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

  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12866 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

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

Posted: 2/15/2013 11:28 AM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


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? 

Poppa- I agree with you and think Weeds needs a shot this year.  However the FO, mainly Lombardi, does not want him under center this year.  We will most likely see some competition as Haslam alluded to.

You're right.  Chud could make him look a hell of a lot better.

(also, I'm an old guy too and wake up with pains all over the place each day that I never suspected to have when I was young cool )
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/15/2013 12:19 PM

Re: FAcy and Draft 


"Poppa- I agree with you and think Weeds needs a shot this year."

-- All QBs deserve what they have earned in the opinion of their masters. As do we all. 

The Browns can shoot themselves in the foot by bringing in Smith and learning he's an overpaid mistake for them. Or they can shoot themselves in the foot by passing on a key to their success in Smith with either his ability as a player or the depth he can bring. 

To avoid shooting themselves in the foot, all they need to do is be right. Simple, right? 

I can see both sides of the argument as far as Smith. I agree that the team should make an honest decision about him and not be too hasty in passing over Weeden. But do it on skill level- not some huggy whim based on Weeden's sensitivity or his need to comfortably grow into the position. 

I like QBs who tend to stay behind a big o-line, btw. Running QBs can look cool, but defenses will always try to take shots when they can. They should. Part of the job. That's why RB's careers don't always last very long.

For all his talent, I keep seeing RG3 face down on the ground to end his season. It might not be the last time. I do hear he's doing real well in therapy after reconstruction surgery on his knee... 

Speaking of over-paying, maybe we should be glad we didn't get him.
Reply | Quote