Post-Game Thread: Browns Join the National Blowout League
by Chris Pokorny on Oct 25, 2009 10:03 PM EDT
in General News
Email
PrintAlmost every week of an NFL season, if you lose 31-3, your team is looked at as the "joke of the week" due to being blown out of the water by the opposition. That has changed this year though, particularly this week. It's amazing that despite the Browns' loss, there were five other teams who suffered losses that were either just as bad or worse than we did. It's certainly not a consolation prize by any means, but take a look at these other scores:
- San Diego 37, Kansas City 7
- Indianapolis 42, St. Louis 6
- New England 35, Tampa Bay 7
- New York Jets 38, Oakland 0
- Cincinnati 45, Chicago 10
Shocking. When it came to the Browns game, many of the struggles encountered throughout the season were still present against the Packers. The number one thing that comes out of this game though is that it might be time to go away from Derek Anderson again. It's not even worth saying anymore that Anderson has performed better than Brady Quinn did to start the season due to how bad he has played.
I still believe Anderson can be an effective quarterback, but it's becoming evident that it's not possible unless he has a tremendous supporting cast. If there is any remote chance that Quinn has something left, or even just to showcase him to other teams for next season, it's time to give him another chance.
490 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
DA has played 4.5 games, Quinn 2.5… to avoid the big pay day for Quinn the Browns have to wait until after the Bye Week against Baltimore and maybe even the 2nd half of the the Baltimore game (how ironic would that be).
Realizing it’s 70% of the snaps, not 70% of the games I’m guessing the Browns would want to ensure that he doesn’t get anywhere close to that before bringing Quinn back in and they want to make sure DA is done.
This is an awful strategy. It is pitiful to do something like that
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 25, 2009 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions
If a team is looking to draw future free agents away from their team, this is the type of thing to do.
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Oct 25, 2009 10:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh yeah, of course. Now I am sold on this strategy.
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 25, 2009 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Sarcastic. And you should understand it
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 26, 2009 5:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Why? Because you like Quinn?
He was absolutely terrible so far, why would we actively try and pay him performance bonuses of 11 million dollars?
I agree with the money issue and not wanting to pay 2 QB a crzy amount of money and that is why one of them should have been moved when the season started and Quinn was named the starter.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 25, 2009 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t really agree. If we move Anderson in the offseason, we would be watching a floundering offense and paying the guy 11 million. At least starting Anderson over Quinn was somewhat justifiable. If Quinn were terrible and we had to bench him to avoid paying him, we’d be stuck with an unproven Ratliff.
What’s the difference in watching one horrible qb over another? Oh yea the money!! Anderson is so awesome with his 30% comp., 1td and 12 turnovers. A lot of good QB’s dont do that great their first year as a starter. Aikman was 3-13!! I would rather start Quinn and take that chance and who knows, maybe he’s pretty good. I don’t think he played that bad. he has went up against some good defenses. A lot better thatn Anderson has seen. Put Quinn in and call the plays that you would call for DA, except the sweep with Lewis, and stretch the field. I know Quinn can throw a ball 20yds.
Nobody said Anderson is awesome.
The point is that if you have to choose between two crappy QB’s then you play the one which won’t cost you $11 million. That’s the sensible thing to do for the long-term value of the team. Now, once that point has passed, then I’d like to see Quinn get another shot.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
I really don’t see the case for playing Quinn and allowing him the potential opportunity to earn 11 million. He has done nothing to deserve that money, and we should tread around the situation.
I understand the argument but I don’t want to go into the next season not knowing anything but Cleveland saving $11 mill. With this we get to go into next offseason go through the QB dispute all over again. After 10 years, really besides 2 years, I’m gettin tired of it.
by The naome40 on Oct 26, 2009 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Regardless of how long it has been since we have been good, we need to make the correct long-term decisions.
Well think of this;
Will free agents want to come to a team that does everything to make sure their players dont get bonuses?
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 26, 2009 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions
If the player was playing well then we wouldn’t be sitting him. Do you honestly think that the Browns would have benched Quinn if the offense was scoring points? Of course not.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Nobody said we should never play Quinn the rest of the season; just make sure that he doesn’t get 70% of the snaps. We can still give Quinn two-thirds of the playing time this season to see if he has any chance of improving.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions
With the talent goin into the draft, I would like to know who my QB is goin to be.
by The naome40 on Oct 26, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions
The case for playing BQ is obvious…like it or not he has the best stats (of the two) thus far this season, and he currently has the most upside potential…so you start him against Chicago…and if he wins… great… you start him again….if he loses you re-evaluate..and maybe start DA…platooning the QB is not going to upset either one of them all that much because even the two of them will admit they have sucked thus far….the ballboy needs to give BQ the same opportunity the ballboy gave DA (and DA has blown the opportunity given him…same as BQ did earlier)…you evaluate game by game….if you don’t see improvement…you start the polka music again and the musical chairs goes on…after all…this is all the coaching a ballboy can be expected to handle…..
As far as the money….benching BQ to keep from paying him 11 mil is…in the long run….such a negative reinforcement to the entire team and the fans….it basically says that management is more interested in the money than in doing whatever it takes to make the team better…but then people who live in Cleveland under the spectre of the “small market” mentality that is foisted upon us, have grown accustomed to seeing the best players traded to save on salary…I am not saying BQ has demonstrated he deserves the 11 million…he hasn’t….but at least give him the chance to perform…and if he doesn’t…bench him again….
…and if you are worried about either QB’s trade value….it’s not really a consideration, because every other team in the league knows what these guys are up against when you have a ballboy for a HC….
Why don’t you call Mangini a ball boy a few more times. I’m sure that will get your point across.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Hopefully he was a damn site better as a ball boy. It amazes me how you get so offended everytime someone takes a shot at that fat useless bastard. Mangini apologists are worse than DA apologists. THE GUY IS BEING PAID MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND IS MOVING THE TEAM IN THE WRONG DIRECTION!!! You have to call a spade a spade. Not to mention the fact that he is a pompous asshole…Doesn’t help his cause in the least. Maybe if we referred to him as “Mangenius”, you and the rest of the faux fans would be happy…
by guambrownsfan on Oct 26, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions
So I’m a “faux fan”? What’s a real fan — someone who goes to Browns websites to call our coaches and players names and make immature, derogatory comments about them? People who post things in CAPITAL LETTERS to get their point across. People who call everyone who disagrees with them idiots and “apologists” to make themselves feel smarter? Because I don’t want to be one of those fans.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Pick apart the man’s record if you want. You’ll find lots of sympathetic ears for that. On the other hand, calling him childish nicknames just makes you look biased and silly.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Oct 27, 2009 2:39 AM EDT up reply actions
trust me you’ll find plenty of people here willing to bash mangini as a football coach, but they can do it without calling him ridiculous names like a 12 year-old.
Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t make them an apologist.
Try this site, I bet you won’t find many apologists: www.cleveland.com
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Hi guambrownsfan. I think what you may be missing is that people aren’t getting mad at you for saying that Mangini sucks. I think a lot of people here actually agree with that. But people here are frustrated with you because you use name-calling and swearing and capital letters to get your points across. To be honest, if a pro-Mangini poster came here and constantly called him “Mangenius,” everybody would get mad at that guy too.
If you frame your arguments as “I disagree with these specific Mangini decisions for these reasons. Based on that, I think he has demonstrated a string of poor judgment and should be replaced,” people will respond to you much more respectfully.
thank you for taking the time to explain it to him
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
But don’t DA make more then Quinn now?
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s getting 5 and a half anyway. And you could always bench him for DA later, once you know he sucks (as opposed to now) and avoid the 11 million… And without destroying his development. He’s played 6 games in 4 years, for cryin’ out oud.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
It’s in Quinn’s best interest to wait. He’ll have a lot better chance of success against the end of our schedule than he does now.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Thanks for the price diff on the two.
I also agree that it is better to hold Quinn out till the end of the schedule.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 27, 2009 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Aikman went 1-15, P Manning was 3-13 fyi
by cboldt12 on Oct 26, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
and I honestly was mentally prepared for a 3-13 type of season while Quinn figured it all out. But the BallBoy…..errr Mangenius… felt he needed a win more than developing a QB who showed a little promise before getting hurt. There are still wins on the schedule, but now we still have an undeveloped QB as I am sure “Eric” will be looking to the draft for “his” QB…
He got his win alright…6-3 with his QB throwing those 2 excellent passes….trivia who caught those 2 passes? :)
by Red-Right-88 on Oct 27, 2009 10:22 AM EDT up reply actions
why is Eric in quotes? last time I checked that was indeed his name.
More to the point though, quinn showed promise last season against the worst pass defense in the league. you can’t tell me he showed any promise this year without lying through your teeth.
I’m not saying i like DA, I think we should get rid of both of our QBs, draft one and sign a veteran to fill in for a bit.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
If $4 million in one year is affecting playing time (while Butch, Romeo and Savage are all making that for years), then we’re screwed. Do you really think that’s a factor at all?
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Coaches salaries don’t apply to our cap figure. Quinn’s does.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
it won’t make that big of a difference in his cap number, as the money he would make is in bonuses, so the “we’re sitting him to save money” argument is a little misguided.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
The article only talks about 2010. I think there are escalators triggered in 2011 as well which when added to those from 2010 equal 11 million.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Because it wasn’t clear that Quinn wasn’t worth the 11 million until after he stunk it up for 10 quarters?
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Stinking up 10 quarters is a prerequisite for any successful QB in a new system, not grounds for dismissal.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
You might want to look up the word “prerequisite”.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Why? I’m maintaining that going through 10 rough quarters is necessary before achieving success. In other words, I damn well know what it means, and I damn well know I used it correctly.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Many QB’s don’t have 10 terrible quarters of football before achieving success. Hence, it’s not a prerequisite. Of course, many others do, but that doesn’t make it a prerequisite if it sometimes happens and sometimes doesn’t happen.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
It rarely doesn’t happen. “Big ben” sucked then, so did Peyton, and Aikman, and Elway, and etc etc etc. Christ, Brad, I’m all for policing the reply button and subject lines… but c’mon man.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
What does that have to do with reply buttons and subject lines?
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I wasn’t questioning the format of your comment, I was questioning the content. Since when aren’t we allowed to disagree with people?
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions
To be fair, Brad, you were being a little nit-picky. A few QBs have succeeded right out of the box, but in general his comment is correct. Nearly all QBs will struggle for their first 10 quarters — wouldn’t you agree?
But these aren’t Quinn’s first ten quarters — he’s in his third year. Granted, he hasn’t been starting for three years, but he did start three games last season. He’s not a rookie. So calling this his first 10 quarters is a misrepresentation.
I don’t think all (or even most) third-year QB’s would struggle in their first 10 quarters in a new system. That’s what he was saying, and I disagree.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
But Quinns first 10 quarters are alot better then Andersons last 10 quarters by far.
As for the money I get the whole cap thing.But sitting on Anderson is just as bad.To me with Anderson in all it shows is we are looking at draft slot and nothing more.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 27, 2009 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I definitely disagree with this. He’s played in 6 professional games in the last FOUR YEARS. To expect anything is ridiculous. Literally anything.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
First of all, this is his third year in the NFL. Secondly, it’s not ridiculous to expect him to look better than he has been. I’m not saying he should be great right away, but he was absolutely awful and having only 3 careers starts (or whatever it is) isn’t a good excuse. He’s not a rookie. He clearly looked like he regressed from last season. If you really think that a QB in his third year should be expected to look that terrible then you have very low expectations.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, maybe. We know that Mangini said that Quinn was on a very short leash, which he certainly proved. Isn’t it reasonable to conclude also that Quinn was told that? In effect, “we’re reluctantly handing you the job, but we’re not going to tolerate mistakes. Take care of the ball and try not to screw up.” Quinn looked amazingly tentative, even scared. The absence of the right side of the line (for all intents and purposes) didn’t help at all. He looked like a QB who was afraid to screw up. Certainly part of that is on him, but you have to wonder at least if the coaching staff isn’t also culpable. I’m certainly not a “fire Mangini now” guy, but neither am I one to absolve the coaches of their share of blame, and I can’t see any reason not to think that the QB situation was, and continues to be, a total F-up.
when did mangini say quinn was on a very short leash?
quit using the line as an excuse, DA plays behind that line too.
Any QB who gets that flustered about winning a QB competition is never going to be a good starting QB
by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2009 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions
All I’m saying is that the line can’t be used as an excuse for one QB and not the other.
Also I think its highly debatable which QB has played worse, and i think its a dumb argument anyway, as both have played terribly.
and as far as expectations for quinn, wasn’t aaron rogers a quality starting QB his first ten quarters? His situation is the most analogous to Quinn’s. Both fell in the draft, both sat on the bench for a couple years before getting a shot. if Aaron Rogers can do it, why not Brady Quinn?
by notthatnoise on Oct 29, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Aaron Rodgers had a much better mentor. He started out with a much better running attack. He started out with a better offensive coach. He started out with a better group of WR’s.
Aaron Rodgers and Brady Quinns starting positions were very different.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 31, 2009 12:22 AM EDT up reply actions
our cap figure for this year and next (ie, the rest of Quinn’s contract) is wholly irrelevant. we’re miles below the limit, and no one even knows if there will be a cap in 18 months.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Unless your team is being run by Phil Savage, the salary cap is never irrelevant. There’s 16 Million dollars difference between the cap and the floor, which means that the cap hit represented by Quinn’s salary plus escalators is significant, and that no team is ‘miles below the limit’.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions
The Bucs were also in a better position to sign a lot of free agents this past offseason as they begin their rebuilding process.
My point was you can be miles below the salary cap, as Savage and his “wild spending” usually had us.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
This is completely false. We were right at the salary cap last year. Evidenced by our trade for minimum wage Travis Daniels when Daven Holly went down. Without some of the changes we made this year, and a possible extension for Winslow, which Savage might have done, we would have been right at it again.
This is false. The trade for Daniels when Holly went down was evidence that Savage would not mortgage the future for the present. That’s the only reason he didn’t trade a 1 or 2 for a CB like Lito Shephard. At that point we were more under the cap than any other AFC North team.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
This is false. He was specifically asked about signing Ty Law and said that Law’s demands would not allow us to pursue him given the remaining salary cap room that we had.
Budget and cap are certainly not synonymous, but I can concede finances had something to do with it. Does anyone have the cap totals entering and/or ending 08? I think not signing Law had as much to do with him sucking as anything, and the “$” excuse was Romeo saving face to a respected (and unskilled) old friend. In any event, certainly not trading a future pick had a lot to do with it as well.
I agree that the Williams contract sucks, and obviously that move has been a bust. But literally every report of the actual cap numbers I’ve read during Savage’s tenure had us in the best 1/3 in the NFL.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
The last link has team payroll but doesn’t list what the cap was for that year.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
These figures are different.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
So according to USA Today, we were at 131 million for 2008, which was a large amount above our 2007 number.
According to ESPN, the salary cap in 2008 was 116 million. I am not quite sure how it works given roster bonuses, performance bonuses, etc. but it appeaars to me we didn’t have a lot to work with.
So we have three numbers to work off of from Savages “crazy” spending, two are in the top 5 in room available, and one where we’re in the top 66 percent in room available (20th most)… ie, never anywhere close in danger… certainly not “Ty Law will kill us” danger.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I’ll retract the Ty Law comment, since we don’t have an 08 number. But I maintain the lack of dealing a draft pick spoke volumes, and not signing Law only spoke to him as a shitty player.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
The only 2008 numbers we have are from USA Today which puts our payroll at 131 million which is about 15 million over the cap. This would support Savage’s statements concerning Law, and my belief that we were right near the salary cap.
I think the 2009 numbers are favorable compartively to the league because of the roster purge we underwent (Shaffer, McGinest, Jones, etc)
It think it’s pretty obvious we were never 15 million over, as that would have been public, no? Isn’t being over a fairly major offense?
I thought part of the purging of Shaffer was to “take the hit now”? In any event, who did Law sign with that year? I’m pretty sure he sucked at that point, is my argument. Anyway, agree to disagree. It’s bedtime…
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
The problem with salary cap data is that it is usually not public to even the best reporters. My best understanding is that we would have tried to add a better corner if we had the space to do it. I really don’t think there was a budget limitation beyond anything that the salary cap didn’t impose, mainly because NFL teams make so much money I find it hard to believe that Randy had a budget cap below the salary cap.
I took the Savage quote as a means of not revealing to everyone that he had this team right at the salary cap and did not leave himself flexibility. By calling it budget instead of salary cap, he deflects some of the blame from himself and leaves it vague. Yes, I do believe he intentionally chose those words.
This was the best that I could find for the season.
It was published in September so I don’t know how up to date it is.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree not granting Winslow a huge deal was somewhat of a key, but I also don’t think Savage would have touched one with a ten foot pole (as evidenced by the trade-up/Rucker pick).
The closest we were ever to the cap was Savage’s first year, when he “took the hit” on numerous Butch Davis-busts like you advocated above.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Because they game the system and continually roll cap space forward. They have the roster that they deserve.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704224004574489773943949070.html
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
key quote from the article:
“A person familiar with the finances of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers says that last season, the team signed two free-agents, running back Noah Herron and defensive end Patrick Chukwurah, for contracts that totalled $25 million. Under the rules of the salary cap, the Buccaneers were charged that full amount for the players. But to actually earn that money, each player had to, among other things, block six punts apiece—an exceedingly difficult prospect. In the end, neither player ended up taking a single snap. Mr. Herron was paid $157,000 and Mr. Chukwurah $71,000, although the team’s salary-cap number reflected the full value of their contracts. Tampa Bay, which ranked among the lowest teams in spending last season, has lost all six of its games. Tampa Bay and NFL officials declined to comment.”
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Every team does this. The Browns were one of the first (along with the Vikings), they are referred to as “likely to be earned bonuses.”
LTBE bonuses are thrown into deals to inflate contract numbers. For instance:
DA may have something in his contract that says “If Derek Anderson leads the team in rushing for the season, he will be awarded a 1 million dollar bonus.”
That 1 million dollar bonus counts against that seasons (2009-2010) cap. If that goal is NOT reached, then the team is given a 1 million dollar bump in the following season (2010-2011). If you ever hear that a player has re-worked his contract, it usually is stuff like this. Moving bonus money around. Hope I explained this clearly.
In other words, that bonus money counts against the cap, but it is money that will never be paid, and the savings of that money will roll over to the following season. Pointbriand according to cap numbers is something like the 5th highest paid Browns player this season. This is a major reason why it is so hard to get a read on what NFL players make ever season.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Yea, Pontbriand typically has LTBE bonuses that deal with him playing over 90% of the Special teams snaps (which he does not.) When he doesn’t do so, that number comes back as a cap credit to the Browns the following year. It is impossible to track.
What if BQ snaps back into his Denver game of ’08 form for the rest of this season? (which I expect him to do).
How do you keep him around?
We keep him on the roster for next season.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 25, 2009 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Yea, there is really not a lot to be worried about. He is under contract, and if he wants to play in the National Football League, he will take advantage of his playing time when he gets it. If he wanted that 11 million, he should have tried not sucking.
But the move to Anderson has made thing look even more crapatastic……
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 25, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions
JUST AS BAD, ARE YOU SERIOUS?! Anderson just plain is terrible. They tried to stretch the field, DA’s strength, and he can’t even get it close. This year , the playcalling for Quinn is horrific.
by The naome40 on Oct 26, 2009 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Quinn hasn’t shown anything better than Anderson this season. They were both awful. Arguing over which one was worse is pointless.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Blaming the playcalling for one QB and not the other is an indication that you aren’t looking at this objectively.
Ok so if Quinn gets 5 yard outs, hooks, and curls called all game not stretching the field at all and Anderson is getting posts, streaks,and fades called but still can’t do anything,the play calling isn’t an argument. Did you watch the Baltimore game? Quinn’s pick, that CB sat there and waited for him to throw it. He did his homework. He knew thats all they call for Quinn.
by The naome40 on Oct 26, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
So why would Quinn throw it to a guy standing there waiting to intercept it? Does he not look at the defense or is he forced by the playcalling to throw it there no matter who is standing there?
Honestly, I was hoping you wouldn’t say that. I just don’t think we have seen enough of Quinn to make a decision. I don’t was to lgo into next year with this season being an evaluation season again. What trade Quinn for a 3rd or 4th round pick and go in with Anderson or draft a QB?
by The naome40 on Oct 26, 2009 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I actually agree with you on the fact that we haven’t seen enough of Quinn to fully know. I think we just disagree on whether or not we should risk the 11 million bonus. I want him to sit until that time has passed and then regain the starting role.
Ok so we cleared everything up, now. When that time comes, he would end up with about 4-5 games? I guess that would give them an idea of what he can do. The season is lost sso it comes down to business and $11 million is a couple guys. Sorry, just getting frustrated with the whoole DA over Quinn thing.
by The naome40 on Oct 26, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
If he plays just under 70% of the snaps then that would be more than 4-5 games. I’m not sure where you came up with that number, but he could play 10 or maybe even 11 games and still probably not hit the 70% mark.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
i would start brady. you can say “there’s no points in arguing who is worse”, but the numbers show that anderson has not performed as well. his numbers make quinn’s look good.
i’m being a bit objective though, because i like quinn and think he deserves another shot. 5 combined starts is not enough. hey, maybe quinn would have the kind of chemistry he had with winslow with momass.
actually, scratch that. let DA play out the rest of the season. let him finish with a 30% completion rate and 4x as many INTs than TDs. but my god, just get rid of him at the end of the year!!! keep quinn as a backup, and draft a nfl ready qb.
idk what’s confusing about this (not trying to sound rude). i’m saying to just let DA stay in for the rest of the year and continue with his suckiness. then get rid of him at the end of the year, and draft another QB.
Just so we’d know that we’d stuck a stake in the heart of that particular vampire once and for all?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Oct 27, 2009 2:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, with the number of 3-and-outs the Browns have posted so far, a few sustained drives (with an increased per drive snap count if he’s really able to make it work with all of the short stuff) could eclipse the number of offensive snaps in just 4-5 games – especially with KC, Oakland and Jax on the trailing edge of the season. At least theoretically.
I don´t think anything is cleared up at all. He got his chance to start and he flubbed it. We´ve seen plenty of him. Why take the hit for the former managements shady contract dealings?
There is nothing to negotiate. He lost the starting job, he´s gone as soon as possible. Why prolong this misery? If it was my team, he´s scrimmaging with the practice squad, and if he´s not gone by my deadline, I cut him.
Besides that, your telling me that you would feel comfortable with Ratliff and another Dorsey like talent as your backups rather than Quinn?
naome40, meet mooncamping. he thinks are starting corner backs should be nick sorensen and charles ali.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I would. As long as Brady Quinn is on this roster as a back up there will be a quarterback controversy in cleveland.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
There’s no risk in giving him a sane number of reps as the “starter.” You could pull him in week 11 and be safe. He was pulled after 11 drives.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
So Quinn plays against the Bears and Ravens and then sits for the Lions game?
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
No, Quinn is never pulled, is given job security, and is benched after a meaningful sample size…
I’ll suggest this. I think Quinn is a worse QB now than he was the day he was drafted. I also think he’s worse now than when his throwing hand hit that helmet last year. Why? B/c he’s skittish from lack of the vote of confidence necessary to throw the ball downfield and make plays. Any QB will throw picks. And any QB will tell you that playing loose and well depends on not being afraid to mess up. Quinn has NEVER had that as a Brown, and that fear has only increased. That’s why someone with an above average arm dinks and dunks so much.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
by kwoog on Oct 27, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You could pull him in week 11 and be safe
Quinn is never pulled
and is benched after a meaningful sample size…
???
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
I think he means he isn’t pulled at the beginning of the season like what occurred. That he should have been given the chance to get more time in to give a larger sample size by which to judge his performance Then if it’s not up to standard you bench him.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
If true, he’s got a funny way of sayin’ it.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Who the fuck are you calling illiterate?
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
well said, and i couldn’t agree more. the best the guy ever looked was SF in ‘07…NO pressure, no expectations. he’s so tight now i almost feel bad for him.
i’m very much a “i don’t care, they both suck” guy, but i would be supportive of playing quinn again now.
by DontCallMeJoey on Oct 28, 2009 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions
maybe there are people running those routes but quinn won’t throw to them. Just a thought.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions
What there is to be worried about is the one, singular way all QBs become successful in the NFL: a stable and large amount of reps. Not giving that to Quinn (or any QB) is far more detrimental than any cab number.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
if you’re only talking about game reps then this argument ignores every rookie QB who came in and was good right away, such as Roethlesberger (sp) or Matt Ryan.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions
why in the world would you expect that? did you watch the first three games this year?
by notthatnoise on Oct 25, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Have you seen the last 3 games…. Not like the move back to Quinn could be as bad as what we see now
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 25, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions
i disagree. I don’t think he could be worse, but his first three games were defintely as bad. I would definitely prefer Quinn at this point, even though yesterday I would have said the opposite. I didn’t mean to compare the QBs, all I did was ask why you would expect quinn to be better than he was earlier in the year?
by notthatnoise on Oct 26, 2009 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions
I am not one that thinks he would be better but he could not be any worse I guess.Who knows sometimes getting the hook can open your eyes and he might come out with fire and a chip on his shoulder pads just to show that yes he can get it done.But we will not know till he gets back in there.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Worst QB rating in the NFL among qualified passers - 35 of 35
BQs first 3 weren’t NEARLY as bad. We have the WORST rated passer in the NFL in Derek Anderson. I would expect Quinn to complete at least 50% of his passes and pass for more than 120 yards per game…Which he was indeed doing prior to his benching.
34 JaMarcus Russell OAK 47.2
35 Derek Anderson CLE 40.6
Updated as of Week 7 on nfl.com. The Anderson apologists are getting quite boring. He is NOT a starting QB in the NFL! Charles Robinson has an interesting editorial on the situation at Yahoo! Sports.
by guambrownsfan on Oct 26, 2009 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions
lol had not heard that name in years.
Still recall asking my friend who in the frack is Spurgeon Wynn and why was he in the game?
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 1:41 AM EDT up reply actions
just because his QB rating wasn’t as bad doesn’t mean his play wasn’t. The offense still sucks, but at least we move the ball every once in a while.
by notthatnoise on Oct 26, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think BQ played poorly in the first 2.5 games.
The right side of the line was non-existent.
The play calling wasn’t letting him throw the ball enough.
He didn’t look relaxed like he did last year, which I attributed to Mangini’s lack of confidence in him yet.
I thought BQ would make some plays, the coordinator would then call for more passes, and Mangini would get comfortable.
It turns out that Mangini had him on an unbelievably short leash, and BQ knew it and was all tensed up!
True, what bout Ratliff? What is Vinny doing nowadays? Yep Quinn played awful…however we are a different team since then….worse….
by Red-Right-88 on Oct 26, 2009 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions
There ya go. Testaverde was from the same draft class as Favre, right? And we have proof that players (okay, at least one player) from that draft class can still be useful.
Seriously, though, a few years back I was hoping the Browns would sign Vinny as a backup to help coach the kids. Instead he went to the Jets and we got Dorsey.
So Quinn played poorly because of the offensive line, the play-calling, and Mangini not trusting him? Really?? He has no responsibility whatsoever, it was all everyone else’s fault.
I like how you are telling us what Quinn “knew” — did you ask him personally?
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know him personally.
I believe BQ needs time to grow, and I’m frustrated that the Browns refuse to grow him.
I’ve seen him play carefree. He WAS NOT carefree in his 2.5 starts.
Seeing as how Mangini pulled him quickly, I assume he knew that his boss wasn’t happy with him, which I believe can contribute to a reservation in one’s performance.
Brady Quinn is a big boy — he can be responsible for his own performance. I cannot believe that you’re actually trying to blame his poor performance on Mangini. If he would have made plays on the field then he wouldn’t have been benched — it’s that simple.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Well I can see both sides here.Yes it was up to Quinn to show he could play.But at the same time hearing people talk about how he may not be the answer here really would not help with making you feel like you are wanted and would add a little more hate for everythign that you do bad.
Then it ends up like quick sand no matter what you do it just keeps going bad.Then you try harder to make it right only to make even more mistakes.
In the end really can’t say Mangini gave Quinn as much of a shot as he has Anderson.Also we can’t say Quinn did good with the time he had.
But it is time to look at Quinn again because Anderson no matter what Mangini thinks is not a NFL starter…
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 27, 2009 6:18 AM EDT up reply actions
I think the vast majority of people were behind Quinn at the beginning of the season. Almost all of the fans wanted him to start. I’m not sure about the players, of course, but Winslow said after he got traded that Quinn should be starting. Mangini did give them both a chance to win the starting job in the preseason, but if you can’t perform when competing for a job then you shouldn’t be playing in the NFL.
It sounds like you’re just making excuses for Quinn. The idea that nobody was behind him coming in to this season is completely false. Anyways, the guy has performed under pressure before — he was the starting quarterback for Notre Dame! And as a freshman! How much more pressure can a college kid have? If he’s so worried about losing his job that it affected his performance on the field then he doesn’t deserve to be the starting QB, anyways. This is the NFL and the players have to deal with pressure.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 7:57 AM EDT up reply actions
No matter what fans think or he did in College.If you know the coach don’t like you and you are on a short chain you tend to over do things.Eather try stuff you don’t do or do stuff like check down so you don’t make mistakes.My point is if he understood Mangini was not sold on him could have a bad or good effect on his game.
Same could be said of Anderson but think Andersons issues is he can’t hit water if he fell out of a boat.
I never was sold on Quinn or Anderson but if I have to pick on I would go with Quinn.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 27, 2009 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions
like i’ve said before, his his play is affected THAT much by pressure, he’ll never be a good NFL quarterback anyway
by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, I have to say “maybe.” Performing at a professional level requires not only the skill set necessary to execute, but also an inordinate amount of confidence. Sometimes it looks like arrogance (and there’s actually a thin line there), sometimes swagger, sometimes just quiet confidence. It’s easy to say “damn what everybody else thinks, I KNOW I can do this”, but it’s not nearly as easy to actually do it. So, maybe Brady has a bit of a fragile ego: I don’t know, but he sure looked like it when he was playing. Coaches definitely can, and do, affect the confidence of players. I’m not saying that hand-holding is needed, but a developmental perspective is. Quinn was given neither the chance nor apparently the coaching to develop. Can he, or will he? Who knows. That’s the big problem.
how do we know he wasn’t given the coaching to develop?
more importantly, every good quarterback can handle pressure. Steve Young and Aaron Rodgers both got booed by home fans, both were under tremendous pressure their first years as starters, and both performed. I don’t expect quinn to be steve young and maybe not even aaron rogers, but i expect him to be better than charlie frye
by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2009 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions
why are play calling, the line, and the coach’s confidence viable excuses for quinn but not anderson?
anderson has the same OC, the same line, and probably less confidence from the coach (remember how the coach named the other guy the starter?)
by notthatnoise on Oct 26, 2009 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Quinn looked much more nervous this year than last.
One can look at that flubbed forward pass that went backwards – nerves.
DA is a vaunted (one and done; career year) pro-bowler and (soon to be) journeyman. He is beyond nerves.
if Quinn gets THAT nervous I don’t want him anyway, he’ll never have success in the NFL
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Mangini said that the QB needs to protect the ball.
I think BQ’s nervousness that I perceive is him going out of his way to protect the ball. It would then follow that Mangini would be happy with that.
BQ protected the ball by not throwing into triple coverage (like DA did last week), and then checking down to Royal, who is a below average receiver.
If I remember correctly, BQ had Butterfingers, Cribbs, who wasn’t getting open, Furrey sometimes open, and Royal to throw to. And he was getting creamed by the collapse of the right side in all of that.
Last year he had K2. That’s huge right there.
All that being said, maybe Mangini just doesn’t like the guy personally.
Anderson is performing under the same conditions as quinn, to say playing conditions are an excuse for quinn but not anderson is showing some major bias.
I seriously doubt any coach would hold a player out of a game because they didn’t like them personally, people that do that type of thing never make it to the nfl in the first place.
by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Easy to answer that one with look at how bad Anderson has played and see what Mangini says.The staff is behind Anderson if they was not he would have been pulled by now.Anderson has had way more time then Quinn to try and show he can get it done but yet he can not.
As for the other guy the starter.That other guy has still put up better numbers and looked better then Anderson but yet Mangini still says Anderson is his man so how does he get lessconfidence from the coach?
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 27, 2009 6:22 AM EDT up reply actions
better numbers, yes. looked better? I don’t think so. DA makes our offense look respectable every once in a while. Quinn looked terrible ALL the time.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
and ok, maybe he has more confidence, that doesn’t explain how other people use the line or playcalling as an excuse for one but not the other.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
I have used it for both but have seen it used more for DA then Quinn.I just dont think eather one is a good QB but at this time Quinn has looked better then DA.No matter what DA’s last 3 games has not made the offense look good at all.DA has showed more of what is wrong with us then what is right.
The few parts of games I have seen both QB look lost.DA has issues with wanting to throw ever ball at 450 mph and then looks like how could you drop that or wow I threw that bad and shrugs and walks off the field.
Quinn looked lost,confused and scared when he played.Not sure why but that was all I seen in him.Fear is not a good thing on the field the other team can see it.Quinn understands that you do not have to throw the ball 450 mph all the time and is able to throw a better ball then DA.
Wish we could compine the two might have a decent QB.Anyone know a good gene splicer?
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 27, 2009 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions
my comment was specifically in response to someone saying quinn had to deal with a bad line and bad coaching, while DA didn’t. if someone would have said it the other way around i would have been just as critical.
by notthatnoise on Oct 28, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
i agree with this. typically, i don’t love the “looks over numbers” route, but DA screws up every once in a while and throws a dart that the receivers can’t help but catch.
by DontCallMeJoey on Oct 28, 2009 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions
1999 VS 2009
What has changed in 10 years? We all argue about who should be QB. The defense can’t tackle or make key stops. Our best offense is our special team.
The Browns hire coaches and GM’s that they think are football gods and then turn out to be football flubs. This organization needs a new makeover. Someone to change the mentality of losing. I was disappointed they didn’t try to get a guy like Gruden, someone who is in your face. There is cancer in the locker room for last 10 years and its not changing anytime soon.
I can name 3 players on this team that could play for any team in the NFL Cribbs, Rogers,
and Thomas. The rest are backups at best
Here is an idea, use draft picks on defense. Defense as a foundation? What a concept. How has the recent draft picks on offense worked for the Browns? Top 3 picks last year offense, offense, and offense. You look at the success of our hated rivals the Steelers and Ravens what are they known for? Nasty, in your face defense.
by Dawg Pound1971 on Oct 26, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions
The Steelers and Ravens are also known for ignoring the knee-jerk reactions of so called fans.
They pick a coach and stick with him for years on end. That’s how you build a winner. Had Cowher been the coach in Cleveland, Browns ‘fans’ would have run him out of town on a rail five years before he had a chance to put it all together.
by golanbatrac on Oct 26, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions
The organization did get a makeover — that’s why they brought in Mangini and Kokinis.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Steinbach, Jackson, Mack, Wright, Pool, Elam, Massoquoui, and Wimbley are starters on most teams
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 26, 2009 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
What are you smokin? Steinbach maybe. Wright and Pool have shown me nothing but poor tackling skills. massaquoui a starter, cmon maybe in a year or two. Wimbley another high pick thats under achieved
by Dawg Pound1971 on Oct 26, 2009 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Wright and Pool are definitely starters on most teams, hell even an announcer a couple weeks ago called wright one of the top corners in the NFL. Corners aren’t judged on tackling unless its absolutely terrible, they’re judged on cover ability.
Steinbach is a fairly young, versatile lineman with pro-bowl potential, almost every other team would love him.
massaquoui was a stretch
Wimbley would at least be a complementary pass rusher on most teams
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m pretty sure that Steinbach has already been to the ProBowl.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
either way, it makes my point a little stronger
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t get it.
his organization needs a new makeover. Someone to change the mentality of losing
Isn’t this exactly what was attempted by hiring Davis, Crennel/Savage, and Mangini??
Sure, the first two didn’t work like we hoped, but its not like they were awful hires from the start. They came with good pedigrees and were well respected.
I’m presonally sick of the “blame Lerner” crowd. What else Al and Randy have done?
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Watching the mass exodus at 14:14 of the 4Q, Lerner must be worried about the concession revenue for the last cold games of the season.
I cheered when DA hurt his hand. The GB fans surrounding me looked shocked at my reaction.
My public apology: Sorry DA. I hope your hand is OK.
I’m still going to boo you when I see a guy wide open and you force it into double coverage.
Hmmmm will 10-6 be good enuff? Mathematically are we still in it? Is that what you are asking? LOL
by Red-Right-88 on Oct 26, 2009 9:42 AM EDT up reply actions
God another bad game from DA and yet he is still the QB for next week.Can’t things ever get any better.I understand the whole 70% snap thing but if they would have moved DA after the spring we woul not even have this issue now
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 25, 2009 11:25 PM EDT reply actions
I honestly can’t believe people are saying we won’t play quinn because of the incentives. Lerner doesn’t care about money. This was a football decision, not a business one. What do you think is more important to Eric Mangini, winning games and keeping his job, or saving the billionaire owner a few dollars?
by notthatnoise on Oct 25, 2009 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Lets get real now DA had nothing to do with the Buffalo win other then try to give it away.Don’t matter who QB’s the need to win now with a bad team is not going to happen.There is more wrong with this team then just the QB but we can see DA is not the answer here and trying to say DA is good is just wrong
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 25, 2009 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Where did I say DA was good? At the time the decision made sense, now it would make sense to switch back to quinn.
by notthatnoise on Oct 26, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Well holding out to keep from giving both QB’s over 11 mil is not a bad idea saves alittle cash on a very very bad team.
But it has been said by so manny that DA gives us the best chance to win is why I said what I said.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Maybe he does give us the best chance to win. That doesn’t mean he’s good, he’s just less terrible.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
This is about money. Mangini wants a lot of cap space, Why do you think he stated " we saved about 40 million on draft day with all the trades we made, We needed to get our financial side in order along with acquiring picks"
This is about money.
Yea, it’s pretty obvious that the money played a decision, and will become more obvious when Quinn is starting again once his ability to achieve the bonus has passed.
It’s not that complicated, the bonus is a huge bonus, why would we pay someone that was playing horribly that much money? On some desperation hope that he turns it around?
Can’t argue your point. I am just mad at myself for not seeing it earlier. This is a tough spot for any QB to play on this team. Dabol’s play calling, lack of consistent play makers and inconsistent line play.
I would just hate to see Quinn be shown the door and come back and play well in this league.
i think this is in no way a money decision. Quinn’s money would be a bonus, and as such would mostly not count against the cap (correct me if i’m wrong there).
Its not like mangini is paying the players, why would he care if one of them gets bonus money?
by notthatnoise on Oct 26, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Bonus counts against the cap. The money situation is not because the team can’t afford it and entirely because they want to save the cap money on players who are worth it. Lerner is not being cheap.
ok thanks i wasn’t sure how the cap worked. does all of it count or only most or some?
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
If this is the case, then it’s the most piss poor management ever, and it gives Taibbi’s article validity. Start him for 9 games. If he sucks, pull him and avoid the bonus. If he’s good or growing, he’s worth it.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Agreed!
Mangini/Daboll apologists are as bad as the DA apologists.
by guambrownsfan on Oct 26, 2009 1:11 AM EDT up reply actions
So everyone who doesn’t want to fire our coach after 7 games is an “apologist”? What exactly is that going to accomplish? You’ve got to love Browns fans — they complain that the team goes through too many coaches and want stability, then they want to fire the new coach after less than half of one season.
Also, just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t make them an apologist.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I would like the young Shanahan or the other Harbaugh.
by TheRealSlimShady on Oct 26, 2009 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Mangini and the rest of the coaching staff including the scouts need to be replaced. And a new QB not Quinn or Anderson
How can any of us stand here and say that theames w Coach needs to be changed after 6 games when he took over a very very bad team.
Did you really think we was going to win more then 3 games this year?
I know I did not but after he gets the parts in place he wants I hope to see a better team.But for now I know they would suck no matter who was calling the plays
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 1:12 AM EDT up reply actions
bah blasted mouse pad gives me typos lik eI need help doing that……
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Because they are moving in totally the wrong direction. If they were showing progress and the players were showing ‘heart’, I would fully agree that they need time to ‘build’, but that is not the case. It did not work in New York either. Everyone mentions that the Jets made the playoffs in Mangini’s first year, but that team regressed as well, until he was fired. The guy is not getting it done…Period.
by guambrownsfan on Oct 26, 2009 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions
eather way still 6 games is no were near time to call for a man’s job when he did take over a very very bad team is all I am saying.
I did not like him in the first place nore did I like the last group that we got.Just seems one bad move after another and not like fireing a new coach 6 games inot his contract will make this team any better no matter what you want to think.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 1:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed
Probably a bad hiring in the first place. And you’re right, a firing at this point will likely not make this year’s team any better. But rebuilding the culture of the team and providing encouragement, such as the 49ers did with the Singletary move last year, might be worth it. Granted, Mike Nolan had a much longer tenure in SF, but I am truly worried about long-term issues if we continue with this current management regime. It will likely hurt potential off-season free agent signings if the issue is not dealth with soon.
by guambrownsfan on Oct 26, 2009 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I am in the middle right now.
He has got something going on just not sure what it is at this time.I still hope that maybe we are just bad because are players are bad.The O calling has been ver very ugly but then again look at the talent on that side of the ball.The D has shown some flash of what it could be but they seem to cave when the game is close ot being over.
I just see that this team has way to many issues to call for a change at this time.Think it would be fair to wait till next year at this time if the team shows nothing and looks just as bad as this team then yes it is time to show him the door.But for now I will hold out to see what happens
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 1:34 AM EDT up reply actions
yea it would be stupid to fire him now but after the season ends I would like lerner to bring in a more experienced coach with his own style and a strong non-alienating personality.
by The Licensed Pessimist on Oct 26, 2009 2:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I still think you cant do anyhting untill after next season.If this team still sucks and looks lost after next year then yes start looking at why.But even if next year they go 6-10 then that IMO is going in the right direction.This team was in need of a had coach some one to not be there buddy but there boss.He got all the me first guys now just need to give him a year to get his guys in here.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 3:38 AM EDT up reply actions
He got all the me first guys now just need to give him a year to get his guys in here.
He has brought in 23 players. That is damn near 50% of the roster.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 26, 2009 3:57 AM EDT up reply actions
and from last years team this is a bad thing why?
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 4:08 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn’t say it was a bad thing. But please spare me the whole “he needs his guys in here” crap.
Plenty of coaches win with other coaches players. McDaniels is doing it in Denver.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 26, 2009 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions
My only concern is that a lot of talented coaches will be available this offseason. If I thought any of them might take the Browns job, I would consider the switch. I don’t think Cowher would take it, nor do I think Shanahan would take the job. Holmgren and Dungy are probably both staying retired. That leaves us in a bad position, one that we probably wouldn’t change from.
If Mangini is replaced as head coach, or better yet brought into the front office. We need a temp from within. There have been a lot of changes, and I think the bad dynamic will turn good. The Browns will have their allstar squad, we just have to keep moving people.
by mooncamping on Oct 26, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions
I think it´s the perfect time to move Mangini into the front office. He has presided over a lot of unpopular moves, and he´s still ticking.
He is the perfect man to make an honest appraisal of talent in management, he´s been a footsoldier in the right places for a long time now. He ran an amateur franchise in Australia, He saw how winners are created in New England, he earned his own spurs in New York, and he never slowed down in Cleveland, making as Brownsfan4ever said unpopular decisions.
Maybe some people have a point in saying he´s not quite cut out to be a head coach. Let´s see what he has in the more cereberal area of management.
by mooncamping on Oct 26, 2009 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions
I was saying ‘no thank you’ to Jim Brown.
by golanbatrac on Oct 26, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Why not? You seem very certain in your veto.
by mooncamping on Oct 26, 2009 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions
The Browns have been so bad for so long, the team is going to have to be rebuilt before we can hope to bring in a guy with a Cowher or Shanahan like resume.
by golanbatrac on Oct 26, 2009 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
As a temp. Carl Smith has an impressive resume:
http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/coaches_detail.php?id=66
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Smith_(American_football)
by mooncamping on Oct 26, 2009 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Michael Lerner needs to sell 51% of the team to Bill Cowher for $1 and beg him to save us from the ballboy
Randy Eisner’s poker buddy.
You are reading my signature.
by rolub on Oct 26, 2009 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Just look at the trades with the JETS not one of them players we received from the jets are impact players,consider what we past up in the draft.All these moves Mangini made didn’t improve the team not one bit.
i would argue about ten starters are worth as much as one impact player
by notthatnoise on Oct 26, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I would rather have five or six good starters than one “impact player”. Who did we pass up in the draft that would be an “impact player”?
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
The Jets were actually very good last year until Favre got injured. After the beat the undefeated Titans many people were proclaiming them the best team in the AFC. Then Favre hurt his arm and threw a bunch of picks the last month and they missed the playoffs. I don’t know how much of that you can blame on Mangini. To say they “regressed” is wrong. They were bad his second season but they won 5 more games his third season — that is not regressing.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions
DEFINITELY! Replace the coaching staff…Time to clean house. ITS NOT WORKING!!! It would still be nice to see what BQ can do for the remainder of the season before a decision is made to get rid of him.
This is the kind of talk that landed Belichick in Boston. 6 games and we are all experts on coach Mangini and want him replaced by… who? Other coaches that have been fired? Some untried coordinator? Yes, lets stay on the head-coach merry-go-round. Get a coach, watch him get rid of the players from the previous coach, draft a few players for him, fire him… wash, rinse, repeat!
Brownsyup
by Brownsyup on Oct 26, 2009 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yes, let’s replace the coaching staff after 7 games. Brilliant idea. Then when the team doesn’t improve the rest of the season we can fire the new coaches and hire another set in the offseason. That’s the way to build a winning organization — change the coaching staff every two months.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
While it is true that Mangini and staff took over a team short of talent, there’s no excuse for this team failing to show a pulse after 7 games. But, now I have the satisfaction of knowing Lerner’s decisions will start to cost Lerner real money in the form of lost revenue. It’s probably the only language Randy understands.
I voted no on the poll because if we don’t see improvement from Anderson I think they should put in Quinn for the Lions game and leave him in for the rest of the season. I don’t think they should put Quinn in against the Bears or Ravens. Let him progress (if he is going to) against some lesser defenses. He looked shell-shocked in the first 2.5 games… let him re-establish his confidence against the Lions.
Brownsyup
Agreed.
Replacing Quinn early may prove to be a brilliant or lucky move, giving DA a chance to prove (or disprove) is ability to play then let Quinn finish out the season is better for the team and ultimately Quinn then say waiting until now to replace Quinn with DA.
This team was going to struggle regardless of who is behind the center (excluding the top 5-7 QBs).
This is not “Da Bears” we know. Their defense is really struggling. Their secondary is shot….and no one expects us to win….did anyone see what ochocino did to them? (sure he had Carson Palmer throwing to him and had a running game.).
Being in Chicago, there may even be some Quinn fans in the seats from his ND days…
by Red-Right-88 on Oct 27, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Weather was beautiful yesterday. I even got a slight sunburn on my shaved head from the sun.
I left with 8 minutes to go in the freakin’ 3rd quarter because my time and money were better spent leaving and going home. I’ve never left a game early before, sitting through some of the worst losses in some bad weather. There was absolutely nothing redeeming about how they played yesterday.
I understand the the value of the draft picks were accumulating and some of our future core players are just rookies this year. But my God, the prospects for the Browns turning this around and the Indians getting back on the right track are like night and day.
You are reading my signature.
brady quinn
mangini set Brady up to fail, that all new offensive line was terrible, braylon edwards couldnt catch a cold in the dead of winter. he threw him to the dawgs!!! MANGINI IS THE WORST THING THAT EVER CAME DOWN RT. 2 !!!!!! WHY DID WE DRAFT QUINN IN THE FIRST PLACE???? Get him back in there and let him learn to lead this team to victory!!!
This sounds like the ranting of a Yankees fan.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
the offensive line was not “all new,” in fact, there’s a lot of talent on that line, and how is it mangini’s fault braylon can’t catch?
I think your username explains your ramblings
by notthatnoise on Oct 26, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Hey, where’s my Ratliff option in this poll? I cry foul!
(Kidding. I think.)
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Oct 26, 2009 9:44 AM EDT reply actions
I understand your viewpoints, in saying Brady Quinn should be marketable and wanting to display his inert ability by showcasing him. And to keep pushing Derek Anderson, until his innate potential finds expression.
The question is, though: Would we sell a winner? The answer would seem to me: No, Cleveland is too goodnatured to do so.
Consequently, highlight some of their past achievements and trust other franchises scout and talent teams. We should get rid of them while we have a chance. We all know they don´t totally suck. But neither will make the transition from ugly duckling to beautiful swan in Cleveland. For Quinn and Anderson´s sake, stop playing Clevelanders affinities, this rollercoaster has come in.
Ratliff can run this offense. What about good signing a good backup until we can anoint our future quarterback? Billy Volek, Sage Rosenfels, David Carr, Rex Grossman…
You know, tender a one year contract to a journey man. Someone we can allow to win, without feeling we´re sitting them down at our dinner table. Volek has shown flashes of brilliance, Sage Rosenfels was the comeback king for a while, David Carr represents a true talent that never got his puzzle pieces in place to a lot of people, Rex Grossman´s Super Bowl run a fluke?
Why not gamble on Chris Pizzotti from Harvard, he set all kinds of records there?
This is my take. I believe Mangini has to go. I know the argument is he has only 7 games, let get his people in place. No thanks
This hire parallels the hiring of Belichick in so many ways. The arrogance, the cleaning out of players, bringing in of “his” people, the mindless press conferences, ( I never thought of changing QB’s, I liked the things we were doing") his ultiminate control, and not learning from mistakes. This hiring brings back 1991.
Mangini is sitting Quinn for the 11 million. This will allow the Browns to use this money for other players and the multiple draft picks. This is about the money.
To Quinn. How some people can say with a straight face that Quinn is failure is beyond me. Unless you have played QB in college or pros, or have been and offensive Co., then I don’t think we really know what we have in Quinn. Quarterbacking is the most difficult position to play in team sports. And to come up with the evaluation after 10 quarters of football is beyond premature. The list is short for QB’s that come in this league and have no or limited failure. Quinn deserves a chance to start for this team.
This being said, Quinn deserves a chance to start, the worst part of the equation is Dabols offense. You can argue that both Anderson and Quinn have gone backward since last year.
Once again as Brown fans we sit and suffer. Another horrible hire, more years of listless football.
So Quinn can’t be called a failure but after 7 games it’s ok to get rid of Mangini?
I honestly don’t believe either of the two quarterbacks are the answer and I don’t think either will be back next year. I would hate to think of Ratliff as the only returning QB in 2010 but I really can’t see either of the other two back.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Mangini has more than 7 games, how about 3 years and 7 games and getting fired. Ask the Jet fan base and the majority of players how they miss Mangini so much.
And Quinn has not been able to remove himself from the bench and supplant a QB who has played horribly this year.
Also Mangini’s first year he took a 4-12 to the playoffs his first year and made Pennington look like a real quarterback. Obviously they regressed the next year and we all know what happened last year. As i’m not a Jet’s fan I couldn’t tell you why they fell apart at the end of the season, but I’m definitely willing to state I don’t think all the blame should be placed on Mangini.
Also I don’t care much for what the Jet’s fans and players think because they also think Edwards is going to help their rookie quarterback, who while not sucking has been pretty inconsistent, lead them to the promise land this year. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
The Jets aren’t any better this year than they were last year. In fact, last year they were better at this point of the season. Are you forgetting that last season after the Jets beat the undefeated Titans many people were proclaiming them to be the best team in the AFC? The Favre got hurt and had a terrible last month of the season which caused them to miss the playoffs. But trying to act like the Jets were terrible under Mangini and much better now is just false and nothing but revisionist history.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Whose steering this runaway train????
The wheels on this bus are looking real wobbly right now. When they come off is anybodys guess, but I would say it’s real soon. I dont know if I can take much more crap football. My experience tells me that this situaton is going to get much worse. Mangenius took a bad football team and made it worse. How do you do this? I guess raping and pilaging the talent off this team is oneway. Bringing in a bunch of castaway Jets is another way. Maybe having no talent coaches is yet another. Exactly what is Mangenius’s resume? Hanging on the coattails of Belichek, yes. Being a defensive coordinator for a whole one year, yes. Making the playoffs a whole one year, yes. Boy Mr. Lerner you really must have been blown away with those credentials. Haste makes waste and what a waste this hire has been. Browns 2-14 and another wasted high first draft pick. Thats what I see in the Browns future. I want you to know that after watching the Browns for 45 yrs, I can say these things from experience.I would like to be wrong but it goes against my better common sense.
I agree that keeping Quinn out longer is likely due to money. The Browns would have to pay him more if the escalators kick in, and if he was traded the receiving team would have to pay more as well. I also have considered that the coaching staff simply doesn’t like working with him.
While I would be interested to see Quinn play more, I would also be ok with seeing Ratliff get a chance as bad as that might look in the short term. I’m just not interested in seeing DA any more.
I am 100 percent convinced that Derek Anderson cannot play quarterback in the NFL. He had that 2007 Pro Bowl season. If I recall, we had a ridiculously easy schedule that year. The Division schedule included a bad Bengals team and down Baltimore team. The non-Division schedule included the NFC West and AFC East, with only New England any good in that bunch. So Anderson leads the Browns to a 10-6 record and I believe they only beat one winning team – Seattle, who was not any good anyhow. Seattle had a winning record by running roughshod over a putrid NFC West Division. If I also recall correctly, Anderson racked up his stats early (5 TDS against Bengals) and after the league saw enough film on him, he had a poor second half. So those who hang their hat on 2007, it was fool’s gold. Anderson is not good.
Regarding Quinn, the jury is still out. He starts three games this season, against a very stout Minnesota and Baltimore defense. When he played against the Broncos, no one thought they were very good so Quinn took a lot of heat. Looking back now after six games, The Bronco’s have been playing the best defense in the NFL. They’ve shut down everyone, including Brady and Rivers.
I’m not saying Quinn is the answer. The answer may not be on the roster. I am saying Anderson is definitely not the answer and that Quinn needs more of a chance.
Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history
I largely agree with this. Do you agree that it would be foolish to play a question mark in Quinn right now knowing that we would have to pay him 11 million if he were to play the rest of the season?
Ya realize that $11M gambit is only a theory? What if Magini continues to play DA without this excuse?
I’m not saying the bonus is a theory, I’m saying that BQ sits on the bench because Kokinis is avoiding the bonus as a theory. I’m asking what you think of Mangini if he plays DA even after the threat of bonus expires?
If DA plays the rest of the season and continues to play like he is now, I would question Mangini’s judgment. At this point, that is a hypothetical scenario, though, and not something that I think is likely to happen.
If he left DA after the bouns chance on BQ has passed then that just shows Mangini is tanking the season just like I said before.
I don’t mean as in not trying to win but as in putting us in a spot that is darn hard to win.
It is already shown that DA can not QB in the NFL.Leaving him in after the 11 mil kick in has passed just shows he is not worried about this year and is looking at draft spot.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions
My take in the NFL is that you do anything and everything you can to play better, grow and win football games. Playing the money game at the expense of doing anything you possibly can to play good football is incredibly foolish. If Quinn is not playing, then maybe Mangini is equally convinced that Quinn cannot play in this league. If behind closed doors Mangini is telling Lerner and Kokinis that neither guy can possibly play in this league, then maybe the money thing makes sense. Cut your losses and add your QB next year.
If, however, there is any shred of doubt about Quinn, then not playing him now is foolish. My guess is that Mangini doesn’t think Quinn can play, so keep the cash. Also, if that is right and he is right, playing Quinn not only costs the team money, but it also exposes Quinn more to the rest of the league and eliminate any trade value.
I don’t know the answer to any of this, other than I have seen enough of Anderson to know he is not the answer, and I can’t say the same about Quinn.
Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history
I think you are touching on my point. The coaches do not believe Quinn is that good, and it makes no sense to play him right now. If we thought Quinn were good, then I would agree it is worth the 11 million to develop him.
If that’s the case, and it may well be, then it would have been better to trade Quinn before last week’s deadline. Surely someone like Tampa, Carolina, San Fran, Miami, Buffalo, would have given you something. Dan Snyder would bite. The more this saga goes, the less value Quinn has to anyone. Snyder wouldn’t give you a second or third-rounder?
Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history
I doubt Quinn could fetch that high at this point, especially since Quinn becomes more tradeable once the performance bonuses are no longer a possibility.
Quinn becomes more tradeable once the performance bonuses are no longer a possibility.
That’s key. No matter what the coaching staff thinks of him, his value rises once that 11 Million is off the table.
by golanbatrac on Oct 26, 2009 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
His value doesn´t rise one iota, unless he is forced into the inevitable sequel to last years Brady Quinn vs. Jay Cutler.
They´re not buying that contract, they would however buy Brady Quinn himself.
Wrong. You don’t buy and trade players. you buy and trade contracts. That is how professional sports works in this country.
(Thanks Jay and LGT)
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the point Mr. Dorn is trying to make is that Brady Quinn has not performed unless financially motivated.
He’s not making that point at all. Nobody has said anything about Quinn’s motivation.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Then maybe you should stop speaking for Dorn. You’re the one who tried to restate his point yet said something completely different than he did.
I’ll speak for myself if you speak for yourself.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
This is exactly right. Why trade Quinn just for the sake of trading him? Do people really think teams are falling over themselves for the chance to trade for Quinn?
I know fans like to think that they can get rid of any player they don’t like just by trading him, but trades require a second team who wants that player and maybe no team was willing to give up anything for Quinn.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I would personally like to get rid of quinn because if we don’t there will be a QB controversy every year
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions
deadline /ˈdɛdˌlaɪn/
–noun
1. the time by which something must be finished or submitted; the latest time for finishing something: a five o’clock deadline.
2. a line or limit that must not be passed.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
. . . . which is at the end of the season, so why are we bothering to discuss that now?
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions
We´re not discussing it.
And if it were a legally viable deadline, not trading Brady Quinn before it says nothing about his job security.
I think he is referring to a statement he made earlier declaring the trade deadline as not being a deadline. I remember some saying that no it was not like the baseball deadline, but i’m not positive that this is what he is referring to.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Which you could have easily found out, by leaving him in for 10 games (no bonus), or putting him back in against the Bengals then benching him after 10 games (no bonus). I know we’re stuck here now, but this was obvious at the time and Mangini made the wrong decision, twice.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Good points Maryrose… I just can help but think that Mangini is so arrogant, that he doesn’t play Quinn because Mangini doesn’t want to be wrong.
If Quinn does play and plays well, doesnt that raise questions about how he handled the QB situation in Cleveland?
My guess, either way Mangini is gone after this year, which means his career is over. You can’t be fired back-to-back years and begin to believe you’ll get a 3rd chance.
Odds of Mangini being fired after 1 season are zippy (I’ll take any amount of money on that bet)
What team that the Browns played should we have beaten? Denver, Minn, Pitt, Cincy, Green Bay, Baltimore? The only one we should have we did.
Progress can’t be measured by Wins this year, last week was a set back but there were many factors, just like the B-More game. I’m interested to see how they finish the season out, but at this point just not enough evidence to say Mangini should be fired.
Progress can’t be measured by Wins this year
Fine, I agree. What should it be measured by then? Progress of young players? Progression of the quarterbacks? Of the defense?
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 26, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I would say progress of the young players (Mack, Robo, Veikune, Maivia, MoMass) is most important. Second most important to me is improvement on the defensive side (which I do not see happening with DQ gone for the year.) I have kind of given up on the QBs unfortunately, and do not have any sort of hope for the offense.
I agree 100%. That is what bothers me most.
We should be seeing Veikune. We finally are seeing more Robo. Francies should be active every week. We are losing 35-3 without these kids, could we really be doing that much worse with them? Why hasn’t the media asking these questions?
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 2:08 AM EDT up reply actions
It really bothers me that Francies hasn’t been playing, especially with McDonald sucking so much. This is looking like Crennel all over again.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 7:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Odds of Mangini being fired after 1 season are zippy (I’ll take any amount of money on that bet)
You know, I’m wondering about that. I think the fire Mangini crap is way premature. But is there anyway I would support firing Mangini after the season? Or is there anything that would lead Lerner to this conclusion?
I’d say a 1-15 with a bunch of blow outs could make this a consideration- not that I see this happening with the easier second half schedule. Also, I could see more pressure if he refuses to fire Daboll or something like that.
I’d put it at a 98% chance he returns, at this point.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions
At this point, firing Daboll seems like a necessary move- like maybe job-saving.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ve yet to give up on Daboll. It’s only been seven games and he doesn’t have a whole hell of a lot to work with. I’m not sure that someone like Terry Moore could look good with so little developed talent.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions
I have given up on the dude.
I have never seen a gameplan lack any sort of purpose. Are we a running team? Passing team? Does Daboll have any idea?
How many times have we run a WR screen to Cribbs? What happened to Harrison? He has two great games, and the dude once again becomes extinct. Daboll is in way over his head.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree. Blaming the offensive coordinator is a convenient excuse that many fans turn to when the team is struggling, but I think it’s justified in this case. It usually bothers me when fans endlessly complain about the play-calling, because most of the time it’s second-guessing, but Daboll really looks like he has no clue. This is his first time calling plays, so we can only hope that he improves as the season progresses and he gets more comfortable in that role. If not, though, I can see a move being made in the offseason.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 8:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Daboll is Mangini’s guy. I wonder if he would make the switch after one season.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions
The case for playing BQ is obvious…like it or not he has the best stats (of the two) thus far this season, and he currently has the most upside potential…so you start him against Chicago…and if he wins… great… you start him again….if he loses you re-evaluate..and maybe start DA…platooning the QB is not going to upset either one of them all that much because even the two of them will admit they have sucked thus far….the ballboy needs to give BQ the same opportunity the ballboy gave DA (and DA has blown the opportunity given him…same as BQ did earlier)…you evaluate game by game….if you don’t see improvement…you start the polka music again and the musical chairs goes on…after all…this is all the coaching a ballboy can be expected to handle…..
As far as the money….benching BQ to keep from paying him 11 mil is…in the long run….such a negative reinforcement to the entire team and the fans….it basically says that management is more interested in the money than in doing whatever it takes to make the team better…but then people who live in Cleveland under the spectre of the "small market" mentality that is foisted upon us, have grown accustomed to seeing the best players traded to save on salary…I am not saying BQ has demonstrated he deserves the 11 million…he hasn’t….but at least give him the chance to perform…and if he doesn’t…bench him again….
…and if you are worried about either QB’s trade value….it’s not really a consideration, because every other team in the league knows what these guys are up against when you have a ballboy for a HC….
Please don’t post the same comment twice. It was bad enough the first time.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions
DA looks clueless out there, BQ has just looked scared. Scared in the way my 1-year old daughter looks when she is sneaking behind the tv to unplug the 360 (“daddy’s not gonna like this.”)
I hate to say it, but there’s not a player on this team I would consider to have “fire” or “gall” or whatever the going cliche’ is that would match the definition of “chutzpah” nowadays. . . and that’s needed more from the under-center position than anywhere.
My vote? Well, DA shouldn’t play because he’s horrible, BQ shouldn’t play (for a few weeks) because of the money thing, so there’s really no reason to avoid giving Ratliff a go.
Or even better — Dick Bartel had the best preseason performance of 2009, and I bet he’s still available (probably on a practice squad somewhere I’m sure) . . . Why not give him and his super sweet Nickleback tattoo another go? (/sarc)
[this space for rent]
Lets put that amount of 11 million dollars into relation to the population of Cleveland. There are 478403 people living in the city of Cleveland.
Divide 11000000 dollars by 478403 people and you get 22.99 dollars per person. How many lattes can I get for 22.99 dollars? Certainly not the type of cash cow a starting QB in the NFL should be.
I know it´s not taxpayer money at work here. I´m just saying, the amounts tendered to pro athletes are miniscule, in relation to what citizens pay for mundane things every day. What are Brady Quinn and Derek Anderson costing you? A lot of nerves.
by mooncamping on Oct 26, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
In a similar equation. The population of Ohio, established in 2008, was 11,485,910. 11 million dollars devided by that number equals 0.96 dollars per person. What does a Snickers cost nowadays.
by mooncamping on Oct 26, 2009 11:42 AM EDT reply actions 4 recs
You should divide the $11M by the number of people living in Japan. It would make just as much sense as what you are doing.
by elsandito on Oct 26, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
The lesser of 2 evils
Mangini has managed to destroy both qbs. Anderson has had plenty of time to prove himself. A 30% completion rate is unacceptable under any circumstances.
May as well let Brady play out the string. Maybe the light has come on. An interesting scenario played out yesterday in San Fran when they brought in disgraced qb Alex Smith for the second half who lit up the Texans and almost pulled the game out. Maybe he’s caught up to the game. Maybe the benching will have helped Quinn.
How do you know that Mangini has destroyed the quarterbacks? I think they would both be bad no matter who was the coach.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe. But you have to admit that nobody on this coaching staff has been able to do anything to make either of these two guys at all productive. In reality, it’s hard to believe that these guys are this bad. Both have shown something as a QB in earlier seasons, so why do they both now look like rejects from a D-III College program? For certain, something is going on. Maybe it’s not coaching, but you have to wonder at least.
Interesting point.
Who is playing better than last season? The only one I can think of is Wimbley, and that has been a mediocre increase at best.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 26, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Hm, who has played better than last year?
- Wimbley (by a lot)
- DQwell (by a lot- I was not sold on him last year at all)
- Pool
- Cribbs (on special teams- health has a lot to do with this)
- Steinbach
There really aren’t that many opportunities for individual improvement from last year. So much turnover. Then you have guys like Rogers and Thomas who are playing about the same as last year, but that is really good.
I am disappointed in a lack of improvement by Wright, McDonald (wow), Hall, Quinn, and Cribbs (as a WR)
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions
4 players. We, as a fan base, can point to four players that have played better than last season. That isn’t a coaching problem?
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, take into account that most of the starters are new.
These include ROL, C, WR1, WR2, WR3, TE.
Among the old guys, we never really notice Vickers much and our RBs won’t be able to show improvement if they can’t stay healthy.
The defense is new. Again, among the old guys: Pool, DQwell and Wimbley have improved. Rogers is just himself.
Right. We’re only comparing to the players who were here last season, which is less than half of the starters, right?
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah. 4 starters look better. 3 look worse. The rest either are the same or have been replaced. (Thomas, Rogers, Robaire, Lewis, DE, OLB, ILB, SS, RT, RG, C, FB).
I don’t see that as shocking, or some huge coaching issue.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 27, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Coaching is the problem.
Mangini is a waterboy who somehow landed himself a head coaching job. He seems to absolutely hate coaching the Browns. But it’s not just Manigini
Take a look at the elite teams in the NFL – they have coordinators who have extensive experience, many of them already have been head coaches. Our coordinators are Turtle from Entourage and the Ryan that even the Raiders didn’t want.
Mangini talks about character and fundamentals all day long, yet we still can’t tackle anyone?
Someone also needs to realize that Lewis’ best days were running over Browns, not running for him. He wore him self out with all those 200+ yard performances. His 1.2 yard average isn’t going to cut it. We have a team of 5th and 6th rounders and no leadership, any surprise we’ve only won 1 game. Quinn or Anderson doesn’t matter – they both could be good on a good team, and they’ll both suck playing for the Browns as they are now.
What has Mangini done besides tear this team down from what little talent we had in the first place?
I’m ok with getting rid of bad apples but if that bad apple happens to have a lot of talent then you better replace talent for talent.
Other teams 4, Mangini 0!
Where the heck were you gunna find a Braylon-without-the-attitude and Winslow-without-the-attitude?
Some people here make it sound like Mangini had a real darn easy job to do.
How would the Browns have acquired those two for the two we got rid of?
The statement was that we should replace talent for talent when getting rid of bad apples. Unfortunately you don’t get much for bad apples these days.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
That’s funny- next time I’ll draw you pictures. You’re one to talk, when was the last time you said anything original or interesting. My point, BTW, was that either Quinn and Anderson could be good, even greAt given things like the entire right side of the O-line. Getting rid of schaeffer was not where you want to cut payroll
by HenryDawg on Oct 26, 2009 9:40 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Quinn and Anderson could be great with a better offensive line? Really . . .great?!? Have you been watching the same two quarterbacks that the rest of us have watched this season?
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions
No way to tell given that we only play with 3 offensive linemen, but almost any QB in the NFL has the ability to be great given then amount of time QBs like Worthlessburger had during the last Pittsburgh game
our pass protection this year has actually been decent, so to use the line as an excuse is just a cop-out
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, it hasn’t been great but not horrible enough to use as an excuse for our quarterbacks sucking so much.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I dunno. I thought the right side – mostly St Claire – sucked pretty bad through the first two games at least. And I definitely saw guys blowing by St Claire this week as well.
I wouldn’t call that the sole contributing element but the impact would seem greatly increased when you factor in the quality and/or experience of WRs. We already know that DA needs plenty of protection to stay in the pocket and (at least in his only good year) receivers who can make circus catches.
Without that strong supporting cast DA just isn’t good and BQ just isn’t going to develop.
people blow by mediocre linemen from time to time. Thats why they’re mediocre, not good
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I stopped reading after “Mangini is a ball boy”
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
It's time to move the Cleveland Jets out of here!
I have been and more then likely will die a browns fan, been through the drive, the fumble and years of let’s wait till next year. I wailed when the browns moved to Baltimore and blessed all that worked so hard to get them back. But did we ever really get them back? It has been now again 10 years of a team in Cleveland that had never resembled our browns. Now more then ever I yearn for Marty Ball to be back. You Guys can argue QB’s till the cows come home it will not help till we coaches back here that will inspire a player to leave it all out there on the field. Any player on the team get’s payed more money then most that watch the browns play. Shame on you guys on this team, you are not browns material. Dropping passes is part of a game but I had never seen that many in a season then you guy drop in one game. Please jets get out of town, you stink up the place..
wbaron
Pluto had some interesting statistics on drops:
In his 14 quarters over 31/2 games, Derek Anderson has had 16 passes dropped. Here’s how that compares to the other QBs in the AFC North, and they’ve all played six games: Baltimore’s Joe Flacco (nine), Cincinnati’s Carson Palmer (18), Pittsburgh’s Ben Roethlisberger (11). Green Bay’s Aaron Rodgers has 16 in five games.
Anderson is getting drops at a higher rate than these other guys, but at least some of that is his own fault due to his inaccuracy. Everybody has drops; the Browns just have more. Look at Palmer’s 18 or Rodgers’ 16. You certainly can’t blame Anderson’s problems all on dropped passes.
See I view the stat as other teams have similar number of drops, but at least have productive offenses. That to me says the QB play is bad, and that drops happen.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 26, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
false, they have similar numbers of drops in twice as many games. that means per game they get 1/2 the drops anderson does. can you guys really not do 8th grade math?
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
they actually all get less than half the drops per game, except for palmer.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
totally alright, and the “8th grade math” thing was probably unwarranted
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Derek Anderson will always have more drops than other QB’s. He is partly to blame.
Palmer, Roethlisberger, Flacco, and Rodgers all do a much better job of throwing a “catchable” football. Yes it is a WR’s job to catch the football, but I am not going to kill a WR when they turn out of a route and have NO IDEA where the ball is going to be. We have to lead the free world in WR’s making catches from their knees.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions
This comment doesn’t really have to do with QB accuracy but its related to your comment.
Am I the only one who thinks that receivers go to their knees or jump to catch passes they could have easily caught on their feet?
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I think they do that based on how they see the ball coming out of the quarterback’s hand, how the defense is coming at the receiver, and how they feel comfortable making the catch.
If they jump they might be able to brace the catch with their body instead of having to catch a pass over their heads, going to their needs allows them to avoid defenders coming high at them and I think both allow them to cradle the ball after the catch and brace for a hit.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
The Browns Suck
It doesn’t matter what QB we put in they both are terrible!! We should sell the team to LA and start over with a new team……..Maybe some High School kids that way it’ll be entertaining at least!! The Browns are supposed to be worth like $13billion why not spend some of it and get some free agent talent in, a real coach and a front office that knows more about real football and not soccer!!!!
I think its obvious that whoever made that comment didn’t put any thought in to it.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Give me 50 losing seasons in a row over not having a team at all.
by Roger Dorn on Oct 26, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You obviously didn’t read the "start over" part I’d give up a bad franchise to start with a new team bought by an owner that will spend the money and do things right from the beginning, So before you start saying stupid crap about not posting try using your less than perfect education and read every word thoroughly. I’m a born and raised Clevelander, I love the Browns but hate that they are being owned, managed, coached, & player staffed they way they are. Shaun Rogers and Josh Cribbs should have a Team around them that are just as hard working and passionate about football as they are. They are the only two people on the team that earn their money everybody else should be embarrassed to call themselves professionals. If you want 50 losing seasons then you are not a fan but a big mouth with no goals!! So stick that in your big mouth and chew for a while then maybe you’ll understand.
The Browns are supposed to be worth like $13billion
Are you really sure about that number? Just to the naked eye, it looks a little high – like about 20 times too much.
You need to never post here again.Sell the Browns hell no I will deal with a bad team over no team.
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 26, 2009 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Trying reading the post properly
You too should read the post all the way through before talking out your asshole and not your mouth. I said sell the team and start over!!! Duh that means get rid of the crap and build from scratch!! It’s no wonder the Browns suck so bad, the education in Cleveland is no better than when I graduated from there 30 years ago!!
The reason we are suggesting that it is a bad idea to sell the team to LA, is that if we were to do so, it is very possible that we would not be granted a third franchise after having two leave us. In fact, it we were to force this incarnation of the Browns away, I am not sure the city of Cleveland would ever get a franchise again.
If every bad team sold to another owner in another city and started over, the league would have over 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,0,0,0,0,0,,,0000,,0,0,00000,,00,,0,0,0,000,0.1.2.3.44.5.5.6.6.55 teams in it. That makes no sense.
And yes by your comments it is very obvious education in Cleveland must have been bad when you were there 30 years ago, but are you sure you graduated?
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Our educational differences aside…….
If enough fans started a campaign or boycott of games, maybe then Mr. Lerner would get the hint and either sell the team to someone who will do the right thing or he’ll do the right thing and start hiring a front office that’s worth a shit. We don’t need to draft a QB to fix our offense we need an old pro to teach our QB’s how to play like a pro!
Our front office need an enema, we need a GM like Ozzi Newsome or Bill Parcells that will get a team on its feet. We need our football operations to be strong before our team is better.
It’s like the military was back in the 70’s and early 80’s the DoD was mismanaged and our Armed Forces paid the price. Starting in the mid 80’ and early 90’s we had good Generals, training was better, money flowed for better weapons, moral improved and we kicked the crap out of Iraq in the first Gulf War. So forget the players, we need front office "Generals" who know what they are doing then we can look at what players to keep and who to throw away.
Maybe if our front office and players had the passion that fans had about negative comments like mine, we would at least have a winning record. I’m not looking for a Super Bowl but it would be nice to have some winning seasons. Maybe we would score touchdowns instead of settling for fieldgoals. Maybe our stadium would be rockin’ like Sodom & Gomorra, instead of the opposing team being able to talk to each other at the line.
I hope you are getting my point now, saying I should never post a comment again is like “I’ll meet you at the flag pole” is Cleveland that immature!! I would like to think not, we have come a long way from our river catching fire, not being able to eat the fish out of Lake Erie, being the "mistake on the lake." But yet the Browns have not done anything in that same amount of time!!??
Maybe there is a conspiracy to make money with salary caps, maybe its just mismanagement. Maybe if we (the team in general, the fans & the City) took responsibility and initiative we could attract the talent we need both in the front office and on the field.
So instead of bitching about what was being said by a frustrated fan, write the Browns front office, write an editorial for the Plain Dealer. Look at that kid from Buffalo he is out of work but started an on-line registration to get money for a billboard in front of the stadium to say how frustrated the Buffalo fans are. I take my hat off to him he took the initiative.
What have our fans done?? I have written the front office, not hate mail but a real letter asking why?? I have gotten no response either, so ask yourself what have I done, its sorta like JFK said "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what can you do for your country". Turn the words around and "Ask not what blame is to be set, but what you….the fan can do for your team??
Do you really think putting up a billboard or writing letters to the front office is going to do any good? How is that going to make the team better?
Lerner knows the team isn’t good and he’s trying to fix it. That’s why he hired a new GM and a new coach this offseason. We have to give those guys time. What more do you want him to do? What is the “right thing” that you said Lerner needs to do? Lerner needs to hire good people, give them they money they need, then get out of the way. He’s done that (or, at least, he’s tried to do that — so far he hasn’t found the right people but it wasn’t for lack of trying).
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions
see the following link, this is what I mean by fans doing something, other than sitting on the couch and complaining about other comments.
Add this to the list of things that we lost when the team moved to Baltimore: season ticket holders who cared about the team.
You just don’t get it, we do care about the team that’s why we do this!! And write to the front office, write on forums, we spend the money and want to see value for it. You don’t buy a DVD take it home open it and find it broken without taking it back to the store for a refund or replacement, do you??
no, but there’s an expectation of non-brokenness when you buy a DVD (from a store, anyway). there is no guarantee of success or wins when you buy a sports ticket.
this protest is stupid. it makes browns fans look stupid. and it will accomplish LITERALLY nothing. other than that, sounds great.
by DontCallMeJoey on Oct 29, 2009 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Will you spearhead a movement to surreptitiously fill the stadium’s ‘empty seats’ on 16 October? Because that would be hilarious.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Oct 30, 2009 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions
Exactly. There’s a difference between a physical, tangible object and a performance. Bad analogy.
by golanbatrac on Oct 30, 2009 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions
Every team wants to win, but only half of them can succeed in that goal for any given game.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 29, 2009 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions
People who care for the team would never chant for the former coach of the Steelers as happened last year. That’s part of the problem with this franchise; the fans in the stadium are fair weather fans. The diehard fans who built this franchise were shut out when they built that god awful stadium and started charging a fortune for seats.
by golanbatrac on Oct 29, 2009 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions
COWHER…COWHER…COWHER…
Never would have happened in the old stadium with the old school fans.
by golanbatrac on Oct 31, 2009 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions
I think that is false. I spent many Sundays in the Pound with my father, and heard much worse things.
Hell, every Sunday I would hear someone say that Kosar is a bum and we needed to fire Marty/Carson/Bilacheat.
For a lot of fans Cowher was seen as a link to the past and a way to relevance. That wasn’t a bandwagon thing, it was a desperation thing.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 31, 2009 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Tooting my Own Horn
I hate to toot my own horn at the haters who said I should not write anything again, or that I’m not a real fan, but I think the GM being fired and Mr. Lerner meeting with Dawg Pound Mike proves I knew what I was talking about, it will be interesting to see if those who would do nothing but throw insults at me see the light now.
What is that going to do? Honestly, how is that going to make the Browns better and help them win games? I’d love to know your answer to that question.
Don’t you think that Lerner know the team is bad? Don’t you think that he knows the fans are upset? He wants to win as much as any of us, if not more — it’s his team and his money, after all. He’s trying to make changes; that is why he hired a new GM and a new coach this summer. It’s way too early to judge those moves.
Planning a protest like this only makes Browns fans look stupid.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 29, 2009 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I never said you should never post here again. I would never say that.
To what you said. Alot of what you said sounds nice but it also isn’t always the way things work when you actually look at experience.
If enough fans started a campaign or boycott of games, maybe then Mr. Lerner would get the hint and either sell the team to someone who will do the right thing or he’ll do the right thing and start hiring a front office that’s worth a shit.
I guess this eventually worked in Detroit, however I’m not willing to concede that Mr. Lerner is not attempting to hire a front office that is worth a shit. Heck he has gotten staff from San Fran, Baltimore and New England. Unfortunately this hasn’t worked out for us.
We don’t need to draft a QB to fix our offense we need an old pro to teach our QB’s how to play like a pro!
I always here this but who was Ryan’s old pro? Flacco? I guess Brady had Bledsoe, but then again Couch had Detmer. I don’t even know who Manning had. Aikman? Marino? Brees? Well Young did have Montana. Hasselbeck (sp?)? McNabb? I beginning to think maybe this old pro thing isn’t all it’s made out to be.
I don’t go in much for military debate.
As far as the fans, I think everyone in the league knows how good the fans in Cleveland are.
I’m not bitching about what you said, but I figured since you posted on a blog that you would be receptive to a response.
I’m a fan, and a fan who realizes I have less than a percent of the knowledge about football of anyone working for the Browns. I come to this site because it allows me to discuss with other fans and to learn more about the team and the game. I believe that you can learn alot by putting differing ideas in one area and discussing them, and obviously I don’t feel that everything i say is gospel because I would then bypass writing letters and interview for a position myself.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Yeah, the protesting is just silly. Lerner is a fine owner. He doesn’t meddle in football affairs too much. He hires GMs and coaches to handle the football operations. And he fires GMs that are obviously failing.
Fans in Washington, Cincinnati, and Detroit had real reason to protest. But that is NOT the situation in Cleveland.
I agree, his hirings have not been successful for the most part, but he at least tries to rectify the situation every few years when it becomes obvious that he missed.
It’s really difficult to know if a person will be a successful GM or head coach unless he’s been in that position before. If not, then you have to hire a guy with a good background and hope that he does well in his new position. Obviously you can tell things about a person by talking to them in the interview but we aren’t privy to any of that information. But the people Lerner has hired all had good credentials and came from good backgrounds, unfortunately they didn’t work out well here. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t trying to hire good people, though.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 28, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah. That’s one reason I reacted so strongly to the “Worst Hire Ever” crap earlier. It’s certainly fair to criticize the Browns’ record in hiring coaches and F.O. personnel, but that’s always in hindsight, isn’t it? The fact is, there were solid reasons for hiring these people, and it made sense -at least to Lerner – at the time. I’m as disgusted as anyone with this year’s team, but it makes no sense to say “Let’s just start over AGAIN.” Give these guys some time – I say 3 years – and let’s see what we have. I do have one caveat for the 3 years, though: we need to see definite signs of improvement, and not just three years of wandering around in the desert. didn’t work for Moses (OK, he actually got 40 years, but I just can’t stretch that far), won’t work here.
Time.....
It has taken a decade worth of bad decisions to get to this point, and be in the shape we are in right now. No GM or coach or qb can change this overnight, sitting Quinn shows that we are at least starting to make a couple of decisions headed in the right direction. Someone earlier posted defense in the draft, our first pick will have to be qb after that straight defense. We have a relatively young line, young backs, and some young receivers for a rookie qb to develop around. We have to get some tackelers!! We have to go after some db’s!! Ohh how I miss dixson and minifield!!!
I mostly agree with this, but i think a good qb will be available in round 2
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Getting SICK!
Let’s be real here. Anderson is clearly not a ‘good’ QB. He is at the bottom of the league, worse than J.Russel.
Now if the original post is correct and we are trying to save 11 Million, then WTF!!!
How does that help this team? Who in their right mind would come to Cleveland ‘ever??’ after we show how we treat players. WHO?
Start Quinn NOW. Man up Lerner and put Mangini in his place!!! Show the NFL that you are a team owner who wants to win this Millennium. Pay that 11Mil and find out if Quinn can do something, if not we get rid of both QB’s anyways. Or Quinn shows up and starts to deliver.
New coach comes in and names Quinn as the starter from the start, he gets all the reps with the ‘New Offense’ (Again) and we build PROPERLY around that player. And if he stinks then we can him… I’m for the team not the player and Anderson is worse with more opportunities against worse defenses.
For all those that think we are doing it right, and then please name me the player we are building around now? Who did we get this YEAR that screams Franchise? WHO?
BTW it’s not our 11Million… Give it up Lerner. Flash your manhood for ONCE.
Fortunately this isn’t a basketball team so we don’t have to build around a player. Instead we can try and build a team that will be able to support any player that we choose to make a part of the team.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
How does it help our team? That’s 11M for improvements in other areas.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Give it up Lerner. Flash your manhood for ONCE.
That kind of thing gets you in trouble round these parts.
by Bernie19Kosar on Oct 27, 2009 2:29 AM EDT up reply actions
So pay him 11m and then cut him…….brilliant idea!!! Those are the kinda moves that have gotten us into this mess for the last decade!!
by cfields on Oct 27, 2009 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
So if Manginin is waiting till Quinn will get less then 70% of the snaps when would he get in? My best calculations lead me to believe Quinn will get less then 70% of the snaps around the Detroit game. The games he could then play would be Detroit, Cincinnati, San Diego, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Oakland, and Jacksonville.
If he plays like he did in the first 2.5 games he played this year I could see him going around 3-4. Likewise I see DA going around 3-4 based on his play so far this year. My question is if Quinn does end up playing like he did earlier this year but does got 3-4 are we going to ship DA and keep Quinn to start next year?
Who ever ends up playing the last 7 games this year could get a few wins and look good just because they are playing TEAMS that are not as good as our TEAM. I’m just starting to worry that we are going to be arguing about the same thing a year from now.
Bruce pointed out Kellen Clemans who was drafted by Manginin will be a free agent next year. How do you all feel about that?
I’m not sure those teams are worse than us. I’ve never seen a starter play a whole game and complete only 2 passes, no matter how windy it was
by HenryDawg on Oct 26, 2009 9:43 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
TEAM not QB. DA was historically bad, but we still beat a worse TEAM.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Who ever ends up playing the last 7 games this year could get a few wins and look good just because they are playing TEAMS that are not as good as our TEAM
Precisely why you don’t judge a QB by W-L record.
And DA and Quinn will NOT both be on the team next year. Questionable if one of them will be.
Clemons is interesting.
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 26, 2009 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions
“Bruce pointed out Kellen Clemans who was drafted by Manginin will be a free agent next year. How do you all feel about that?”
i would not be surprised if he’s in a browns uniform next year.
Clemons is a Brown for sure next year, DA is gone. We will draft a QB so we will have Quinn ,Clemons, Ratliff ,and ???? battling for a spot.
i think we bring in clemens as a stop gap for a drafted rookie, and i think quinn and anderson are both gone, anderson because he sucks and quinn because he could return a decent draft pick (3rd round maybe)
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
On Conference Calls in the Red Zone
Please point me to an NFL playoff team that consistently calls timeouts to discuss strategy in the red zone.
We couldn’t think of one at lunch today.
DA has a 2nd and goal on the 3 and calls a timeout and joins a team meeting.
It worked out so well, that GB calls the timeout the next time the Browns get in the red zone to force another Browns team meeting.
That one worked out as well for us.
You’re exactly right. . . the Browns are the only team in the entire NFL to ever call a time out in the red zone. No team in the history of the league has ever done that before. How dare they discuss a play in an important situation!
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 26, 2009 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Still, given all the lip service Mangini gave to practicing certain situations like possessions in the red zone you’d think there would have been something dialed up or at least a short list of options. It’s not often that the Browns are able to march down the field, so when they do occasionally get there it would be nice if they had a plan to follow through.
Is it possible, then, that Mangini is eschewing Quinn so he doesn’t take 70 percent of the snaps, a number that would trigger $10.9 million in contract escalators? Quinn has played 10 quarters, and would need to play about 45 to hit 70%. With 36 quarters remaining, he could still reach 70 percent if they started him this week. If they wait until after the bye, he has virtually no chance.
“That has nothing to do with it. Nothing. Zero,” Mangini said.
Has it crossed Quinn’s mind that it’s part of the equation? Afterall, why would the Browns risk paying him all that money if they’re not sure about his future here?
“No, and I hope that’s not the case,” Quinn said. “We’re just trying to win out there.”
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I’m sure they aren’t going to say anything publicly.
Though, I’m sure Quinn has thought about the escalators. I really think this is why he is “downsizing” his house.
While I do think the money is part of the equation (and I’m happy about that), there is another issue. Quinn’s development. I said it at the time of his benching, this has to be about Quinn. DA isn’t going to be a solid starting QB in this league- and that is clear now more than ever. The decision Mangini should be making is: Is Quinn ready? Should he keep learning from the offense from the sidelines?
by Ryan Kelsey on Oct 27, 2009 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions
I think (and this is only my opinion) that the coaching staff would have loved to play Quinn all year, but his inexperience combined with poor line play and very tough opponents made for 10 quarters of awful. It was at that point that they made the move to DA. The move to DA wasn’t a move in favor of DA, though. I think they looked at the schedule (Jacksonville, Oakland, KC, Detroit all in the later half of the schedule) and decided to sit him now, let DA suck it up through the difficult part of the schedule, and then bring back Quinn to finish out the year playing games we have a chance to win. End the year on a high note with Quinn under center. Build his confidence a bit so that he comes in next year having ‘earned’ the starter role.
I could be entirely wrong, though.
by golanbatrac on Oct 27, 2009 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions
I actually like this a lot, this sums up my feelings nicely. Quinn was almost handed the job this year by default. By sitting him they let him know he has to earn it, so maybe he works a little harder in practice and hopefully performs better when he gets back in. That way we end the season on a high note and with Quinn looking decent. This last point is important, as I personally don’t believe quinn is ever going to be a good qb (agree to disagree) and would love to see his trade value rise a little.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s always shocking to me (and this came up during the preseason competition) when it is suggested that either Quinn or Anderson need to be convinced that their careers are on the line and that they need to work very hard. What could possibly make someone think that either is so stupid that they would rest on their NFL success at this point?
by dgcambridge on Oct 27, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
quinn knew he basically got the job as long as he showed up. i don’t know about you, but if i know i don’t normally work harder than i have to to get something.
by notthatnoise on Oct 27, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Quinn had started less than a handful of games in his NFL career up to this point. I highly doubt he was taking anything for granted when it came to the starting QB job. That would have been really stupid of him to do, since he’s had very little chance to prove himself on this level.
by Buckeye Brad on Oct 27, 2009 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
ahh to go back to Jaworski, with every snap, you learn something in the nfl, especially at the QB level. I think Manning said that even on the worst plays, he got something from it….but the point was ….he was in there.
Could it be that Quinn even learned something on that awful fumble looking backward pass thing?
Could it be that after awhile you stop learning? DA?
I dont know.
by Red-Right-88 on Oct 27, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with this. And I said it at the time. I never understood those that say/said Quinn would only play if DA got injured.
After the bye week would be good to change out QB’s and see what is on the table from Quinn.If he plays bad in the last few games vs teams as bad as us then it would tells us to find a QB in the off season.Is there a Kitna type QB out there that will be cheap and a decent QB so if we draft someone they have a vet to talk to about what to look for when out there.Think are down fall with the young QB’s is we have not had a decent vet to help them learn.
On a side note:
How long was did Palmer sit behind Kitna?
by Brownsfan4ever on Oct 28, 2009 1:49 AM EDT up reply actions
A side note, Bengals fans were highly critical of Kitna throughout his time there. I think he might have even won the comeback player of the year Palmer’s first year and was never given a chance to start the next year. Sort of parallel to a question I asked earlier about how you could get rid of or bench a QB following a Pro Bowl year. Obviously quite easy if you have a Palmer sitting behind him.
Makes me wonder now if maybe Quinn wasn’t seen as such or maybe the coaching staff had a different philosophy.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Has a Starter Been Named this Week?
Just curious if Mangini has said if DA is still his QB this week.
True, and probably even reasonable and logical. It doesn’t mean I don’t get nauseous at the thought, though.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Oct 28, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions
We need some kind of post
Where everyone puts on their GM hat and lays out their plans for the Browns.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
Ha, agreed. I’m sorry for all the posts re-hashing “what-ifs.” The incredible mis-management of the QB situation by the current regime easily leads to it. We’re at where we’re at. Lord knows where that is, but I’ll stick to posting about that.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I just think it would interesting to hear everyone’s opinions on the roster in one place. Might also help to figure out what exactly Mangini’s plan might be.
"This season has been everything most of us feared it would be[.]"
Mike Rutherford, Card Chronicle
http://www.cardchronicle.com/
I think I get Mangini’s plan regarding non-QB players… he wanted to start from scratch, get high character, “football is my life” guys, and he wanted fiscal sanity (ie, not pay Winslow or Edwards). I’m fine with that. What I don’t get is why not have some rationality at the QB position? You can’t pull one for another to “add a spark” in a game you’re down by 4 scores on the basis that you want to win, and then trade Braylon Edwards 7 days later. Preseason competition aside, the rational thing was to acknowledge how close these two were, and concoct a variable-independent plan to deciding between them this year, 2009.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Agreed. It’s a strange contrast, isn’t it?
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Oct 28, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Qb situation
Listen kids and listen closely…It doesn’t matter which chuckle head plays Qb for us this year. When you trade the 2 best recievers on the team (i probably would have gotten rid of Edwards too). Mangini mis-handled the Qb situation completely. Typical Cleveland rebuilding year lol. And if you all think your sad, I just moved to Denver and have to deal with that.
Quinn
Looking back on games 1 and 2, I observe that Quinn had to start against the Vikings and the Broncos, now a combined 12 wins and just 1 loss. Clearly these two teams are elite and potential Super Bowl tickets. Makes me wonder if Mangini should’ve just exercised some patience and stayed with Quinn for what has been undoubtedly easier opponents.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Follow DBN on Twitter
Browns Links
Local Media Sources
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities/Blogs
The Watercooler
Waiting for Next Year
Dawg Scooper
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
- The hidden play of Super Bowl XLVI: Justin Tuck’s third-quarter sack
- Report: Chad Ochocinco will become Chad Johnson once again
- Video: Bill Belichick implores his defense to make the Giants throw to Mario Manningham
- Training Day: Learning the 40 with an Olympian
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
