2016 Browns Season Thread

• BR1986FB

  sleeper;1773498 wrote:He's the worst. I'd rather have noodle arm Weeden or noodle arm Quinn than watch Manziel scramble around like an idiot for 4 quarters. He has no business being in the NFL and this doesn't even include his off the field stuff.

  Maybe the worst in your lifetime but you didn't watch Todd Philcox take over for Kosar....guys like Paul McDonald, Terry Luck, Dave Mays, Eric Zeier, Charlie Frye (you've seen), Ken Dorsey,Ty Detmer & Spergon Wynn. Manziel was far from great but those guys were absolute abortions. Weeden sucked ass but he had far from a noodle arm. If he had one thing going for him, he had a cannon. That's about all he had going for him.
• hilliardfan

  Commander of Awesome;1773432 wrote:THIS JUST IN: Mets VP Paul DePodesta is leaving baseball to become Browns' chief strategy officer. (via @mortreport & multiple reports)
  59 retweets 40 likes

  DePodesta says they'll focus on getting a closer and help up the middle. Should be good to go!
• Commander of Awesome

  

  BR1986FB;1773489 wrote:Agreed.
  
  Unless the QB walks into the perfect storm (a ready made team) like Roethlisberger or Flacco did, it will probably be pretty ugly.
  
  Goff, Lynch or whoever likely won't have the weapons & the protection right out of the gate, like those guys did. Right now, JT's return could be iffy (might want out/regime might want to move him), Mack is likely out the door and Schwartz is a FA. That's 3/5's of your O-Line possibly gone with a rookie coming in? I'd probably throw the rookie in about week 8, or so. Let him watch the speed of the game a little.
  
  And I certainly wouldn't start a QB because the fan base would be "annoyed" if you didn't.

  What about Bortles, Matt Ryan, Newton, Wilson, Mariotta? All QBs who by my memory didn't come into a rapistfucker like situation and still performed. Play the fucking rookie.
  
  I think Brock is a great example that mental reps count for Dick in the NFL.
• Crimson streak

  

  Anyone high on the kid from NDST?
  
  
  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
• BR1986FB

  It wouldn't make sense for the Skins' to trade within their division (unless he was released) but it would be so sweet if Little "Billy's" plan backfired and the Cowboys traded for RGIII and Johnny Boy ended up in the Arena League....
  
  http://sports.yahoo.com/news/should-cowboys-push-for-rg3-or-manziel-to-back-up-romo--190053089.html
  
  Good lord....
  
  http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/01/theres_a_johnny_manziel_billy.html
• Al Bundy

  BR1986FB;1773510 wrote:It wouldn't make sense for the Skins' to trade within their division (unless he was released) but it would be so sweet if Little "Billy's" plan backfired and the Cowboys traded for RGIII and Johnny Boy ended up in the Arena League....
  
  http://sports.yahoo.com/news/should-cowboys-push-for-rg3-or-manziel-to-back-up-romo--190053089.html
  
  Good lord....
  
  http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/01/theres_a_johnny_manziel_billy.html

  Why would you want either of those as a backup? I'd rather have a veteran game manager for a backup than turnover machines
• sleeper

  

  BR1986FB;1773499 wrote:Maybe the worst in your lifetime but you didn't watch Todd Philcox take over for Kosar....guys like Paul McDonald, Terry Luck, Dave Mays, Eric Zeier, Charlie Frye (you've seen), Ken Dorsey,Ty Detmer & Spergon Wynn. Manziel was far from great but those guys were absolute abortions. Weeden sucked ass but he had far from a noodle arm. If he had one thing going for him, he had a cannon. That's about all he had going for him.

  You would defend Weeden. : thumbup:
• sleeper

  

  Al Bundy;1773513 wrote:Why would you want either of those as a backup? I'd rather have a veteran game manager for a backup than turnover machines

  I'd rather have a bag of sand than either of those two, even as a backup.
• BR1986FB

  sleeper;1773514 wrote:You would defend Weeden. : thumbup:

  Oh c'mon I could see that setup coming a mile away. As I was typing I was thinking "this is a setup....he's going to say 'you're still defending Weeden." lol
• BR1986FB

  One thing I like about these new metrics dudes is that I think the coaching staff is going to need to be much more accountable.
  These candidates are going to have to be on their toes. "Analytics" is going to be key. If the front office asks "what are the three plays on 3rd & 10 with the most likelihood of success" they'd better know their shit.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  Azubuike24;1773486 wrote:I actually think the opposite, unless the QB has a very, very high pedigree or has experience in a pro-style system. I don't see a guy like that in this draft, regardless of "where he's picked."
  
  Look at a guy like Brock Osweiler. Former 2nd round, highly-touted prospects. Not elite though. He sat behind Peyton for a year and a half and then finally got the chance. He's done OKAY. The book is still out on him.
  
  Had you given him the reigns of a team from day one (and keep in mind, this guy would be given the reigns of the Browns offense), he absolutely wouldn't develop into anything.
  
  I suppose there is no right answer, but reaching for a QB like Goff of Lynch, and THEN starting him day one in a brand new regime with average talent around him and an average OL, would be a disaster.

  He sat behind Peyton manning because the team had a legit shot at winning a super bowl with manning. No fucking shit a rookie is going to sit behind that.
  
  If you draft a qb, you start him ASAP and let him take his lumps. Mccown behind him is great insurance. He can help coach our qb up and is a pretty decent backup to have skill wise. Shown he can play well.
  
  Bridge qb only does something if you have a top 5-10 qb to sit him behind.
• like_that

  

  Yeah, if your team is going to suck ass, you might as well throw out your first round QB out there. This is why it didn't make sense why they didn't start Manziel this year. The few times I have seen the whole sit a year or two approach work with a rookie QB is when they actually had a legitimate starter and were a competitive team.
• SportsAndLady

  

  ^yeah, LOL @ comparing the second round pick behind Peyton manning and the top seeded (or close) Broncos to the hapless Browns and their QB-less franchise.
• shook_17

  

  Yes thank you. You draft Goff he plays from day fucking one. Not sit half the year and so on. That's only if your team is winners and has an established guy like farve in place. Learn on the fly.
• Sonofanump

  like_that;1773549 wrote:Yeah, if your team is going to suck ass, you might as well throw out your first round QB out there. This is why it didn't make sense why they didn't start Manziel this year. The few times I have seen the whole sit a year or two approach work with a rookie QB is when they actually had a legitimate starter and were a competitive team.

  Because the coaches want the best current player to win as many games as possible and try to save their job even if the long term it is better for the franchise, Joseph Heller would probably have term for this quandary.
• Sonofanump

  BR1986FB;1773546 wrote:One thing I like about these new metrics dudes is that I think the coaching staff is going to need to be much more accountable.
  These candidates are going to have to be on their toes. "Analytics" is going to be key. If the front office asks "what are the three plays on 3rd & 10 with the most likelihood of success" they'd better know their shit.

  
  Maybe these metrics dudes will like WRs and the Browns might draft one...
• KnightRyder

  

  IggyPride00;1773483 wrote:If they draft a QB with that 2nd pick, it is imperative the guy start from day 1 and take his lumps this season.

  This might be as stupid as it gets, Especially when your offensive line hands out more sacks than Giant Eagle in double coupon day. Their first round draft choice is gonna take more than lumps, by seasons end he will need a drool cup.
• BR1986FB

  Sonofanump;1773559 wrote:Maybe these metrics dudes will like WRs and the Browns might draft one...

  I'd think they would.
  
  They have all of these candidates lined up but I almost wonder if this hire could be an "outside the box" type candidate that fits the analytics mode.
  
  Haslam seems to be all in with these metrics guys so he's going to have to give this a chance. Meaning, regardless of the previous comments between me & COA, he's going to have to give the new head coach at least 3 years. Yeah, three years of 4-12 (as mentioned) would really suck but this team isn't going to turn around in a year.
  
  Nobody wants to hear it but there's probably going to be a lot more pain before there's joy in C-Town. Haslam could end up being a genius/pioneer if this pans out.
• BRF

  

  Sonofanump;1773558 wrote:....Joseph Heller would probably have (a) term for this quandary.
  

  I wonder how many of our 25 posters get that.
• Laley23

  

  No regime is lasting through three 4-12 years lol. Not happening.
• iclfan2

  

  This is do or die for Scheiner. They're all his buddies, basically staking his career on this. Head coach is going to be super important. They seem to be interviewing everybody, but they have to have a favorite or 2.
  
  
  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
• BR1986FB

  iclfan2;1773589 wrote:This is do or die for Scheiner. They're all his buddies, basically staking his career on this. Head coach is going to be super important. They seem to be interviewing everybody, but they have to have a favorite or 2.
  
  
  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  The problem could lie in that, with the new metric guys, there could be some candidates that shy away from this opportunity. This is something that is pretty new. It's interesting but I'm waiting to see how metrics, which seem to work very well in baseball, translate to football.
• sleeper

  

  BR1986FB;1773594 wrote:The problem could lie in that, with the new metric guys, there could be some candidates that shy away from this opportunity. This is something that is pretty new. It's interesting but I'm waiting to see how metrics, which seem to work very well in baseball, translate to football.

  My guess is they don't translate that well in football. Baseball has a lot of 1 on 1 statistics that football doesn't really have and there are far more variables in football. How do you evaluate a WR if the QB is terrible because the OL sucks? There isn't enough data points to accurately use data to evaluate players in football either since there are less games and the 'true value' of a player may take an entire career to validate.
  
  The average NFL career is 3 years, which assuming you play every game, that's 48 games; about 1/3 of 1 MLB season. It won't work.
• GOONx19

  

  BRF;1773577 wrote:I wonder how many of our 25 posters get that.

  This is my favorite book of all time; I've read it over 10 times.
• BR1986FB

  Good read from MMQB....might confirm my suspicions they may go with an outside the box head coach....
  
  http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/01/06/nfl-cleveland-browns-paul-depodesta-jimmy-haslam