| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bungleodeon
Joined: 19 Mar 2009
Posts: 7878
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:02 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
An article descirbing the pros and cons of QB rating and saying nothing about Weeden's actual play on the field? Exciting...
_________________
Adopt-a-Brown: Jabaal Sheard - Stats:
2011: 55 Tackles - 8.5 Sacks - 5 FF - 1 FR - 2 PD - 7 STF
2012: 54 Tackles - 7 Sacks - 1 FF - 3 PD - 2 STF |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hornbybrown
Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 12813
Location: dunedin new zealand
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hey Dawg great work on all the prospects threads.
How about a late round developmental QB thread?
I think we will take one.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DawgSoldier
Joined: 30 Oct 2007
Posts: 5947
Location: Medina OH
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| hornbybrown wrote: | Hey Dawg great work on all the prospects threads.
How about a late round developmental QB thread?
I think we will take one. |
Me do a QB thread in a Browns forum.
That's like giving Iranians weapons grade uranium.
Bound to be explosive and good for no one.
_________________
The Dawgpounds new three headed monster!
Adopt a Brown: QB Brandon Weeden
247/433 57% 2820yds 6.5avg 13 TD 15 Int |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas5737
Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Posts: 1854
Location: WV
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DawgSoldier wrote: | | hornbybrown wrote: | Hey Dawg great work on all the prospects threads.
How about a late round developmental QB thread?
I think we will take one. |
Me do a QB thread in a Browns forum.
That's like giving Iranians weapons grade uranium.
Bound to be explosive and good for no one. |
If you do it at this time of the night the thread will be derailed by the time most people read it and it won't matter. I say go for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hornbybrown
Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 12813
Location: dunedin new zealand
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Thomas5737 wrote: | | DawgSoldier wrote: | | hornbybrown wrote: | Hey Dawg great work on all the prospects threads.
How about a late round developmental QB thread?
I think we will take one. |
Me do a QB thread in a Browns forum.
That's like giving Iranians weapons grade uranium.
Bound to be explosive and good for no one. |
If you do it at this time of the night the thread will be derailed by the time most people read it and it won't matter. I say go for it. |
If it needs derailing I'm your man.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas5737
Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Posts: 1854
Location: WV
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| hornbybrown wrote: | | Thomas5737 wrote: | | DawgSoldier wrote: | | hornbybrown wrote: | Hey Dawg great work on all the prospects threads.
How about a late round developmental QB thread?
I think we will take one. |
Me do a QB thread in a Browns forum.
That's like giving Iranians weapons grade uranium.
Bound to be explosive and good for no one. |
If you do it at this time of the night the thread will be derailed by the time most people read it and it won't matter. I say go for it. |
If it needs derailing I'm your man. |
Hornby train company, we specialize in derailment.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DawgSoldier
Joined: 30 Oct 2007
Posts: 5947
Location: Medina OH
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| hornbybrown wrote: | | Thomas5737 wrote: | | DawgSoldier wrote: | | hornbybrown wrote: | Hey Dawg great work on all the prospects threads.
How about a late round developmental QB thread?
I think we will take one. |
Me do a QB thread in a Browns forum.
That's like giving Iranians weapons grade uranium.
Bound to be explosive and good for no one. |
If you do it at this time of the night the thread will be derailed by the time most people read it and it won't matter. I say go for it. |
If it needs derailing I'm your man. |
Here comes your yellow cake uranium laced with nitroglecerion.
_________________
The Dawgpounds new three headed monster!
Adopt a Brown: QB Brandon Weeden
247/433 57% 2820yds 6.5avg 13 TD 15 Int |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bonanza23
Joined: 10 Nov 2008
Posts: 5411
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I posted this in another thread, and it is exactly how I feel. I'm sorry to say we don't know what we have in Weeden. Another year hopefully will solve it.
_________________
Thanks to ReggieCamp on the sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
roger murdock
Joined: 13 Dec 2010
Posts: 5215
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
This is one of the worst articles I have ever read. He doesn't say anything of value in the entire piece.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bonanza23
Joined: 10 Nov 2008
Posts: 5411
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| roger murdock wrote: | | This is one of the worst articles I have ever read. He doesn't say anything of value in the entire piece. |
That's the point 
_________________
Thanks to ReggieCamp on the sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ether
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 1466
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bruceb wrote: | While I generally like these kinds of articles from Pluto, I thought this one sucked.
Too diffident, noncommittal for my liking. |
Pluto is a noncommittal optimist in all his articles. That's why he's so well liked by a lot of people. Most of his articles in the PD seem so lazy and he provides as much insight as most posters in this forum. I don't think it's because he's a bad writer, I think he just has his hands in too much stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ether
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 1466
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| By the way that's not a shot at the posters in this forum. I just expect more from somebody who regularly gets paid to provide published insight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
duke2056
Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 7731
Location: Cleveland area
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
If we keep all the same coaches and GM (which we won't) then of course Weeden should be our starter next year. He certainly played well enough as a rookie to warrant starting him in 2013.
And for anyone who says Weeden should be better than a normal rookie cause he is 29, you are an idiot. He is still a rookie. Age is pretty irrelevant.
If our front office drafted him and expected immediate success and would be unwilling to give him a 2nd year if there wasn't immediate success....then they are idiots.
However, the entire argument changes when we get a new coach, and also if we get a new GM. At that point, it doesn't matter whether or not Weeden deserves to be the starter in 2013. If the new staff and front office wants to go a different direction, they will, and I would not really criticize them for it. As long as the change is a to a different rookie, or a really good vet. Not sure either will be available for 2013, so I do expect Weeden to be our starter in 2013 even if the new coaches and front office don't even like him, because he is likely going to be the best option they have.
_________________
NEW 2011 draft prediction.
Cam Newton's dad accepts 200k for talking Cam into attending the draft, but Cam denies any knowledge of his dad getting money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UKClevelander
Joined: 03 Sep 2012
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| duke2056 wrote: |
However, the entire argument changes when we get a new coach, and also if we get a new GM.. |
Judging by the rumours it looks like we clean house from Monday. With a new GM/coach duo coming in my first thought would be they would want "their" man (be it a trade or draft).
I have a question which I am not sure if it can be answered easily or not:
What is the % of a new GM/coach duo sticking with the incumbent QB? From my patchy memory I think the Falcons drafted Ryan after a new HC/GM but I don't know about any other examples to help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Entropy
Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 1909
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Ether wrote: | | bruceb wrote: | While I generally like these kinds of articles from Pluto, I thought this one sucked.
Too diffident, noncommittal for my liking. |
Pluto is a noncommittal optimist in all his articles. That's why he's so well liked by a lot of people. Most of his articles in the PD seem so lazy and he provides as much insight as most posters in this forum. I don't think it's because he's a bad writer, I think he just has his hands in too much stuff. |
So people that think either "Weeden is the man" or "Weeden sucks" would have more insight? They wouldn't be lazy?
The situation is "we don't know enough" for either opinion. That's what he was saying.
That's good insight and it wasn't lazy.
Being "noncommittal" is absolutely appropriate when committing to either extreme is unfounded.
Now, if Weeden plays this way next year with more experienced receivers, a healthier RB, a more experienced line, and a better defense, THEN there will be a foundation to say "He Sucks"...and if he clearly plays better next year, for any reason, there will be a foundation to say "He's the guy".
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
