was 1st

    So basically, out of the last 10 Super Bowls 5 top 10 defenses have won Super Bowls, and 5 defenses outside of the top 10, including 4 that were outside the top 15, won Super Bowls. That's weird, would've sworn that all Super Bowls are won by top 5 defenses.
  • DeyDurkie5
    sleeper;1584109 wrote:Also I don't see many top 10 drafted QBs in there. I think the only one is Eli Manning; nice try though.
    I don't give a shit if they aren't top 10 or not. With the exception of a few, they are all first round QBs. You barely find franchise qbs in later rounds. It's as simple as that. Why the fuck does it matter where we take a QB when we desperately need one? If it's with the first first rounder or the second first rounder, we need a QB. You are the delusional one if you don't think we need a QB. Also, I'll take solace in the fact that the people getting paid to scrutinize these players are calling 3 QBs in this draft very good prospects. I think, and I'm sure people on this site would agree, that if we don't get a QB in the first round, we are fucked.

    But hey, take a LB with the first pick and let's see us skyrocket to the playoffs. You can fuck bitches, get money, and fry them fries while khalil mack leads us to the promised land. Word, dawg.
  • lhslep134
    SE, say what you want about the Giants defense being ranked 17th that year, THEY were the reason they beat the Patriots and one of the best offenses ever.
  • se-alum
    lhslep134;1584111 wrote:The bolded (with the exception of Wilson statistically) are all mediocre to above average QBs who rode great defensive performances.

    I'm not saying I agree with with Sleeper, but you're not telling the whole story.
    Eli Manning rode the great defensive performances of his 17th and 25th ranked defenses.
  • DeyDurkie5
    se-alum;1584113 wrote:Patriots were 2nd.
    Steelers were 4th
    Colts were 23rd
    Giants were 17th
    Steelers were 1st
    Saints defense was 20th
    Packers defense was 2nd
    Giants defense was 25th
    Ravens was 12th
    Seattle was 1st

    So basically, out of the last 10 Super Bowls 5 top 10 defenses have won Super Bowls, and 5 defenses outside of the top 10, including 4 that were outside the top 15, won Super Bowls. That's weird, would've sworn that all Super Bowls are won by top 5 defenses.
    That's why khalil mack is such a lock at 4. In fact, we should trade up to number 1 to get him. The best defense always wins the super bowl.
  • sleeper
    SportsAndLady;1584112 wrote:Lol. You've had some pretty horrible logic lately on this, but this takes the cake.
    Really? It's no different than your "Acquiring a QB in FA doesn't work because if a player was good enough a team would never let them get to FA". Nice fail.
  • lhslep134
    se-alum;1584117 wrote:Eli Manning rode the great defensive performances of his 17th and 25th ranked defenses.
    See my above post.