Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

Re: FAcy and Draft

Avatar

Posted: 2/11/2013 10:21 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



poppa9601 wrote: There's been a lot of discussion as to how active the Browns will be in FAcy and what kind of FA's the team might bring in. So I thought I would compile a list for your discussion/destruction as to who I think would be solid FA signings and possible draft picks.

FA's
Matt Moore QB Miami
Vasquez OG SD
Keller TE NYJ
Barwin LB Hou/Groves LB SD
Johnson FS AZ/Landry FS NYJ

A lot of talk about Alex Smith and the Browns, and Smith did play 1 year with Norv as his OC. But in that year Smith completed 58% of his passes for 2890yds with 16 TD's and 16 int's. Those are McCoy numbers. Besides Moore would come cheaper and without costing a draft pick. SF has too much invested in Smith to let him just walk.

Vasquez is a plug-in and play OG who knows the Turner offense.
Keller is a replacemnet for Watson and averages 50 catches per year.
Barwin is 6'3" 260+ and Groves is the same. Either one or both would be a major upgrade.
Johnson is a FS who played for Horton the last 2 years. Landry is a FS who plays like a SS.

The draft

#6 Millner CB Alabama- Solid all around CB who's not afraid to help support against the run.
#68 Jenkins OLB Flordia St- Speed of the edge
#101 Tyler Bray Tennessee- Not my pick but if he's there in the 4th, Haslam jumps. Has the tools, needs work, and lots of it. Little doubt they draft a QB somewhere.
#132 Uzzi OG Georgia Tech- Those boys at tech can run block, this guys a road grader.
#165 Graham RB Pittsburgh- Nice compliment to the power of TRich.
#196 Sturgis PK Flordia- He's not Phil Dawson but he's made 85% of his FG's the last 2 years.

Having Landry on the backend pair with Ward and Millner who is very much like Haden would make a nice secondary. Barwin and/or Groves at OLB along with Jenkins plus our holdovers would make for a solid LBing corps.

Moore would be decent competition for Weeden at QB and be a solid backup. Vasquez at one guard spot with Lavuao, Pinky, Greco and Uzzi competing for the other really makes the o-line a strenght.

Keller at TE with Gordon and Little out wide and Cooper/Benjami in the slot and Weeden at the controls of a vertical passing/power running offense would be sweet. Wouldn't mind a vetrean WR in there somewhere. Edelman is a FA and a Welker clone. We'd really have a chance to make some noise.

Will we sign 5 FA's? Doubt it. But only Vasquez and Landry would cost decent money. The rest could be had at reasonable contracts. And with 45 million under the cap and having to spend 89% of it, it's got to go somewhere.

Well that's my list. Tear it apart if you must, just have the stones to put one up of your own.
Matt Moore - Since you think this would be a solid signing I assume you're good with Weeden starting again?
Moore looks like a good teammate but he's strictly a back up-i'm not sure there would be much competition there.
His skillset is probably less then McCoy's.

Vasquez is not a great OG.
He's simply a decent starter who's better in the pass game then run game.
If we had a great big hole at OG, he'd be a solid signing, otherwise....puzzzzt

And I think our Oline situation is actually pretty good.
Greco stepped in and played much better then Pinkston, who still may be back.

Keller would be an ok signing. Before last season, he was a decent rec TE.
I think he's slightly better then Chud's former top TE, Greg Olsen, when healthy.
But there's a bunch of talented TE's potentially available in FA.
Delanie Walker, Martellus Bennett, Fred Davis, Jermichael Finley, Jared Cook.
Given the prominence of the position in the new offense, I think opening up some cash to a talented TE makes sense.

Barwin/Groves are decent depth at a position where it's needed.
Barwin might be pricey though. I'd add Vic Butler in there too.

Rashad Johnson is pretty terrible.
I'd hope we steer clear. Landry is intriguing. He played pretty well coming back from serious injury. He is more of a SS but I wouldn't complain. There's also a bunch of others potentially up for FA. Dashon Goldson, William Moore, Kenny Phillips, Louis Delmas.

Alex Smith - You're right, SF has too much invested...that's why they'll cut him loose.
But I want no more part of him in Clev as well. He's a marginal QB and only creates a controversy here.

Dee Milliner - The problem with going CB at #6 is it ignores our primary need..pass rusher. It's an even greater need now with the transition.
Is Milliner that much more talented then whatever pass rusher is available there?
Your FA list also left out a good bunch of pretty solid CBs potentially available in FA.

Keenan Lewis - Playing like a pro bowl CB until getting injured late in the season.
Drafted when Horton was in Pitt and just coming into his prime.
Steelers actually would be foolish to let him go but reportedly they'll let all their FAs test the open market.

Greg Toler/ARI, Brent Grimes/ATL, Cary Williams/BAL, Sean Smith/MIA, DRC/PHI, Antone Cason/SD, Bradley Fletcher/STL. All would be upgrades across from Haden.

Jenkins in the 3rd is as good as any, I guess.
But there is a history of underperforming pass rushers out of FSU of late.
I like all your other choices.

I'll channel some Lombardi and project what I see as solid moves:

First and foremost, I'll think long and hard about trading for Ryan Mallett.
What complicates a trade for him is that i'm missing a 13' 2nd round pick and BB wants more picks in this draft.
If I don't go that route, i'll need to find a QB that has special upside.
i've already pretty much written off Weeden.
My hope is that he shows marked improvement in his 2nd year and becomes a good bridge for the next guy, and gives me something of value to bargain with.
I'll keep a shred of hope for him though, as well.

At safety, I really like the potential of DB Johnson Bademosi.
We'll groom him for FS or the nickel DB. (the position i think is almost as important as ILB.) Gipson might also be a keeper as a depth guy. so...

FA

Keenan Lewis CB PITT
Danario Alexander WR SD
Fred Davis TE WAS
Victor Butler OLB DALL
Dominic Alford OL CAR ;
Jordan Norwood WR CLE
Phil Dawson K CLE


Draft

1. Dion Jordan OLB Oregon
2. E.J. Manuel QB FSU
3. Duke Williams FS Nevada
4. Bruce Taylor ILB Virgina Tech
5. Quinn Sharp P Okie State
6. Chris Thompson RB FSU
aka: BrownLeader

Last edited 2/11/2013 10:31 PM by JH360

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 2:23 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



JH360 wrote:

Alex Smith - You're right, SF has too much invested...that's why they'll cut him loose.
But I want no more part of him in Clev as well. He's a marginal QB and only creates a controversy here.

I don't get this. How does a guy who was rated the #3 QB in the entire NFL. suddenly become "marginal"? Because Kaepernick is so good, then Smith is worthless?

What's the big deal about controversy? Competition at a key position on a 5-11 team isn't wrecking anything worth preserving. If Smith is so marginal, it'll prove out on the field. Don't put a lot of guaranteed money in, but if this team is trying to get better, they should start by getting more better players.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12852 posts this site

Posted: 2/12/2013 8:18 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



Gameface64 wrote:
JH360 wrote:

Alex Smith - You're right, SF has too much invested...that's why they'll cut him loose.
But I want no more part of him in Clev as well. He's a marginal QB and only creates a controversy here.

I don't get this. How does a guy who was rated the #3 QB in the entire NFL. suddenly become "marginal"? Because Kaepernick is so good, then Smith is worthless?

What's the big deal about controversy? Competition at a key position on a 5-11 team isn't wrecking anything worth preserving. If Smith is so marginal, it'll prove out on the field. Don't put a lot of guaranteed money in, but if this team is trying to get better, they should start by getting more better players.
Circuitous Thinking but, Alex Smith's value may be see in the maybe we want to sign Mike Wallace as a Free Agent.

Wallace had a terrible year in Pit. Some his attitude, but mostly the play calling. Roeth and the OC had many a words. Much unhappiness in Steel City because of the play calling. Roeth and Wallace are downfield guys. It is the best part of their game. Smith is not a downfield passer. Wallace wouldn't fit with Smith. Wallace could fit with Weeden and with Chud and Norv.

I've thought of Wallace as a possible since mid-season. He does fit our new system. He does match with Weeds and with Shurmur gone it could be good.  Wallace makes Gordon an even bigger threat.  Little would be a go-to guy and Wallace is the home run hitter requiring full time attention.

Now that Wallace had had his feathers plucked and is personna non grata in Pitt, he is a likely WR for a big arm down field passing game.  At the right price and an attitude adjustment Wallace would be a great addition. There is no subtraction from Pit. Wallace is gone.  Their Offense has changed.

Think of TO and BE and Randy Moss. Smith is not going to throw those guys open deep. Doesn't have the arm. Weeds, Moore, DA have the arm to unleash an offense of Gordon, Little, Wallace and maybe you go four wide with Benjamin.

Now Flacco and Wallace in Orange and Brown.......... fireworks.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/12/2013 11:10 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



Gameface64 wrote:
JH360 wrote:

Alex Smith - You're right, SF has too much invested...that's why they'll cut him loose.
But I want no more part of him in Clev as well. He's a marginal QB and only creates a controversy here.

I don't get this. How does a guy who was rated the #3 QB in the entire NFL. suddenly become "marginal"? Because Kaepernick is so good, then Smith is worthless?

What's the big deal about controversy? Competition at a key position on a 5-11 team isn't wrecking anything worth preserving. If Smith is so marginal, it'll prove out on the field. Don't put a lot of guaranteed money in, but if this team is trying to get better, they should start by getting more better players.
He's marginal because he's been sub par for most of his career until a great coaching staff turned him into a solid game manager.
Controversy is fine when your dealing with great talents, but when it's between your 30yr old 2nd year guy and a career game manager at best, it's not so good.
Smith's already shown what he is, no need to give him money to show it in Clev.

I think Mike Wallace might demand more money then Banner's willing to give him. Roethlisberger makes all those guys look better.

Tarvares Jackson is absolutely terrible. Lombardi would take serious heat if he signed him.
aka: BrownLeader
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/13/2013 2:39 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



JH360 wrote:
He's marginal because he's been sub par for most of his career until a great coaching staff turned him into a solid game manager.
Controversy is fine when your dealing with great talents, but when it's between your 30yr old 2nd year guy and a career game manager at best, it's not so good.
Smith's already shown what he is, no need to give him money to show it in Clev.


Kind of a shallow analysis, and not very logical.

He's been bad so far, so he can't be good, even though he was good this year.

The coaching staff made him good. If that's true, than Harbaugh can make any QB good. That would be magical! Or conversely, Harbaugh is the ONLY coaching staff good enough to make Smith any good. Not exactly straight line thinking.

Also love putting someone in the "Game Manager" box, as that is the end all be all.  If Smith played on a team with a good running game, stout defense and he scored touchdowns through a combination of effective passing and rushing with minimal mistakes, then I don't see that as a liability. Granted, Smith did not ignite that team in the same way Kaepernick did, but Kaepernick is a freak. Perhaps we shouldn't compare Smith to Kaepernick, and instead compare him to Weeden.

Not saying bring Smith in and hand him the job. Not anymore than Matt Flynn was handed the Seattle job. The Seahawks rolled the dice twice, and came up a winner with Wilson. Wilson didn't ask to be installed as the starter. He came to camp and won the job from Flynn. Are the Browns so good that the same model won't work for us? Bring Smith in (or a draft choice or a trade QB {Chase Daniel?}) and let it rip. We have absolutely nothing to lose except cap space, of which we have big bank. Years in NFL contracts mean nothing, just guaranteed money. If Smith's contract demands are too much, move on. But imo, he's absolutely worth pursuing and letting him and Weeden compete for the spot.

Those that say Weeden will lose his job if Smith is brought in must assume that Smith is clearly superior. And if that is so, what's the problem?
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/13/2013 3:48 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Speaking of illogical analysis....

"The coaching staff made him good. If that's true, than Harbaugh can make any QB good. That would be magical! Or conversely, Harbaugh is the ONLY coaching staff good enough to make Smith any good."

What is this nonsense? A great system can't make a guy look better then he is?
Smith was an absolute bust for 6 seasons before Harbaugh came on.
Then he became "good".

Let's instead compare Smith to Flacco.
Or Brady? Or Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Manning (coming off a career threatening neck), E.Manning, Ryan, Stafford, Luck, Griffin....
Let's aim a little higher then Alex Smith or Chase Daniel.

But for the sake of argument, let's compare him to Weeden.
The difference is 7 seasons of experience and a bigger paycheck.
That's about it. It's a lateral move that doesn't make the team that much better.
And that's making a big assumption that Smith can play like he played in Harbaugh's system rather then the way he played in his previous 5 systems under some very good coaches.
aka: BrownLeader
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/13/2013 4:33 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


"And that's making a big assumption that Smith can play like he played in Harbaugh's system rather then the way he played in his previous 5 systems under some very good coaches."

-- The enigma that is Smith's career.

Bringing him in and "assuming" he should replace Weeden and "assuming" he can play really well would be a mistake. Giving up too much to get him and hurting other positions would be a mistake.

Getting him for the right price and improving the QB position might not be a mistake. Sure Weeden's career has been short, but has he really shown the new regime that he's a franchise QB and they should look elsewhere first?

If there are better options out there, then the team should go after them for the right price. But Smith should at least be in the mix at this point. Considering his stats and how much they may have to give for him should also be part of the mix.
Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12852 posts this site

Posted: 2/13/2013 9:27 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Game,
Those that say Weeden will lose his job if Smith is brought in must assume that Smith is clearly superior. And if that is so, what's the problem?

rr

not really. Smith is a step aheads of Weeden. Has to be. He has 6 years experience and Weeds has one  year in the land of misfit coaches.  Likely Smith wins the QB competition, becomes the starter and never becomes all that and a bag of chips. Weeden may not be better, but if you are not certain Smith is to be your franchise QB, all you've done is paid a high price for an interim QB. Weeds or  Moore or Anderson could do that. We need to be certain Smith is our QB for 5 years or pass. Average or slightly better than average means five years of never getting to the dance.

Do you remember Bill Walsh taking an underachiever, Steve Deberg and getting him to perform as is he was pro-bowl quality?  DeBerg thought he was all world.  Not so. Walsh knew it. NO mega bucks for DeBerg. See much the same with Smith.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/13/2013 11:26 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



redright wrote:

Game,
Those that say Weeden will lose his job if Smith is brought in must assume that Smith is clearly superior. And if that is so, what's the problem?

rr

not really. Smith is a step aheads of Weeden. Has to be. He has 6 years experience and Weeds has one  year in the land of misfit coaches.  Likely Smith wins the QB competition, becomes the starter and never becomes all that and a bag of chips. Weeden may not be better, but if you are not certain Smith is to be your franchise QB, all you've done is paid a high price for an interim QB. Weeds or  Moore or Anderson could do that. We need to be certain Smith is our QB for 5 years or pass. Average or slightly better than average means five years of never getting to the dance.

Do you remember Bill Walsh taking an underachiever, Steve Deberg and getting him to perform as is he was pro-bowl quality?  DeBerg thought he was all world.  Not so. Walsh knew it. NO mega bucks for DeBerg. See much the same with Smith.

Red, Deberg was a pretty old vet, no? Don't think that's a good comparison. As I've said above, Smith would have to come at a reasonable price to be worth adding. Reasonable being front loaded contract so that if he turns out to be meh, you cut him and walk away.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/13/2013 11:33 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



JH360 wrote: Speaking of illogical analysis....

"The coaching staff made him good. If that's true, than Harbaugh can make any QB good. That would be magical! Or conversely, Harbaugh is the ONLY coaching staff good enough to make Smith any good."

What is this nonsense? A great system can't make a guy look better then he is?
Smith was an absolute bust for 6 seasons before Harbaugh came on.
Then he became "good".

Let's instead compare Smith to Flacco.
Or Brady? Or Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Manning (coming off a career threatening neck), E.Manning, Ryan, Stafford, Luck, Griffin....
Let's aim a little higher then Alex Smith or Chase Daniel.

But for the sake of argument, let's compare him to Weeden.
The difference is 7 seasons of experience and a bigger paycheck.
That's about it. It's a lateral move that doesn't make the team that much better.
And that's making a big assumption that Smith can play like he played in Harbaugh's system rather then the way he played in his previous 5 systems under some very good coaches.
Okay, and how many Offensive Co-ordinators did Smith have so far in his career. I believe that it's 6 in 7 years or something like that.

And yes, let's compare Smith to Flacco. The last two years there's been tons of opinion posted about Flacco that mirrors your low opinion of Smith, which is that he was over-rated and not good enough to win a SB.

Look, I'm not even making an argument that Smith is a sure thing. Just that to dismiss him out of hand is to deny both eye test and W-L stats. I don't buy the theory that only an uber QB can take a team all the way. I look at the Browns and I see a 5-11 team with a big question mark at QB, and I read a lot of static about how it spoil Weeden to bring in some competition. Never know, some competition might make Weeden better. Or make the team better.
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/14/2013 2:15 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Look, I'm not even making an argument that Smith is a sure thing. Just that to dismiss him out of hand is to deny both eye test and W-L stats. I don't buy the theory that only an uber QB can take a team all the way. I look at the Browns and I see a 5-11 team with a big question mark at QB, and I read a lot of static about how it spoil Weeden to bring in some competition. Never know, some competition might make Weeden better. Or make the team better.

Your POV on this makes sense, and I haven't disagreed with an F'N word you've written. 

I don't get this resistance to Smith. WTF is wrong with him? Oh yeah, he doesn't fit the scheme. You know, the whole vertical passing attack thing. 

But Weeden, he does. If it wasn't for the dunderheaded Hanoi Hilton prisoner (AA, 2012) pigeonholing him into that archaic 1993 offense, he would have set the league on fire.

Weeden has some tools, he might even be good. But giving him more or less a pass due to "scheme" while mercilessly excoriating McCoy who played in the same **** "scheme" is revealing. But Weeden, he's got that cannon.

Sometimes you gotta use your eyeballs. For all the sophistication of the modern game, it still gets down to the plays drawn up in the sand when you played as a little kid. Throw the ball to the open man. It's like the idiots that argued here about the trajectory and this and that and the other when Dilfer overthrew a wide open BE by like 20 ft.

It doesn't matter what the "scheme" is, you just make plays. Weeden missed wide open guys enough to warrant serious concern. Miight be fixable. Field General? Not so much. And he slides too soon like a wuss.

Anyway back to Smith, I never knew he existed until is name came up a while back, I did a quick check and saw the 17/5 stat line from the year before. 5 F'n picks in 445 attempts? Then I watched, I guess it was the divisional playoff game, where Smith pulled out a thriller by repeatedly willing the team down the field in the 4th quarter, sheer brilliance.

I guess his play in the championship game was less winsome, yet he still finished the postseason at 5/0. Not too shabby, and this year he was putting up numbers a Browns fan could only morosely whiff at before getting hurt and then having tropical storm Kaepernick flatten him and everything else in its path.

So yeah, while he's had some lean years, I'd say he's probably qualified to come push a rookie on a 5-11 laughingstock called the Cleveland Browns.

Not too worried about the "scheme" I'm sure Smith could adapt, and he probably can spin it a little faster than he's being credited for.

Bring him in and let them fight it out, works for me. But no high draft picks, that would be tough to stomach.



Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/14/2013 9:34 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



gomjabber wrote: Look, I'm not even making an argument that Smith is a sure thing. Just that to dismiss him out of hand is to deny both eye test and W-L stats. I don't buy the theory that only an uber QB can take a team all the way. I look at the Browns and I see a 5-11 team with a big question mark at QB, and I read a lot of static about how it spoil Weeden to bring in some competition. Never know, some competition might make Weeden better. Or make the team better.

Your POV on this makes sense, and I haven't disagreed with an F'N word you've written. 

I don't get this resistance to Smith. WTF is wrong with him? Oh yeah, he doesn't fit the scheme. You know, the whole vertical passing attack thing. 

But Weeden, he does. If it wasn't for the dunderheaded Hanoi Hilton prisoner (AA, 2012) pigeonholing him into that archaic 1993 offense, he would have set the league on fire.

Weeden has some tools, he might even be good. But giving him more or less a pass due to "scheme" while mercilessly excoriating McCoy who played in the same **** "scheme" is revealing. But Weeden, he's got that cannon.

Sometimes you gotta use your eyeballs. For all the sophistication of the modern game, it still gets down to the plays drawn up in the sand when you played as a little kid. Throw the ball to the open man. It's like the idiots that argued here about the trajectory and this and that and the other when Dilfer overthrew a wide open BE by like 20 ft.

It doesn't matter what the "scheme" is, you just make plays. Weeden missed wide open guys enough to warrant serious concern. Miight be fixable. Field General? Not so much. And he slides too soon like a wuss.

Anyway back to Smith, I never knew he existed until is name came up a while back, I did a quick check and saw the 17/5 stat line from the year before. 5 F'n picks in 445 attempts? Then I watched, I guess it was the divisional playoff game, where Smith pulled out a thriller by repeatedly willing the team down the field in the 4th quarter, sheer brilliance.

I guess his play in the championship game was less winsome, yet he still finished the postseason at 5/0. Not too shabby, and this year he was putting up numbers a Browns fan could only morosely whiff at before getting hurt and then having tropical storm Kaepernick flatten him and everything else in its path.

So yeah, while he's had some lean years, I'd say he's probably qualified to come push a rookie on a 5-11 laughingstock called the Cleveland Browns.

Not too worried about the "scheme" I'm sure Smith could adapt, and he probably can spin it a little faster than he's being credited for.

Bring him in and let them fight it out, works for me. But no high draft picks, that would be tough to stomach.




SD:

People aren't adverse to pushing Weeden , and bringing in competition to provide a fire to his backside so he can be all he can be .

However the option of Smith warrants an expenditure of resources far in excess of that goal , to the point where draft picks and an absorbitant amount of cash would turn the competition into an either or proposition where coaches will be hobbled  to make fit this new toy because of the cash outlayed to aquire his services , rendering the contest into a competition of expended reources rather than a competition of applied talent.

You can effectively push Weeds for less , husband valuable draft cheddar to add talent to the team , and leave yourself options in the 2014 draft should the results of your choices prove unsatisfactory .

Sinking a number one in Weeds , then expending more on Smith a proven underachiever of questionable ability to power a downfield passing game while expending a huge outlay of cash , for a QB who looked good on a super team so talented they  got to the Superbowl via a rookie QB replacement , doesn't bespeak of using far reaching forethought with purpose , but yet instead  a typical kneejerk rush to the gold field chasing a played out vein.

That shiny convertible in califorinia , doesn't look near as smart in the winters of Alaska.

SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12852 posts this site

Posted: 2/14/2013 10:17 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



Gameface64 wrote:
redright wrote:

Game,
Those that say Weeden will lose his job if Smith is brought in must assume that Smith is clearly superior. And if that is so, what's the problem?

rr

not really. Smith is a step aheads of Weeden. Has to be. He has 6 years experience and Weeds has one  year in the land of misfit coaches.  Likely Smith wins the QB competition, becomes the starter and never becomes all that and a bag of chips. Weeden may not be better, but if you are not certain Smith is to be your franchise QB, all you've done is paid a high price for an interim QB. Weeds or  Moore or Anderson could do that. We need to be certain Smith is our QB for 5 years or pass. Average or slightly better than average means five years of never getting to the dance.

Do you remember Bill Walsh taking an underachiever, Steve Deberg and getting him to perform as is he was pro-bowl quality?  DeBerg thought he was all world.  Not so. Walsh knew it. NO mega bucks for DeBerg. See much the same with Smith.

Red, Deberg was a pretty old vet, no? Don't think that's a good comparison. As I've said above, Smith would have to come at a reasonable price to be worth adding. Reasonable being front loaded contract so that if he turns out to be meh, you cut him and walk away.
O K How about the statiscally best Q B the Browns ever had...better statistically than Unitas and on  a great Browns team ....... Milt Plum?  

If I can not get a stud Q B, Im going wih Weeds, D A, Moore,    It gives us a chance to build the team and have a chance at better quartering.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/14/2013 10:32 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Blah,Blah,Blah.

Two points  give you away Gom.

"Weeden has some tools, he might even be good. But giving him more or less a pass due to "scheme" while mercilessly excoriating McCoy who played in the same **** "scheme" is revealing."

And

" Field General? Not so much. And he slides too soon like a wuss."


-Obviously you just don't like BW b/c he doesn't play the game the way you would or the way your hero COLT McCOY does. Got it.

Here's the thing. The time is well past for the arguements of whether Colt got a raw deal or complaints that Weeden is too old to develop. We are where we are, and it is what it is.

What it is, is that we currently have on the roster a 6'3 1/2'' 220+ lb QB with a rocket arm.
Who has 15 starts in the league. Who despite playing in an offense not designed to take advantage of his talents or skills managed to win 5 of 15 games he played as a rookie. Who except for a dropped perfectly thrown ball and the defenses inability to hold  late 4qt leads could have won at least 3 more games.

Now the real question is "Why wouldn't we try to develop that QB"?

Why?

Because we're the Browns that's why. Or at least that's the only reason I can come up with.

So he didn't play as good or win as many games as RG3, Wilson or Luck. Yeah well those guys didn't play for Pat Shurmur or with 3 other starting rookies on offense. It makes a difference.

Having said all that, if there were a clear upgrade out there in FAcy that we didn't have to give draft picks for or starter money to, I'd be all for signing him. But there's not. That's why I said to bring in Matt Moore. He's started games and has done fairly decent given his situation. He would be competition for Weeden and a good backup. Then save our drafts picks and if need be trade up next year for a new QB.

Signing or trading for Smith will be us chasing our tail again wasting time and money plus picks on a KNOWN non-championship caliber QB.

Sounds like something the Browns would do in the past. Let's see if this new regime IS really different for a change. Why guess is no.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/14/2013 10:32 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


" Never know, some competition might make Weeden better. Or make the team better."

-- The only down-side of bringing Smith in would happen if the team gave too much to get him. The upside would, of course, be that the team gets better with him.

Smith has ups and downs. In some ways he contrasts with Weeden as he contrasted with Colin. At any rate, he seems smart and he seems flexible and he's used to different head coaches and different coordinators. And he's  6'4" and he's experienced and he has some ability to have "pocket presence". 

If nothing else, the Browns would have some depth at a position that can be both important and fragile. Again, the question is how much they want to give to get Smith.

The Browns could do worse- and no doubt have.

BTW- I don't get all this worry about Weeden's psyche under a new realm. Did the coaches hurt his feelings by being inappropriate and saying the wrong thing about the QB position? Will Smith cause him to worry? Will he get lots of Valentines today?

The guy is pushing 30 and has played one year with some highs and some lows and now has a new owner and new coaches who didn't draft him. Deal with it. The coaches should make the team better and let Weeden sink or swim.

Last edited 2/14/2013 11:14 AM by HeadHole

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/14/2013 11:50 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Gameface64 wrote:
Okay, and how many Offensive Co-ordinators did Smith have so far in his career. I believe that it's 6 in 7 years or something like that."


So what. His first year with Harbaugh's OC was better then any other year he had.

Gameface64 wrote:
And yes, let's compare Smith to Flacco. The last two years there's been tons of opinion posted about Flacco that mirrors your low opinion of Smith, which is that he was over-rated and not good enough to win a SB."


Fair enough. But that has more to do with expectations.
Ravens have been a very good team since Flacco arrived as a rookie.

Gameface64 wrote:
Look, I'm not even making an argument that Smith is a sure thing. Just that to dismiss him out of hand is to deny both eye test and W-L stats."


Your eye test and W-L stats are denying the 6 years before Harbaugh.
Even while having his two best seasons under him, his coach chose to try and replace him each season.

Our rookie QB has already thrown for more yards in a season then Smith ever has in his 8 seasons.
And Weeden came within 4TDs of the most passing TDs Smith's ever thrown for a season in his career.

gomjabber wrote:
"Anyway back to Smith, I never knew he existed until is name came up a while back"
"Sometimes you gotta use your eyeballs."


Good advice.
aka: BrownLeader

Last edited 2/14/2013 1:25 PM by JH360

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/14/2013 2:06 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


"Good advice."

-- Well, posters are welcome to use their eyeballs or any other body part to analyze Smith or any other player.

Really good advice would be to watch what the Browns do as they are led by a new regime and are at least partially advised by an OC who has worked with Smith in a real football situation and is so informed.

Of course, their view of Weeden and what they would need to give up to get Smith also plays a role in their decisions. Just please don't let any concern over Weeden's delicate nature be a factor. If he or any other players are real sensitive, maybe they should pursue other interests.

So, if someone just wants to show the forum how smart they are, the good advice- as you say- would be to "use your eyeballs" and fire away. 

If you want to see what the team actually does, stand by. 

BTW- The price for Smith might be too high. There are other teams who could compete and drive the price higher and there is a consideration in SF that the depth at QB that Smith brings isn't a bad thing. So that would drive up any price for him. On the other hand, if SF keeps him, they will have to pay him money in April. Supply and demand always effects prices. Money- not a player's feelings- is a more substantive factor.

Further BTW- Apparently if the 49ers decided to keep Smith this year, they would get a low 3rd round pick as compensation if he goes FA in 2014 and gets signed by a team. Worst case if they keep him and pay his salary: they have QB depth and end up with a 3rd rounder down the road. So their is support for a belief that a 3rd round pick would be the lowest point they would negotiate from. Begin your auction at that price and the best offer wins!

2013 may well be a Weeden Year for the Browns no matter what.

Last edited 2/14/2013 3:17 PM by HeadHole

Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12852 posts this site

Posted: 2/14/2013 5:38 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


HH,

Smith has ups and downs. In some ways he contrasts with Weeden as he contrasted with Colin.

RR, I agree. That is why I don't see him as a good sign.

1. He has his ups and downs

2. He contrasts. Why not get all your ducks in a row? Weeden, Moore, D. A. or go the other way, Smith, McCoy and Lewis?  FWIW, I read Chud and Turner wanting a down-field, play acton offense.  Smith, and McCoy and Lewis seem to be a better Holmgren/Shurmur WCO fit, or whatever that supposed offense was expected to be.

Furthur, If Smith comes in there is no competition. Two different QBs in style and approach. Smith coming in means Weeds is gone.  I am okay with Weeds moving on, IF, Turner and Chud deem him not capable of starting QB status and really want to run an offense unlike what the have said.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/14/2013 10:25 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



JH360 wrote:

Your eye test and W-L stats are denying the 6 years before Harbaugh.
Even while having his two best seasons under him, his coach chose to try and replace him each season.


I don't believe Harbaugh tried to replace Smith until Kaepernick was ripe. And Kaepernick is an anomaly. If we have a Kaerpernick, let me know. So it's irrelevant that Smith was replaced by CK, because we're talking about Smith vs. Weeden.

And one more time, if Smith was so bad, why was there any controversy around Kaepernick replacing him?
>>> Decleater <<<
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/14/2013 10:36 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



HeadHole wrote: "Good advice."

-- Well, posters are welcome to use their eyeballs or any other body part to analyze Smith or any other player.

Really good advice would be to watch what the Browns do as they are led by a new regime and are at least partially advised by an OC who has worked with Smith in a real football situation and is so informed.

Of course, their view of Weeden and what they would need to give up to get Smith also plays a role in their decisions. Just please don't let any concern over Weeden's delicate nature be a factor. If he or any other players are real sensitive, maybe they should pursue other interests.

So, if someone just wants to show the forum how smart they are, the good advice- as you say- would be to "use your eyeballs" and fire away. 

If you want to see what the team actually does, stand by. 

BTW- The price for Smith might be too high. There are other teams who could compete and drive the price higher and there is a consideration in SF that the depth at QB that Smith brings isn't a bad thing. So that would drive up any price for him. On the other hand, if SF keeps him, they will have to pay him money in April. Supply and demand always effects prices. Money- not a player's feelings- is a more substantive factor.

Further BTW- Apparently if the 49ers decided to keep Smith this year, they would get a low 3rd round pick as compensation if he goes FA in 2014 and gets signed by a team. Worst case if they keep him and pay his salary: they have QB depth and end up with a 3rd rounder down the road. So their is support for a belief that a 3rd round pick would be the lowest point they would negotiate from. Begin your auction at that price and the best offer wins!

2013 may well be a Weeden Year for the Browns no matter what.
Points taken. The price for Smith needs to be right, and it's probably unlikely that it will be. But there's posters here that are dead set against even looking into the possiblity. I find that POV hard to understand. The man is not without accomplishments. Granted he's not Kaepernick, but right now who is? I can't think of a young QB that I'd rather have, although Luck may eventually prove to be even better. And knowing that Kapernick was not considered the top QB in his draft class shows that great QBs can come from nowhere.

All I'm advocating is looking hard for that elusive star, and not standing pat and restricting our options to Weeden. We've got a bankroll, we can gamble this year and I think we should. Weeden may blossom, but based on what we've seen, its just as likely that he may wilt.
>>> Decleater <<<

Last edited 2/14/2013 10:37 PM by Gameface64

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >