| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bruceb
Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 5323
Location: Rocky River, OH
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:13 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| fsubrowns9510 wrote: | | Entropy wrote: | | roger murdock wrote: | Its been pretty clear to me that we are moving on from Weeden. I doubt hes on the team next year. Chud hasn't said anything about him either.
I mean why would anyone who hasn't invested anything in him be excited by him? He will be 30 years old by game 5 next year and has shown almost nothing. Why take a risk on a 30 year old project when you can easily move on and nobody will blame you. |
You means besides the 155/255 (60.8%) for 1875 yards (7.4 YPA) 9TDs 5 INTs 87.0 rating against the Ravens , Bengals , Giants, Colts, Cowboys, Raiders, and Broncos.
Not sure how people just ignore this. |
While its possible we are moving on from him, Chud did say one of the first things he did was had a long conversation with Brandon.
I think by trying to avoid the questions they are either
A.) Not commiting to him in case they would like to bring in competition for him.
B.) Not commenting because they don't want to tip their hand in any way whatsoever regarding the draft.
C.) Completely moving on from him.
IMO its either A or B. |
Think "C.)" is a viable choice.
Based on his comments at the time which he has conveniently forgotten, Lombardi didn't like the Weeden pick at all.
I didn't either for much the same conveniently forgotten reasons.
It is best to cut your losses as quickly as you can in a bad player just as it is in any other bad investment.
_________________
Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
StewieRules
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 1308
Location: jacksonville
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Lombardi is a failure. He was a failure the 1st time he was here, he was a failure with every other organization he was with, and he'll fail here again - his track record speaks for itself. He can repeat memorized coach-speak about A & B gaps and 40 times all he wants, what he clearly cannot do is evaluate college player talent for success at the Pro level.
For him, the Costanza rule should be implied - anything he recommends, do the opposite. Success will be guaranteed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bruceb
Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 5323
Location: Rocky River, OH
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| StewieRules wrote: | Lombardi is a failure. He was a failure the 1st time he was here, he was a failure with every other organization he was with, and he'll fail here again - his track record speaks for itself. He can repeat memorized coach-speak about A & B gaps and 40 times all he wants, what he clearly cannot do is evaluate college player talent for success at the Pro level.
For him, the Costanza rule should be implied - anything he recommends, do the opposite. Success will be guaranteed. |
LOL
For all I know, you might be right!
_________________
Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas5737
Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Posts: 1850
Location: WV
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bruceb wrote: | | fsubrowns9510 wrote: | | Entropy wrote: | | roger murdock wrote: | Its been pretty clear to me that we are moving on from Weeden. I doubt hes on the team next year. Chud hasn't said anything about him either.
I mean why would anyone who hasn't invested anything in him be excited by him? He will be 30 years old by game 5 next year and has shown almost nothing. Why take a risk on a 30 year old project when you can easily move on and nobody will blame you. |
You means besides the 155/255 (60.8%) for 1875 yards (7.4 YPA) 9TDs 5 INTs 87.0 rating against the Ravens , Bengals , Giants, Colts, Cowboys, Raiders, and Broncos.
Not sure how people just ignore this. |
While its possible we are moving on from him, Chud did say one of the first things he did was had a long conversation with Brandon.
I think by trying to avoid the questions they are either
A.) Not commiting to him in case they would like to bring in competition for him.
B.) Not commenting because they don't want to tip their hand in any way whatsoever regarding the draft.
C.) Completely moving on from him.
IMO its either A or B. |
Think "C.)" is a viable choice.
Based on his comments at the time which he has conveniently forgotten, Lombardi didn't like the Weeden pick at all.
I didn't either for much the same conveniently forgotten reasons.
It is best to cut your losses as quickly as you can in a bad player just as it is in any other bad investment. |
Trent Richardson didn't meet my expectations, time to move on from him too. Little dropped too many passes, goodbye buddy. Phil Taylor seemed nonexistent the first 6 games, see ya. All other draft picks last year besides Schwartz and Winn, gone.
Or, we can give them time to prove their worth...
Nah, let em go |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bruceb
Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 5323
Location: Rocky River, OH
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Thomas5737 wrote: | | bruceb wrote: | | fsubrowns9510 wrote: | | Entropy wrote: | | roger murdock wrote: | Its been pretty clear to me that we are moving on from Weeden. I doubt hes on the team next year. Chud hasn't said anything about him either.
I mean why would anyone who hasn't invested anything in him be excited by him? He will be 30 years old by game 5 next year and has shown almost nothing. Why take a risk on a 30 year old project when you can easily move on and nobody will blame you. |
You means besides the 155/255 (60.8%) for 1875 yards (7.4 YPA) 9TDs 5 INTs 87.0 rating against the Ravens , Bengals , Giants, Colts, Cowboys, Raiders, and Broncos.
Not sure how people just ignore this. |
While its possible we are moving on from him, Chud did say one of the first things he did was had a long conversation with Brandon.
I think by trying to avoid the questions they are either
A.) Not commiting to him in case they would like to bring in competition for him.
B.) Not commenting because they don't want to tip their hand in any way whatsoever regarding the draft.
C.) Completely moving on from him.
IMO its either A or B. |
Think "C.)" is a viable choice.
Based on his comments at the time which he has conveniently forgotten, Lombardi didn't like the Weeden pick at all.
I didn't either for much the same conveniently forgotten reasons.
It is best to cut your losses as quickly as you can in a bad player just as it is in any other bad investment. |
Trent Richardson didn't meet my expectations, time to move on from him too. Little dropped too many passes, goodbye buddy. Phil Taylor seemed nonexistent the first 6 games, see ya. All other draft picks last year besides Schwartz and Winn, gone.
Or, we can give them time to prove their worth...
Nah, let em go |
Or keep them, and go with Weeden for a 4-6 win season.
_________________
Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candyman93
Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 34773
Location: Adopt a Brownie 2012: TJ Ward
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Lombardi didn't like Josh Gordon
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bruceb
Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 5323
Location: Rocky River, OH
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| candyman93 wrote: | | Lombardi didn't like Josh Gordon |
Another reason why I don't buy into Banner/Lombardi yet.
Frankly, I still am not sure we won't see a league suspension of Gordon at what probably will be a most inopportune time for us because he likes the weed.
_________________
Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candyman93
Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 34773
Location: Adopt a Brownie 2012: TJ Ward
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Gordon was clean last year. I don't care if he smokes more weed than snoop as long as he doesn't get caught.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
roger murdock
Joined: 13 Dec 2010
Posts: 5211
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Who cares if Lombardi didn't like Gordon. Most on here didn't like him when we took him high second. I'm sure he doesn't think he still bad.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bulldog
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 4343
Location: Salem
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Facts.
-We all love Tom Heckert. He did a great job adding talent to our roster.
-Heckert still doesn't have a job. Kind of weird for a guy that's done so well.
-the Browns retained the whole scouting dept. You know, the guys that found billy winn, hughes, gordon and so on.
So does the new FO think heckert was responsible for the added talent, or the main contributer to misses in the draft, trades, and Free Agent contracts? (Weeden, trade up for hardesty, dumb contracts to Rucker and Patterson.)
I'm starting to think heckert wasn't as great as we thought. He hit in the draft as well as anyone, but missed in FA a lot. So maybe its just the scouting dept that's that good. If lombardi can work and listen to them (I know that's a big if) and Banner can handle contracts and FA (which he most certainly can do) then maybe its not as bad as we thought.
_________________
2013 First Ballot Recipient of the Joe Blackburn Award |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ReggieCamp
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
Posts: 8663
Location: Canonsburg, PA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| fsubrowns9510 wrote: | Eagles bring in Tom Gamble to be VPPP.
So they got Chip Kelly and Gamble
We got Chud and Lombardi...
This one should be fun to track. |
I prefer their personnel people to ours.
I prefer our coaches to theirs.
_________________
Cleveland Browns: We put the fun in dysfunction.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ReggieCamp
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
Posts: 8663
Location: Canonsburg, PA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bulldog wrote: | -the Browns retained the whole scouting dept. You know, the guys that found billy winn, hughes, gordon and so on.
So does the new FO think heckert was responsible for the added talent, or the main contributer to misses in the draft, trades, and Free Agent contracts? (Weeden, trade up for hardesty, dumb contracts to Rucker and Patterson.) |
I am encouraged by the fact that guys like Spytek and all the scouts have stayed on. I have no idea how these guys will work with Lombardi and all the new coaches, but it's nice to at least have some continuity in the scouting process.
_________________
Cleveland Browns: We put the fun in dysfunction.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
