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: 2/13/2013 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
  • 12915 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
  • 12915 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
  • 12915 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
Avatar

Posted: 2/14/2013 11:48 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Gameface64 wrote:
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?
Harbaugh tried to replace Smith with a questionably healthy Peyton Manning before the season as well, don't forget.
It's not irrelevant that the coach that helped him play better then he ever had, still actively tried to replace him-and eventually did.
It should tell you something about his talent level relative to other good QBs.

The controversy was because of how it was done. Is that so hard to see?
Their winning games, Smith's managing it up, and he stayed with a completely unproven young guy.

Gameface64 wrote:
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.
^Here's the problem. When did Kaepernick become the best QB in the league? 
Kap is a good young QB-that's all.
Smith is a so-so vet. We need to be looking for a good young QB.
aka: BrownLeader

Last edited 2/14/2013 11:50 PM by JH360

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/15/2013 12:30 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Gotta make this quick. 

Poppa


-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.

LIghten up Francis, I didn't even mention you by name, yet you got all worked up. I just had a POV which doesnt suck that says giving Weeds a pass due to scheme and not extending the same courtesy to McCoy is weak. 

I could personally care less what jizz stain we have back there, I just want someone whose good.

And I hate that weak ass early sliding, you don't?

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.

I actually kinda sorta agree w/this. But I just want to mention the Gordon drop was not a game winner because there were 6 mins to go, which is about 50X the amount needed for the Browns to fatally choke.

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.


He should be developed, of course. They spent a 22 on him. Cutting him after a year is stupid, I never advocated that. I was just agreeing with Game that we should get the best available talent (upgrade the position as a unit) and then let them duke it out and if Weeds rides the pine, too effin bad.

This is war, for Chrissakes.

Poppa

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.

I will defer to your considerable knowledge on this, I don't follow the league that closely. Matt Moore could be the guy that snaked my toilet last week, for all I know. Your track record on QB's..... well you   apparently were right on Tanny, wrong on Flynn, I'll take your word for it on Moore.

Giving up cheddar for Smith sounds about as appetizing as (comment redacted lol). I was mainly referring to the concept of having a guy like Smith on the team. Trust me I could give two piles about him. No high draft picks, you pick him up if he gets cut and thats it.

Last word on Weeds: he's alright, like I said he might be good. But if he starts blowing chucks again it would be nice to have someone there to come in who has actually been successful as an NFL QB.



Last edited 2/15/2013 12:29 PM by gomjabber

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/15/2013 8:33 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Ok, 2 things Gom.

First, My handle is Poppa b/c I'm an old guy. Which means I can't see well enough to read that font size. I had to guess at most of what you wrote.

Secondly, I'm sorry if I come across as snarky at times. I'm an old guy and old guys are in pain most days. I know I am.

I'm in favor of upgrading ALL positions, especially QB. But I'm not in favor of change for change sake. BW has the tools to play the position. He just needs some PROPER coaching. And as I survey the landscape of possible candidates that we might aquire through trade, draft or FAcy at the position, I don't see anyone more capable for 2013 than BW. So why waste the resourses?

That's not to say I'm sold on BW, but I do believe he has the talent and is capable of becoming a quality NFL QB. And I believe the team needs to find out if he can. If he fails or " blows chucks" in an offense more suitable to his skill set, then we'll know and will have a better group to select from in next years draft.

I know only too well that the patients has run out with all Browns fans. But the fact is that we're looking at another season in which the team won't make a serious playoff run. Which is why this year is the time to find out if BW can succeed in the Turner/Chud offensive system.

I know there are some who think we should start over now at the position and save the year we might waste evaluating Weeden. But there no guarantee that anyone we bring in will  succeed and could very well do worst than BW. Like I said, if there's a better option than BW I don't see him.

Anyway that's just MO. And I've have been known to be wrong.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/15/2013 9:26 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 



redright wrote: 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.

This is a good point and I've tried in other posts to suggest that only after FAcy and the draft will we know what type of offense the team will run in 13'.

With Chud running a form of the read option last year with Cam, and the FO suggesting they wanted more mobility at the QB position, I've been wondering if the team will go read option by signing Smith in FAcy and then drafting someone like Manuel to develop for the future.

Or will they stick with the Turner offense and stretch the field vertically with Weeden and take a guy like Bray in April and pick up Moore or DA to backup.

I would like to see them go vertical and believe coach Turner would not have come to C-town if he thought they were going read option.

I would also like to see them reach back into BW's past at Okie st and run that little spread play Weeden liked so much, and force defenses to declare what coverage they'll run pre-snap.

I just hope these guys(the FO) are smart enough  not to try to re-invent the wheel.

We'll see.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >