Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Stats show WCO was never the best route for Weeden
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cleveland Browns
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

roger murdock wrote:
I mean exactly what I said. There has never been a rookie QB on the Browns to have a good season. Weeden being the tallest dwarf means nothing to me.If Weeden is ever going to break out it won't be because of him breaking some 22 year olds crappy record from 30 years ago.

And I think Sipe and Kosar would be hot garage in todays NFL.


Never? Otto Graham was pretty good in his rookie AAFC season AND his first year in the NFL.

And exactly how many good rookie QBs are there in history anyway?

And yeah, Manning (both), Brady, Rodgers, and all of them would be hot garbage playing in other eras too.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
roger murdock


Joined: 13 Dec 2010
Posts: 6261
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Entropy wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
Entropy wrote:
candyman93 wrote:
I think you guys are having a failure to communicate. I think Roger thought you were referring to purely rookie years based on wording.


My wording?

Roger is the one that used wording that suggested there were no good QBs that have ever played for the Browns after being rookies.

If his intention was not to suggest that there were no good QBs to play for the Browns, then why bring it up? Why use the wording he chose to use?

I made him aware of two very good QBs who did not play as well as Weeden did when they were rookies.


I'm with Candy, I think Roger was saying Weeden's rookie records weren't impressive because no one had set the bar very high for rookie QB's in the Browns history. None the less, it's better to set records than not, so I don't like that argument anyway. Weeden has been judged harshly by many since draft day, not just by Browns fans but by all fans and media. He will have to really impress to be accepted.

I hope he gets accepted.


Well ok, let's not focus on the how high the bar was set then...name some recent rookies that also could have broken those same records. I think you'll see the point.


Of recent QBs I think Luck, Wilson, Bradford, RG3, Newton, and Ryan would have for sure done better than Weeden and easily broken the rookie QB records. Guys like Flacco, Dalton, Locker, & Tannehill I think would have done similar to Weeden (maybe a little worse) but they are way younger and rawer than Weeden as rookies and thus would have had a reason to give optimism for the future.

Weeden doesn't excite me because unless he turns it on this season and delivers we will be getting rid of him. That is a waste of a first round pick. Given his performance last year I don't see much of a reason to expect him to do well this year, although I do have a lot of faith in this coaching staff so if anyone can find a way it might be them.

I'd be more patient with Weeden if I thought I saw some leadership or confidence from him but I never get that feeling. He seems like just a guy, who's old, and not very good.

I think Weeden did better than guys like Gabbert, Ponder would have done but I've never been high on either of them as starters.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
roger murdock


Joined: 13 Dec 2010
Posts: 6261
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thomas5737 wrote:
roger murdock wrote:
I mean exactly what I said. There has never been a rookie QB on the Browns to have a good season. Weeden being the tallest dwarf means nothing to me.If Weeden is ever going to break out it won't be because of him breaking some 22 year olds crappy record from 30 years ago.

And I think Sipe and Kosar would be hot garage in todays NFL.


Okay now I'm with Entropy, take it however you want you are right and Roger is wrong. Laughing

I saw a lot of Kosar, and he was a magician. His accuracy was awesome and his intelligence on the field unmatched. He rarely turned the ball over. He was smarter than his coaches (offensively)and that probably led to him losing his job.


He was perfect for his era but I think with the insane speed of defensive players nowadays he would have more of a drop off. Kosar was awesome but even when he was playing well he made everything look like a damn struggle.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
buno67


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 31357
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

roger murdock wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
roger murdock wrote:
I mean exactly what I said. There has never been a rookie QB on the Browns to have a good season. Weeden being the tallest dwarf means nothing to me.If Weeden is ever going to break out it won't be because of him breaking some 22 year olds crappy record from 30 years ago.

And I think Sipe and Kosar would be hot garage in todays NFL.


Okay now I'm with Entropy, take it however you want you are right and Roger is wrong. Laughing

I saw a lot of Kosar, and he was a magician. His accuracy was awesome and his intelligence on the field unmatched. He rarely turned the ball over. He was smarter than his coaches (offensively)and that probably led to him losing his job.


He was perfect for his era but I think with the insane speed of defensive players nowadays he would have more of a drop off. Kosar was awesome but even when he was playing well he made everything look like a damn struggle.


could you imagine how good Bernie could of been if he played in todays NFL. If Bernie could of stayed healthy he could of been real good. If he could of been protected like todays QBs are today Bernie could of be a beast for a long time.

I think now a days its really hard to judge QBs from the early 90s and prior to todays QBs because of the new rules
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
bruceb


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 6974
Location: Rocky River, OH
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Entropy wrote:
roger murdock wrote:
I mean exactly what I said. There has never been a rookie QB on the Browns to have a good season. Weeden being the tallest dwarf means nothing to me.If Weeden is ever going to break out it won't be because of him breaking some 22 year olds crappy record from 30 years ago.

And I think Sipe and Kosar would be hot garage in todays NFL.


Never? Otto Graham was pretty good in his rookie AAFC season AND his first year in the NFL.

And exactly how many good rookie QBs are there in history anyway?

And yeah, Manning (both), Brady, Rodgers, and all of them would be hot garbage playing in other eras too.


A better question would be: How did the Browns' rookie QB records that Weeden set compare to the rookie QB records of other teams?

The fact is that we didn't win any more games with Weeden at the helm -- with the benefit of vastly improved talent around him -- than we did with McCoy, who had no such talent in his supporting cast.
_________________
Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

roger murdock wrote:
Entropy wrote:
Thomas5737 wrote:
Entropy wrote:
candyman93 wrote:
I think you guys are having a failure to communicate. I think Roger thought you were referring to purely rookie years based on wording.


My wording?

Roger is the one that used wording that suggested there were no good QBs that have ever played for the Browns after being rookies.

If his intention was not to suggest that there were no good QBs to play for the Browns, then why bring it up? Why use the wording he chose to use?

I made him aware of two very good QBs who did not play as well as Weeden did when they were rookies.


I'm with Candy, I think Roger was saying Weeden's rookie records weren't impressive because no one had set the bar very high for rookie QB's in the Browns history. None the less, it's better to set records than not, so I don't like that argument anyway. Weeden has been judged harshly by many since draft day, not just by Browns fans but by all fans and media. He will have to really impress to be accepted.

I hope he gets accepted.


Well ok, let's not focus on the how high the bar was set then...name some recent rookies that also could have broken those same records. I think you'll see the point.


Of recent QBs I think Luck, Wilson, Bradford, RG3, Newton, and Ryan would have for sure done better than Weeden and easily broken the rookie QB records. Guys like Flacco, Dalton, Locker, & Tannehill I think would have done similar to Weeden (maybe a little worse) but they are way younger and rawer than Weeden as rookies and thus would have had a reason to give optimism for the future.

Weeden doesn't excite me because unless he turns it on this season and delivers we will be getting rid of him. That is a waste of a first round pick. Given his performance last year I don't see much of a reason to expect him to do well this year, although I do have a lot of faith in this coaching staff so if anyone can find a way it might be them.

I'd be more patient with Weeden if I thought I saw some leadership or confidence from him but I never get that feeling. He seems like just a guy, who's old, and not very good.

I think Weeden did better than guys like Gabbert, Ponder would have done but I've never been high on either of them as starters.


You say "would have for sure done better", but they didn't...ask yourself why. See this isn't hypothetical, their rookie stats are there for all to see.

I see your strong negative opinion about Weeden, like bruce's, but I don't see why you have it. Certainly there are some actual facts you want to add.

I mean geez, the guy had all those batted passes; he missed a dozen or so open receivers in his 512 attempts...and what else?

I mean besides hyperbole and "I just didn't like him much". Can you be more specific?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
roger murdock


Joined: 13 Dec 2010
Posts: 6261
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apologies to the Bill Russell of the gridiron - Mr. Otto Graham (fun fact - did you know Otto Graham played in the NBA for one season - and won a championship - so in 11 years as a pro he made the finals every year and won 8 championships)

Still - Graham put up far more impressive passing numbers than Weeden on far lower volume. I don't think it means much to say Weeden broke his records when he attempted 350 more passes and still threw for less touchdowns. Graham blows him away in every efficiency metric except for the 2% difference in completion percentage.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bruceb wrote:
Entropy wrote:
roger murdock wrote:
I mean exactly what I said. There has never been a rookie QB on the Browns to have a good season. Weeden being the tallest dwarf means nothing to me.If Weeden is ever going to break out it won't be because of him breaking some 22 year olds crappy record from 30 years ago.

And I think Sipe and Kosar would be hot garage in todays NFL.


Never? Otto Graham was pretty good in his rookie AAFC season AND his first year in the NFL.

And exactly how many good rookie QBs are there in history anyway?

And yeah, Manning (both), Brady, Rodgers, and all of them would be hot garbage playing in other eras too.


A better question would be: How did the Browns' rookie QB records that Weeden set compare to the rookie QB records of other teams?

The fact is that we didn't win any more games with Weeden at the helm -- with the benefit of vastly improved talent around him -- than we did with McCoy, who had no such talent in his supporting cast.


A better statement would be: Let's not ignore how many inexperieced players were playing key roles on the team that won 5 games in the 2012 season.

And hey bruce, show me how many recent rookie QBs could have broken those same records...YOU can figure out why there aren't many, right?

McCoy was just a bad pick, period. He didn't win, and lost games instead...right?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
roger murdock


Joined: 13 Dec 2010
Posts: 6261
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Entropy wrote:


You say "would have for sure done better", but they didn't...ask yourself why. See this isn't hypothetical, their rookie stats are there for all to see.

I see your strong negative opinion about Weeden, like bruce's, but I don't see why you have it. Certainly there are some actual facts you want to add.

I mean geez, the guy had all those batted passes; he missed a dozen or so open receivers in his 512 attempts...and what else?

I mean besides hyperbole and "I just didn't like him much". Can you be more specific?


I'm going to go ahead and guess that the reason Luck, RG3, Newton, etc didn't have better rookie seasons for the Browns than Brandon Weeden did for the Browns is because they weren't on the Browns. They had better years than Weeden did for their team, most of them by an incredible amount.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

roger murdock wrote:
Apologies to the Bill Russell of the gridiron - Mr. Otto Graham (fun fact - did you know Otto Graham played in the NBA for one season - and won a championship - so in 11 years as a pro he made the finals every year and won 8 championships)

Still - Graham put up far more impressive passing numbers than Weeden on far lower volume. I don't think it means much to say Weeden broke his records when he attempted 350 more passes and still threw for less touchdowns. Graham blows him away in every efficiency metric except for the 2% difference in completion percentage.


Well, now we can agree. And yes, I have read many articles and books about Graham over the years. I'm glad there are others that find him interesting too.

BTW, I'm pretty sure that Graham's AAFC records (including his rookie year) don't count as NFL records, so Weeden was never compared to Graham's 12 wins as a rookie. Weeden holds the Browns rookie QB record with 5 wins.

And the whole point about Weeden breaking the records is that he would have done that same on most NFL teams, he had a pretty good rookie year. There have been no rookies who have played as well on similarly inexperienced teams, as far as I know.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bruceb


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 6974
Location: Rocky River, OH
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Entropy wrote:
bruceb wrote:
Entropy wrote:
roger murdock wrote:
I mean exactly what I said. There has never been a rookie QB on the Browns to have a good season. Weeden being the tallest dwarf means nothing to me.If Weeden is ever going to break out it won't be because of him breaking some 22 year olds crappy record from 30 years ago.

And I think Sipe and Kosar would be hot garage in todays NFL.


Never? Otto Graham was pretty good in his rookie AAFC season AND his first year in the NFL.

And exactly how many good rookie QBs are there in history anyway?

And yeah, Manning (both), Brady, Rodgers, and all of them would be hot garbage playing in other eras too.


A better question would be: How did the Browns' rookie QB records that Weeden set compare to the rookie QB records of other teams?

The fact is that we didn't win any more games with Weeden at the helm -- with the benefit of vastly improved talent around him -- than we did with McCoy, who had no such talent in his supporting cast.


A better statement would be: Let's not ignore how many inexperieced players were playing key roles on the team that won 5 games in the 2012 season.

And hey bruce, show me how many recent rookie QBs could have broken those same records...YOU can figure out why there aren't many, right?

McCoy was just a bad pick, period. He didn't win, and lost games instead...right?


So, after all your shifting, weaving, bobbing and ducking the logic of the arguments have driven you into your usual end place of compound non sequiturish total irrationality. Haha!
_________________
Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

roger murdock wrote:
Entropy wrote:


You say "would have for sure done better", but they didn't...ask yourself why. See this isn't hypothetical, their rookie stats are there for all to see.

I see your strong negative opinion about Weeden, like bruce's, but I don't see why you have it. Certainly there are some actual facts you want to add.

I mean geez, the guy had all those batted passes; he missed a dozen or so open receivers in his 512 attempts...and what else?

I mean besides hyperbole and "I just didn't like him much". Can you be more specific?


I'm going to go ahead and guess that the reason Luck, RG3, Newton, etc didn't have better rookie seasons for the Browns than Brandon Weeden did for the Browns is because they weren't on the Browns. They had better years than Weeden did for their team, most of them by an incredible amount.


So you will guess that the BEST rookie QB performances there have been were better than Weeden? Ok, but by how much...go ahead and look it up.

Oh, and how many of those guys had 4 290+ yard games as a rookie?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bruceb wrote:
Entropy wrote:
bruceb wrote:
Entropy wrote:
roger murdock wrote:
I mean exactly what I said. There has never been a rookie QB on the Browns to have a good season. Weeden being the tallest dwarf means nothing to me.If Weeden is ever going to break out it won't be because of him breaking some 22 year olds crappy record from 30 years ago.

And I think Sipe and Kosar would be hot garage in todays NFL.


Never? Otto Graham was pretty good in his rookie AAFC season AND his first year in the NFL.

And exactly how many good rookie QBs are there in history anyway?

And yeah, Manning (both), Brady, Rodgers, and all of them would be hot garbage playing in other eras too.


A better question would be: How did the Browns' rookie QB records that Weeden set compare to the rookie QB records of other teams?

The fact is that we didn't win any more games with Weeden at the helm -- with the benefit of vastly improved talent around him -- than we did with McCoy, who had no such talent in his supporting cast.


A better statement would be: Let's not ignore how many inexperieced players were playing key roles on the team that won 5 games in the 2012 season.

And hey bruce, show me how many recent rookie QBs could have broken those same records...YOU can figure out why there aren't many, right?

McCoy was just a bad pick, period. He didn't win, and lost games instead...right?


So, after all your shifting, weaving, bobbing and ducking the logic of the arguments have driven you into your usual end place of compound non sequiturish total irrationality. Haha!


I can't tell if you agree or disagree that McCoy was a bad pick and didn't win, but lost games.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cleveland Browns All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
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