2015 Browns Offseason Thread

• BR1986FB

  Commander of Awesome;1742931 wrote:I'm all for starting JFF over McCown. McCown sucks, and is older than weeden's older brother (fuckin' old). He's a bum, always been a bum, etc.... JFF has less than a 5% chance of not being trash, which is 5% higher than McCown. However he has to earn it, on and off the field. He wants to continue to play penis flickers, and can't beat McCown out for the starter, than he can hit the bricks.

  My thoughts are that the Browns are going to be in QB "purgatory" until they really suck ass and win 2 games or somehow get lucky in a trade (and we know how that goes). They seem to always fall in that 4-5 win area which leaves them just out of the sweepstakes for a potential franchise QB. I'd be willing to dive on that 2 win "grenade", as a fan, for one year to potentially get their guy. If watching JFF look like an idiot out there is the "cost", so be it.
  
  I did find it interesting that a story on Yahoo had "32 players to watch", one from each team (Browns was Duke Johnson), and the Saints player to watch was Garrett Grayson, who many projected the Browns to take in a later round, even though the Saints still have Brees.
• sleeper

  

  SportsAndLady;1742933 wrote:Start JFF.

  I agree with this. Start him so that we can finally say "He blows" and cut him. Tired of this potential shit; he's not and never will be an NFL caliber QB. He belongs in Canada or some 3rd tier league because he certainly is not an NFL QB.
• BR1986FB

  sleeper;1743109 wrote:I agree with this. Start him so that we can finally say "He blows" and cut him. Tired of this potential shit; he's not and never will be an NFL caliber QB. He belongs in Canada or some 3rd tier league because he certainly is not an NFL QB.

  Only reason I suggested it is because he's either going to be so bad that they will be selecting very high or he may have something where they go "hmmm, he might be worth keeping around." McCown sucks but he might be able to "manage" them to 5 or 6 wins which would put them out of reach of one of the top QB's, again.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  sleeper;1743109 wrote:I agree with this. Start him so that we can finally say "He blows" and cut him. Tired of this potential shit; he's not and never will be an NFL caliber QB. He belongs in Canada or some 3rd tier league because he certainly is not an NFL QB.

  Still better than McCown.
  
  McCown, McCoy, Dilfer, Delhomme, Quinn, Weeden, Anderson, Holcomb all fucking bums
• sleeper

  

  Commander of Awesome;1743114 wrote:Still better than McCown.
  
  McCown, McCoy, Dilfer, Delhomme, Quinn, Weeden, Anderson, Holcomb all fucking bums

  JFF is a bum and I can't wait for him to prove it.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  BR1986FB;1743112 wrote:Only reason I suggested it is because he's either going to be so bad that they will be selecting very high or he may have something where they go "hmmm, he might be worth keeping around." McCown sucks but he might be able to "manage" them to 5 or 6 wins which would put them out of reach of one of the top QB's, again.

  McCown definitely sucks, but if we can run the fucking ball and stop the run any QB on the browns has potential to win more than 9 games.
• BR1986FB

  Commander of Awesome;1743116 wrote:McCown definitely sucks, but if we can run the fucking ball and stop the run any QB on the browns has potential to win more than 9 games.

  Big "if." The defense might play better but the oppositions defense will be keying on the Browns to run the ball.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  BR1986FB;1743117 wrote:Big "if." The defense might play better but the oppositions defense will be keying on the Browns to run the ball.

  Good running teams can run the ball WHEN they want to run the ball. Scheme and mentality.
  
  Don't run the fucking toss sweep every 1st down, and a stretch run play to the RT on 2nd down. Mix it up, NORTH AND SOUTH, guards that want to run the ball, etc...
  
  OH also, if we have Peyton Fucking Hillis back there, don't run a toss sweep with Armond fucking Smith on 4th and 1. Fucking idiots.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  Commander of Awesome;1743114 wrote:Still better than McCown.

  Based off a game and a half? COALOGIC
• Commander of Awesome

  

  DeyDurkie5;1743128 wrote:Based off a game and a half? COALOGIC

  No dipshit, based on McCown's career. Garbage nice fail dumbfuck, prob took too much pot, so cognitive exercises are difficult for you.
• BR1986FB

  Commander of Awesome;1743124 wrote:Good running teams can run the ball WHEN they want to run the ball. Scheme and mentality.
  
  Don't run the fucking toss sweep every 1st down, and a stretch run play to the RT on 2nd down. Mix it up, NORTH AND SOUTH, guards that want to run the ball, etc...
  
  OH also, if we have Peyton Fucking Hillis back there, don't run a toss sweep with Armond fucking Smith on 4th and 1. Fucking idiots.

  They won't win 9 games just running the ball and playing good defense. The closest example to that is Seattle and a) the Browns defense isn't even close to theirs, b) Lynch is a better RB than anything on Cleveland's roster and c) even Russell Wilson makes plays when he has to. The key component here is Russell Wilson. The Browns don't have anything close.
  
  I'm not saying you've said it but I think a lot of people are overestimating how good the defense will be. I think they will be better but not elite, which is what they'd need to be to win 9 games by running the ball.
• BR1986FB

  Commander of Awesome;1743130 wrote: prob took too much pot,

  Unless he was eating brownies, you don't "take" pot, you smoke it.
• sleeper

  

  BR1986FB;1743132 wrote:They won't win 9 games just running the ball and playing good defense. The closest example to that is Seattle and a) the Browns defense isn't even close to theirs, b) Lynch is a better RB than anything on Cleveland's roster and c) even Russell Wilson makes plays when he has to. The key component here is Russell Wilson. The Browns don't have anything close.
  
  I'm not saying you've said it but I think a lot of people are overestimating how good the defense will be. I think they will be better but not elite, which is what they'd need to be to win 9 games by running the ball.

  COA has a hard-on for the running game but the running game is irrelevant if you don't have a competent QB in the backfield. Just looks at most teams that are successful; they usually have a no name RB and a top tier QB and they win. The reverse is just not true(see: The vikings).
• BR1986FB

  sleeper;1743144 wrote:COA has a hard-on for the running game but the running game is irrelevant if you don't have a competent QB in the backfield. Just looks at most teams that are successful; they usually have a no name RB and a top tier QB and they win. The reverse is just not true(see: The vikings).

  Sometimes you can get away with that but you have to have a very special defense and an awesome running game, which I think the Browns have neither. As I've said before, a very good QB can cover a teams' deficiency (see Peyton Manning/Andrew Luck with shitty defenses in Indy). The Browns got away with winning 7 games last year with Hoyer because of a favorable schedule. On paper, this years' schedule looks much tougher with probably a worse QB (McCown).
• sleeper

  

  BR1986FB;1743149 wrote:Sometimes you can get away with that but you have to have a very special defense and an awesome running game, which I think the Browns have neither. As I've said before, a very good QB can cover a teams' deficiency (see Peyton Manning/Andrew Luck with shitty defenses in Indy). The Browns got away with winning 7 games last year with Hoyer because of a favorable schedule. On paper, this years' schedule looks much tougher with probably a worse QB (McCown).

  If we win more than 5 games this year, I'll be shocked. We do have talent on the roster but we blow as a team and won't win anything until we fix the QB spot.
• Heretic

  

  BR1986FB;1743134 wrote:Unless he was eating brownies, you don't "take" pot, you smoke it.

  Brownies are fun, though! You munch a couple, sit back and wait for the "tidal wave" to sweep you away to oblivion.
  
  Anyway, now that my PSA has concluded, I return you all to your regularly scheduled argument.
• SportsAndLady

  

  sleeper;1743151 wrote:If we win more than 5 games this year, I'll be shocked. We do have talent on the roster but we blow as a team and won't win anything until we fix the QB spot.

  Qb spot, coaching blunders, stupid mistakes, awful special teams, etc.
  
  We have talent but that doesn't mean shit when you don't have all the above.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  Take pot[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
  
  Talk about dumbfuck
• Commander of Awesome

  

  DeyDurkie5;1743180 wrote:Take pot[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
  
  Talk about dumbfuck

  It's an old oc inside joke dummy. You just forgot because you take too many drugs, thus your memory has turned to shit. A known side effect.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  Heading to the 480 bridge
  
  Offense
  
  Quarterback: Josh McCown, Browns
  Contract Flaws: Paying for the Outlier, The Marginal Talent
  McCown, the subject of a bidding war between the Bills and Browns this offseason, was a replacement-level backup for years before producing a stunning 224-pass sample with the Bears in 2013. That run was driven by a totally unsustainable interception rate of 0.4 percent, 10 times below his previous career average of 4.0 percent. The Buccaneers bit on the premise that McCown’s 2013 was more meaningful than his first 1,113 attempts and found that he was still Josh McCown; despite possessing Vincent Jackson and Mike Evans at wide receiver, McCown threw interceptions on 4.3 percent of his throws and saw his QBR fall from a league-high 85.1 in 2013 to 32.8 last year, a figure that only topped that of Jags rookie Blake Bortles.
  OK, so lesson learned, he’s still the same Josh McCown. But then why are the Browns convinced that last year was really the fluke? After McCown was paid about the veteran’s minimum for years and then struggled mightily last year, Cleveland outbid Buffalo for the right to give McCown another chance. The Browns guaranteed $6.25 million to McCown over the next two seasons to serve as their veteran stopgap ahead of Johnny Manziel, which doesn’t seem to fit any logical plan.
  The Browns aren’t one competent quarterback away from competing, and even if they were, McCown is 36 and has delivered one competent half-season of play during a 13-year career. If you think Manziel has a prayer, don’t pay meaningful guaranteed money to put somebody in his way. And if you don’t, at least try to find somebody with even a modicum of upside. Brian Hoyer wasn’t the answer, but there was at least some logic in using Hoyer, who had some tools and hadn’t been given much of a chance to prove anything about his professional future. We know what Josh McCown is by now.
  (Side note: Where’s Jay Cutler? While it’s amazing just how far Cutler’s stock has fallen in one year, it’s also true that this was a deal the Bears really couldn’t get out of doing. At the end of 2013, Cutler was a 30-year-old starting quarterback about to hit unrestricted free agency after a season in which he was above-average in just about every facet of performance. Cutler had also been just below league average during his five seasons in Chicago, and given how bad his offensive line was for his first three seasons in town, it was fair to project him to be about a league-average starter in 2014. You can fault the Bears for not signing him earlier or for structuring the deal in a way that basically guaranteed he would stay on the roster through 2016, but teams don’t give away league-average quarterbacks for nothing.)
  
  
  http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-nfls-all-bad-contracts-team/
• GOONx19

  

  Are preseason games ever fun? I can't decide if I want to go to Tampa next month. It will be my only chance to see Cleveland sports live until the Cavs season starts.
• Classyposter58

  

  Haha I love this thread. 3-13 for the Browns this season
• DeyDurkie5

  

  Classyposter58;1743232 wrote:Haha I love this thread. 3-13 for the Browns this season

  Lions overrated again ha ha. Bet you the Browns have a better record than the lions.
• Classyposter58

  

  DeyDurkie5;1743235 wrote:Lions overrated again ha ha. Bet you the Browns have a better record than the lions.

  We'll see how the line fairs without Suh. It all depends on how they start the season, it's a brutal first five games. If they go 3-2 then 10 wins is a safe call
• DeyDurkie5

  

  Classyposter58;1743236 wrote:We'll see how the line fairs without Suh. It all depends on how they start the season, it's a brutal first five games. If they go 3-2 then 10 wins is a safe call

  Ignoring my bet?