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)

Re: FAcy and Draft

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

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: 2/15/2013 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 12:38 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


Don't know what happened with the font size, it looks normal on my comp. So I fixed it, don't want to get you any more riled up.
Reply | Quote