Why didn't we trade for McNabb or Kolb?
by golanbatrac on Mar 11, 2010 10:49 AM EST
302 comments
Maybe because the Eagles want a first round pick for McNabb and two first round picks for Kolb. Neither QB is worth a top ten pick. And if, as the article states, the Seahawks are interested in Kolb, I think we can kiss any chance of landing Berry goodbye. Given the lack of a stand-out sure-fire top ten running back in this year's class, I think the Eagles use Seattle's pick to replace Brian Dawkins.
This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.
0 recs |
302 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Eagles might be using the Scott Boras theory of negotiating; Ask for something so outrageous that when you get what you want, you still ripped the other person off but they feel like they got a deal.
That said, I still want McNabb.
exactly…Maybe that is what the seahawks were trying to do with getting marshall. they trade for a similar caliber player and give away much less.
Well, whatever it is, Carroll has not tipped his hat.
by mooncamping on Mar 12, 2010 10:01 AM EST up reply actions
I meant for this to be a fanshot.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
We still can make a trade. So far, all Holmgren and staff have done is replace the backup QB with a cheaper alternative.
Perhaps a trade could be made during or after the draft with the same affect on both teams. In the meantime, each team can see how the draft plays out wrt immediate needs – and still have valuable bargaining chips to make the most of the opportunities.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
I’d give our first round pick for Kolb*. But Philly is going to want more than that — I am sure Seattle has already offered at least their first round pick.
*That and next years? No way.
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 11, 2010 12:47 PM EST reply actions
This really kills me by the way. We traded our first and our second for BQ, and then Kolb was taken with our 2nd round pick. Phuck Phil Savage. Worst. GM. Ever.
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 11, 2010 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
Good thing Kwoog is teaching.
"Spartans never die Jorge. They're just missing in action."
by SpecialBrownie on Mar 11, 2010 1:12 PM EST up reply actions
Because he brought in ‘talent’ and we were on our way to ‘depth’ which doesn’t happen till the seventh year.
by BrownDawg1409 on Mar 12, 2010 7:45 AM EST up reply actions
Search the archives. I maintain he added 3-4 above average starters every single off season. I think it’s hard to argue he didn’t. And this is the formula for a non-successful team to become a successful one (Arizona, Seattle, New Orleans, etc).
In any even, I don’t understand the rage he elicits. Any criticism of him can be heaped 10 fold on every other regime this team has had in the last 20 years (as well as innumerable regimes of other teams). Savage is Chuck Knoll compared to what Butch Davis and Chris Palmer did, or the Raiders/Chiefs/Rams/Bills/etc organizations have been doing. Terry Pluto, who many of you admire with due reason, agrees with me.
In the end, it may be debatable but it’s not crazy to grade Savage as having been up and down, but with more of the former than the latter. However, it is crazy to grade him as a disaster.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Thank you for stating this, I couldn’t agree more a lot of his moves didn’t pan out, but you can’t blame the guy for people such as Bentley or Baxter who got injured in unspeakable manners, that being said he definitely wasn’t a draft guru, he was still better at the draft than any of his predecessors though
The sporting gods hate Cleveland, they give us false hopes, then yank it out from under us like a tablecloth.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 13, 2010 2:18 AM EST up reply actions
Good to know that the Browns still matter in Korea.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 13, 2010 1:41 AM EST up reply actions
I think they’ll always matter wherever I end up… Which may be Thailand next.
I have gone weeks without logging in/checking, Today I just happen to be nursing a soju hangover, and wanted to see what everyone was saying about the QBs.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Meh, I think the general reaction at the time was that we got a steal. In hindsight though, you’re right…
Dawgs By Nature - Covering the Cleveland Browns on SB Nation.
by Chris Pokorny on Mar 11, 2010 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
No, it wasn’t. Maybe with Browns fans who for some reason were obsessed with BQ (some wanted to take him with the 3rd pick), but around the NFL, people believed we got robbed. We basically traded up about 10 picks (our early 2nd for the late 1st) and gave up the next year’s first rounder. The exchange of value on that was ridiculously bad. Think about it — late first rounder instead of early 2nd rounder? Not much difference in the type of players available (and BQ may have still been around), but we gave up a 1st round pick for it!! Yikes.
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 11, 2010 1:19 PM EST up reply actions
If I remember correctly most analysts thought it was a boom or bust scenario, meaning we either had the best draft ever or we were going to regret it.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 11, 2010 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
Guess they were both wrong — picked up two good starters (one of them is fantastic) in Thomas and Wright, but gave up a ton in the process.
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 11, 2010 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
Most teams would be thrilled with a Pro Bowler and a near Pro Bowler in one draft.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 12, 2010 1:20 AM EST up reply actions
No, it wasn’t. Maybe with Browns fans who for some reason were obsessed with BQ (some wanted to take him with the 3rd pick), but around the NFL, people believed we got robbed.
Here we go with the Savage bashing. Again, the guy made mistakes, but now we are just making things up. People around the NFL thought the Browns got jobbed on the Quinn trade?
This isn’t true. Most everyone applauded the Browns for making such a bold move to get a QB that most people thought was going to be a star. (Here are three examples) Even former GM’s thought the Browns made a great deal.
We basically traded up about 10 picks (our early 2nd for the late 1st) and gave up the next year’s first rounder. The exchange of value on that was ridiculously bad. Think about it — late first rounder instead of early 2nd rounder? Not much difference in the type of players available (and BQ may have still been around), but we gave up a 1st round pick for it!! Yikes.
We gave up the #22 pick in ’08 for the #22 pick in ’07. We paid a second round pick to take the QB for the next ten seasons a year early. Yes, we paid a premium, but we paid it in order to get a player that was considered for the number 3 pick overall.
Would you trade a second and next years first for Eric Berry and Sam Bradford? I would. This is what the Browns walked away with in ’07.
Savage made errors, mostly not communicating with his coaching staff about what players would best fit their coaching schemes, paying premiums in free agency, and mostly just some horrendous luck. But please, stop with just making things to crap on the guy about.
Pretty soon it is going to be Savage’s fault that the Browns moved.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 12, 2010 1:19 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
In 2008, Savage had traded away all of our draft picks but three. We then got a sixth rounder for Frye. He then traded away our fifth round pick to move up a few spots to take Beau Bell (!) and then traded our next year’s 3rd rounder for Martin Rucker (?!?). He then traded away our 2009 5th rounder for Paul Hubbard. Notice something: none of those players ever did jack, and I think they are all out of the league after two years. You can’t build a team by trading away half our draft the next year for a bunch of marginal players.
By 2009, we also only had four draft picks. And we had nothing, zilch, to show for it.
The guy made horrible, horrible trades. And not just to make stupid reaches in the late rounds. See also Corey Williams for a second rounder??? That was a very bad move. Williams did not fit in the 3-4 from the start. Again, you may disagree, but the BQ trade was not smart — you don’t trade away a first round pick to move up 10 places in a draft, and there was a reason everyone was passing on Brady. Clearly, the rest of the NFL was seeing something Savage was missing. Everyone always points to the Shaun Rogers trade as genius, and although I think it was a good trade, Detroit got a solid starting CB for it and a 3rd round pick. It wasn’t like we gave up nothing.
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 12, 2010 1:54 AM EST up reply actions
As much as it hurts to halfway defend Savage…
there was a reason everyone was passing on Brady. Clearly, the rest of the NFL was seeing something Savage was missing.
Replace Brady with Rogers in the above quote to see just how wrong that line of thinking is.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
Wow, you are doing so much second-guessing here. It’s easy to criticize with the benefit of hindsight. Savage wasn’t nearly as bad as you’re making him out to be. He brought a lot of good talent to this team. He made some mistakes as well, and that cost him his job, but to say he was the worst GM ever is so far from reality that it destroys your credibility.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 12, 2010 8:01 AM EST up reply actions
We are allowed to use hindsight to evaluate Savage. Savage as the GM of a professional football team needs to have better foresight. The 2008 draft trades were all atrocious as TDSH mentioned. Savage did make some excellent choices though, which is why he is not anywhere near the worst GM the Browns have ever had.
I won’t defend the moves he made at that time. They were clearly desperation moves by a rookie GM trying to save his job and they hurt us in the long run. Prior to that, however, I think at least roster-wise he made very good moves by and large.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
He certainly overestimated the talent on the team after the 2007 season and thought the Browns were in a “win-now” mode, which led him to make poor moves to trade away draft picks. And not selling high on Anderson after that season was another big mistake. But he certainly upgraded the talent and left us in a better position than we he started.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 12, 2010 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
He also probably knew that he had to “win now” or he was going to be fired. He went all in.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Really? I don’t think so. He had just finished up his third year after ‘07 so I don’t think he needed to go “all in” or he’d risk losing his job. He could have kept building for the future and, even if the Browns had taken a small step backwards in ‘08, I don’t think he would have been fired. But he ended up trading away a lot of the future and spending big money to win now and it didn’t happen so he was fired. Had he acted a little more sensibly and kep building the team through the draft then I think he would have been okay.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 12, 2010 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
I really don’t think that was the case. Everyone was calling for that regime’s heads at the end of 06, and after the first game of 07. No one saw 07 coming, and I think Savage felt the same pressure going in to 08.
Obviously speculation. Had he not sent that email and had he had better long-term plans in mind, who knows what would have happened. I don’t think he would have been given another year/coach.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
i actually agree with Brad on this one. He was doing fine…just barely missed the playoffs and was adding great talent. I think he jumped the gun with the win now attitude and got himself in trouble with ’08. I also think had he continued to acquire players thru the draft he most likely would have still been employed with us.
Lady and Gentlemen of the supposed website, TDSH would like to have you believe that the Quinn move was a bad trade. And he makes a good case. Hell, I almost felt pity myself. But, Lady and Gentlemen of this supposed website, I have one final thing I want you to consider.
This…
…is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a wookie from the planet Kishin. But Chewbacca LIVES on the planet Endor.
Now think about it…THAT-DOES-NOT-MAKE-SENSE. Why would a wookie, an eight foot tall wookie, want to live Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!
But more importantly, you have to ask yourselves…what does this have to do, with this post? Lady and Gentlemen, this has nothing to do with this post. THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE! Look at me! I’m a fan defending a 2-million a year quarterback, and I’m talking about Chewbacca. Lady and Gentlemen, am I making any sense? I am not making any sense!
So Lady and Gentlemen of the website, remember, when you’re on this site deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No…Lady and Gentlemen of this supposed website, THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE! IF CHEWBACCA LIVES ON ENDOR, THE MOVE WAS SMART AT THE TIME!!!
The defense rests.
by BrownDawg1409 on Mar 12, 2010 8:09 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Chewbacca is a wookie from the planet Kashyyyk
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 12, 2010 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
how sad is it that i didn’t even need to look it up to know its 3 y’s?
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 12, 2010 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
a little…but I did know that too and I will admit to it.
this reminds me of one of the questions on a history final exam. we were studying the salem witch trial period of america, and they got their inspiration from this biblical fable about the witch of endor (b/c of the witch of endor, they said what they were doing was okay…or something like that).
my teacher had as an answer the witch of endor was:
d) the ruler of the ewoks.
Is that it? I could never quite understand what he was saying at that part.
by BrownDawg1409 on Mar 12, 2010 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
I am by no means saying that every move Savage made was a good one. I am talking about the Quinn trade.
but the BQ trade was not smart — you don’t trade away a first round pick to move up 10 places in a draft, and there was a reason everyone was passing on Brady.
Quinn wasn’t falling because of a lack of talent, he was falling because of a lack of need. There is a massive difference.
You are looking at this deal wrong. We gave up a first and a second for a first. In the end we gave up a second round draft pick to draft Brady Quinn. Yes it was a high price tag but it was a worthwhile gamble.
If Quinn turned out to be the player we all expected him to be, this would be one of the best drafts in Browns history.
Everyone always points to the Shaun Rogers trade as genius, and although I think it was a good trade, Detroit got a solid starting CB for it and a 3rd round pick. It wasn’t like we gave up nothing.
It was a steal. We gave up a CB that wanted to be paid like he was elite and a pick that ended up as Andre Fluellen. Bodden was so bad in Detroit that he was benched and cut after one season. We ended up with the best NT in the NFL. I wish all of our trades ended up like this.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 12, 2010 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
I agree.
but just as a sidenote, just because the lions made a bad draft pick doesn’t mean we wouldn’t have gotten a good player. there were guys like mario manningham, Jermichael FInley, and steve slaton. I still think it was a good trade…just saying that these are guys that in hindsight we could have gotten.
Yes, but we are allowed to use hindsight. It should be considered an error in evaluation to even rank Brady Quinn as a top 5 player from the draft.
What about as a top 22 player? The premium was paid to get the QB a year early.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Bad trade in retrospect, that’s fair. Stupid trade, I’d argue that a bit (not that you said that). I mean I really didn’t like the trade at the time, and it’s clearly not worked out, but it was a perfectly tenable play at the time.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Agree. If your evaluation tells you that Quinn has what it takes to be an above average QB in the NFL, then you make that trade every day of the week. The error was more in the evaluation of Quinn then the trade compensation itself.
But it wasn’t as if the Browns were alone on their evaluation of Quinn.
Everyone expected Quinn to be a first round draft pick.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 12, 2010 2:51 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t think that is true. There is no evidence to support this other than the supposed “lack of need,” but no matter how you slice it Quinn was passed by 21 teams.
Yes, but did the Packers need a QB when they selected Rodgers? Sometimes if the QB is worth it, the team will select the player anyway if the value is there. All we know is that no team traded to acquire a supposedly sliding Quinn until the Browns did, and no team selected Quinn prior to when the Browns did. Suggesting that he was anything more valuable than the 22nd best prospect in the draft is pure conjecture.
True, but they selected Rodgers thinking that Brett would retire soon and that Rodgers would take over. Did another team have a situation similar to that before we took him? I’m too lazy to look it up.
that also begs the question though…why did we trade up to get him. That would infer that another team was about to grab him possibly.
Baltimore was trading up to select Quinn.
Cleveland beat them to the punch.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 12, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
The evidence is that we had to trade up instead of drafting him in the 2nd.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
What? I thought you said that it wasn’t true that everyone expected him to be a first round pick?
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Suggesting that he was anything more valuable than the 22nd best prospect in the draft is pure conjecture.
but no matter how you slice it Quinn was passed by 21 teams.
Both things I said just above.
I was responding to the following:
BK
Everyone expected Quinn to be a first round draft pick.
You
I don’t think that is true.
Your point that teams passed on Quinn is taken. The fact is we still drafted him in the first and Savage felt like we had to draft him then rather than wait till our early 2nd rounder. Obviously, Savage could have been wrong and he could have lasted. I think most people would have been surprised if that happened.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Explain to me how we are allowed to use hindsight to evaluate someone’s foresight.
Obviously, Quinn is not the player anyone thought he would be. But Savage had a plan, the plan made sense, and he took a good chance. Every draft pick/roster move gets you a chance, nothing is a lock and no one can tell with 100% certainty what the good moves are before they happen. There is no moneyball in football. I believe although the move itself didn’t work out it was still a good move because of the chances it gave us.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
You use hindsight because even if the guy has a plan and makes decisions that aren’t good after they come to fruition, then you try to find someone who does a better job of roster building.
Even if it seems on the surface to us that the Quinn selection was good…the fact that Quinn has not turned out to be very good is a negative for Savage’s ability to build a team.
I am not arguing Savage’s process, just the end results…which I am able to do using hindsight. It doesn’t mean I have good foresight.
I just don’t agree with that at all. No GM ever has the future’s hindsight when making a decision in the present.
A good coach has to take the right chances to win, but knows s/he will always lose some games because of the element of chance. LeBron should shoot open shots at the ends of games. He will not make all of those shots. He should pass to someone for a wide-open layup if he is triple-teamed. A basketball player sucks if his shooting % is terrible, not if he misses a game-winner.
Savage just missed one 33% shot with Quinn. It was a huge shot, sure. That isn’t the reason to fire him, he still made the right move. Just like LeBron taking and missing a wide-open shot.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
thats the thing though, this wasn’t a “wide open shot.” there were plenty of reasons not to take it, chief among them being how much we had to give up to do it.
To continue your analogy, this would be like lebron taking a shot in the fourth quarter knowing that if he took that shot, he couldn’t play the next game.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 12, 2010 7:54 PM EST up reply actions
this would be like lebron taking a shot in the fourth quarter knowing that if he took that shot, he couldn’t play the next game.
Except that he would have cloned himself and played twice in that first game.
We did pick twice in that first round. We already had Thomas. We ended up giving up a high 2nd to draft a year earlier at the same 1st round spot. The trade was 2008 first + 2007 2nd for 2007 first, was it not?
There were plenty of reasons not to take that shot, there were plenty of reasons to do it as well. It was like taking the 3 to win instead of the 2 to tie. Bigger risk, bigger reward.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Rufio is right, I think. The real problem is that Quinn was really set up to fail. He ended up with a coaching staff that was decidedly inept and a very unstable power structure in the organization.
The team had that good year with Derek Anderson and that led to the umpteenth quarterback controversy that kept Quinn off the field.
The team was undisciplined and could easily make a QB look bad with sloppy play.
Regime change, new coaches, flux in the roster, another qb controversy.
I don’t think there’s a QB in the NFL today who could have succeeded if he was placed into the same circumstances as Brady Quinn.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
This Quinn was set up to fail stuff is preposterous. The problem with the pick and trading up for Quinn is simple. He has not turned into a good player, so the evaluation was wrong.
This. A good QB could have succeeded in that situation. jaws is just making more excuses.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 13, 2010 4:30 PM EST up reply actions
Never? Really? No QB has ever played well with a bad team around him and a changing coaching staff?
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 13, 2010 11:49 PM EST up reply actions
That he hasn’t had anything close to resembling the requisite consistent playing time.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Then he should quit getting injured.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Mar 14, 2010 12:01 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I am not making the “Quinn didn’t have a fair shot” argument.
Picking Quinn was still a good shot to take, even if we missed. It doesn’t mean it wasn’t a good shot. It does affect Savage’s shooting percentage, but it doesn’t define it.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I don’t think there’s a QB in the NFL today who could have succeeded if he was placed into the same circumstances as Brady Quinn.
That’s simply false. Plenty of QB’s came in to the NFL on bad teams with bad coaches and still played well, or at least good enough to keep their job. Enough with the excuses.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 13, 2010 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
The “bad team” aspect is not what was detrimental to Quinn. It’s more the never playing 6 consecutive games in 3 years.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Maybe the coaching staff thought he wasn’t good enough to deserve that many starts.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 13, 2010 11:50 PM EST up reply actions
Then the coaching staff is incompetent. QBs need developed in real game experience. What they do for the first 10, 12 games (in a row, after a long time is a system) is literally irrelevant.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I just want to get this straight. If Holmgren trades Quinn for virtually nothing, while acquiring Delhomme and Wallace to replace him, we can assume that Holmgren thinks very little of Quinn. You then are saying that Holmgren is incompetent as well?
I will say he gave up on Quinn before it was known how good he can be, and I think he’d sincerely agree. But giving up on a 26 yr old QB learning his 3rd new offense in 4 years in favor of a Super Bowl QB and a competent back up (both of whom have experience in Mike’s system) is a lot different than sitting him for DA, in either 08 or 09.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
DA was coming off of a Pro Bowl season in ’08 while Quinn was a second-year player without a start in his career. You cannot possibly blame the Browns coaching staff for starting DA over Quinn that season.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 14, 2010 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions
And even taking your mis-identification of the problem, you’re still wrong (no, plenty have not).
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
Let’s see what kind of return Quinn gets in a trade, that will give us some idea of how much the rest of the league thinks of Quinn. Unless you think everyone in the NFL is incompetent.
Every quarterback to be drafted in the high first round who panned out came on to a crappy team. Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Vince Young, Jay Cutler, Eli Manning, Big Ben, Philip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Byron Leftwich, Michael Vick. All are QBs taken in the first half of the first round (i think the lowest pick is 11). All were at least above average QBs for multiple years.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 16, 2010 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Alex Smith, Matt Leinhart, David Carr and Joey Harrington and JamMarcus Russell?
In addition, Vince Young sucks. Thought I would go ahead and throw that in there.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 16, 2010 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Vince Young’s stats from last year:
58.7% completions
7.3 YPA
10 TD
7 INT
82.8 rating
thats hardly sucking.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 19, 2010 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions
he was also 8-2 as a starter.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 19, 2010 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions
When he does it for an entire season, then I will buy in.
And don’t use the 8-2 as a starter stat.
That had more to do with the Titans finally deciding to give Chris Johnson the ball.
CJ in his first six games: 16 carries a game
CJ in his last 10 games: 26 carries a game.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 19, 2010 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree.
CJ really came on.
Was Trent dilfer great because the ravens won the super bowl? No. Winning does not mean the quarterback performed great. We always seem to hit on this point…
Even in his rookie year, VY didn’t put up good stats…but He is a WINNER!
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Its a lot more useful when putting him in the game coincided with a large increase in wins AND when he had good/solid/better than the other guy stats.
At least Young was allowing (although perhaps not causing) his team to win where Collins was not.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
yes. I do think he was a solid QB last year.
however this whole thing started because NTN mentioned he was 8-2. yes, he was better than collins, but is the 8-2 relevant? I say not.
first of all, corellation does not equal causation. it sometimes does, but that itself does not prove anything about someone or something.
Second of all, there are multiple variables we are talking about.
a) there is chris Johnson. Johnson was very good for the first 6 games but then completely exploded onto the scene in the next 10. like B19K said above I believe, he had 10 more carries a game and was putting up great stats. that increase in carries might mean that the cause of the turnaround was chris Johnson
b) Injuries.
-Their MLB, Steven Tulloch was injured during part of that losing streak. he was back after the bye week.
-The same is true with their #1 corner, corteland finnegan.
-Their #2 corner nick harper was also banged up too
-Jevon Kearse also got hurt near the end of this streak. I look at the injury as a positive because he wasn’t at 100% when he was playing and his replacement, WIll hayes got more pressure on the QB.
c) emergence of rookies
This is another factor. Kenny britt really looked good during the 2nd half of the season. he looked solid in the first 6 games, but he looked more natural running routes during the winning streak and he played a key role
Because of some injuries, Gerald McRath had to step in at times at LB. he performed solidly and improved enough to be a situational linebacker that could let guys like bullock rest and add depth to the linebacking corps.
The same can be said about ryan mouton who was a solid rookie corner.
The point of all of this was that there was much more going on than just Vince Young becoming the starter. It can be argued that him coming in and performing solidly just correlated with everything else.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Before you launch into a tirade, read what I said.
At least Young was allowing (although perhaps not causing)
Do you still think I don’t know the difference between causation and correlation?
Maybe VY’s ability to run the option with CJ helped him get some of those touches and yards. Maybe Young just had better chemistry with Britt, or the coaches had to change the playbook for VY and Britt somehow benefited.
With virtually the same personnel around him on offense, he vastly improved on all of Collins’ numbers; compare his stats above to Collins’ 55.1%, 5.67YPA, 6TDs and 8INTs, rating of 65.5.
Who caused what is impossible to decipher. And in reality, it was probably synergy between VY and the team. The bottom line is that under Young, the Titans blossomed.
With such a strong change in wins coinciding with VY reclaiming the starting role, it is doubtful that a player who touches the ball on every offensive snap had zero positive impact on the win streak.
And we know for sure that VY didn’t have so much of a negative impact on his team that he caused them to lose (because they won).
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I totally agree with you points. I do think VY had something to do with the 8-2 run, however this started b/c someone pointed out that he was 8-2 and implied that it was VY that got them there. I did go a little overboard and when I look stuff up, occasionally I do. however, I think we aren’t really in disagreement.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
This doesn’t mean that Vince Young is all the sudden good.
Maybe “sucks” was a bit strong, but I don’t think Young is a viable long term starting QB in this league.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 20, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
All I’m saying is that W-L in that situation means something. It doesn’t mean VY is good, no. It does mean he did well enough (or viewed a different way, he messed up infrequently enough) vs. another player to let his team win.
I can’t tell if he is a viable long term QB in the league. If he can keep himself together, I think he is. I don’t think he ever is an all pro. And if he can’t hold up mentally, he will be as bad as he was prior to last year.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Most of the players you mention didn’t go to a crappy team, they wen’t to a good team that had a crappy year,
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
the 49ers have been a consistently crappy team until 2009. Ditto with Arizona until Kurt Warner showed up. The lions? not crappy? Under matt millen? and JaMarcus russell to the raiders? are you kidding me?
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
His reply was to B19K not Golan.
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 16, 2010 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Wrong reply button?
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 16, 2010 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
wait my bad I didn’t scroll up enough and made an ass of myself, Golan’s response was to NTN not B19K.
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 16, 2010 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
ever think the bad coaching just pulled him from the job prematurely? Created an environment where he was totally uncomfortable playing? The other QBs had the opportunity to keep playing and get comfortable under the same playbook for a whole season at least.
Quinns first nfl start he threw for 260 yards and 2 TDs no picks. What would you have him do?
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
Brady had an opportunity to keep playing, he got injured, twice. Brady wasn’t allowed to look at the playbook? And please don’t get started on the “coaching staff wasn’t confident in him” argument.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 16, 2010 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I almost hate to even post this…but what if….Brady becomes a star with Denver? This is all hypothetical, but you all know how I feel about Quinn. Will you then eat your words and say loudly and as often as we like that Jaws and I are right?
A lot of people are afraid of heights. Not me, I'm afraid of widths --- Steven Wright
if brady becomes a star in denver, i’ll be saying “oh well, we had to get rid of him to get (whoever holmgren chooses).” that’s how confident i am that holmgren will get us an elite QB.
I believe that as well…I don’t particularly see him becoming a star…maybe a starter, but not a star. I too think Mike will get us a QB for the future. I think to avoid all the confusion and controversy around the position, he made the right call.
A lot of people are afraid of heights. Not me, I'm afraid of widths --- Steven Wright
what if jamarcus russell miraculously turns it around??
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
rec
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 16, 2010 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions
yep…just saying…why think about the possibilities of BQ turning it around.
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
Yeah I figured that was what you meant, cause Jam turning his career around would be like Couch or Leaf making a come back, but who the hell knows, the Jets pulled Testaverde off of his couch that one year.
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 16, 2010 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Success in Denver does not equate to success in Cleveland and that’s the only success that i’m worried about.
BQ is no longer a Brown and moving forward I have no concern for what he does outside of our conditional pick.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
good way to look at it actually. If it should happen, hindsight is always 20/20 I suppose and we have a better 2012 pick.
A lot of people are afraid of heights. Not me, I'm afraid of widths --- Steven Wright
As much as I dislike the Quinn deal, I understand why it was done.
Quinn has landed in the best place possible. McDaniels can coach QB’s, and judging off how poorly Cassel was this season, I fully expect him to make Quinn into a starting QB.
But I don’t think Quinn could have done that here.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 16, 2010 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions
exactly. if quinn goes on to be a good QB that doesn’t mean he would have done it here.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 17, 2010 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions
It was still a high percentage deal to get rid of him at this point.
Not that what we got in return was high percentage, but it is unlikely he becomes a great QB in Denver, so that makes it a solid deal for us.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I don’t think there’s a QB in the NFL today who could have succeeded if he was placed into the same circumstances as Brady Quinn.
Didn’t Derek Anderson do this for one season?
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 13, 2010 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
He started 15 consecutive games with an organization that was at least kinda stable, and had nobody to look over his shoulder at because Charlie Frye was immediately traded.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
Yes, of course. A QB can only be successful if he doesn’t have a backup QB looking over his shoulder. All quarterbacks are very mentally fragile like that.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 13, 2010 11:52 PM EST up reply actions
Ever play baseball? Quarterback? Anything where a small mistake is quickly magnified?
It really sucks when every time you strike out or throw an incompletion you might just get pulled. Every young qb is going to make mistakes, it is just a fact of life. He can’t be so worried that his next mistake will land him on the bench, or he will get too conservative with the ball, never take risks. He will look bad when he makes decent throws but the receivers drop passes.
Gee, does that sound like a quarterback you know?
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
Occam’s razor may not always be right, but the more convoluted the argument, the sharper it gets.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Mar 14, 2010 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I was a pitcher for 5 years until my sophomore year of high school. I gave up runs, I walked people sometimes. I wasn’t worried if I gave up a double I was gonna get yanked, because i had self confidence. If brady is that fragile, he will never succeed.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 16, 2010 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
He had Brady Quinn looking over his shoulder.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 14, 2010 12:51 AM EST up reply actions
Thats great that he played twice in that first game, but the team is now going to be 1-1 in those two games rather than possibly being 2-0.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 16, 2010 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree, GM’s do not have hindsight when making decisions, but that is not the point I am making. A good GM differs from a casual fan like myself, because he needs to display good foresight and make good draft choices or else he will fail at his job.
Even if the process of selecting Quinn, and at the time it seemed like a good selection, if Quinn turns into a terrible QB, there was something wrong with the selection of the player and with the GM’s evaluation of the QB.
End of the day, he needs to select good players in the draft, and he needs to do it better than the other GMs in the league or else the Browns aren’t going anywhere. Quinn has been a bad draft pick and that also makes the trade up to select Quinn a bad one.
While this is true, when drafting, everyone is basically just rolling the dice, anybody can be a bust, no matter how great he played in college. When it comes down to it, it’s the coaching staff who and the players themselves that make draft picks busts, so putting all of that responsibility on the GM just doesn’t seem right imo. Now don’t get me wrong, when a gm makes a pick that makes you scratch your head that is not the coaches’ or player’s fault.
The sporting gods hate Cleveland, they give us false hopes, then yank it out from under us like a tablecloth.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 13, 2010 1:21 PM EST up reply actions
would it not be fair to say that a GM is only as good as his scouts? They are doing the grunt work and giving him their reports.
This is also true, but Savage’s strength was supposed to be his scouting.
The sporting gods hate Cleveland, they give us false hopes, then yank it out from under us like a tablecloth.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 13, 2010 1:26 PM EST up reply actions
I agree partially with this. A failed team should fall on both the GM and the coaching staff. I think Randy Lerner saw some major disconnect between Savage and the Crennel staff, not to mention what appeared to me to be a bit of a sloppily run organization from Savage’s perspective.
That’s another totally legit reason to bash Savage and Romeo. The whole organization needs to work together. If the GM feeds the coach the kinds of players he needs or if the coach finds roles for the players the GM gives him, or some combination of both, it doesn’t matter. Romeo and Phil just failed to work together.
Which makes me happy to have what we do now.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Romeo and Savage worked well for the first two years (tearing down), if you remember correctly. Savage even ceded his own contractual power, final draft say, to Crennel in the 06 draft, letting him make the call between Wimbley and Ngata.
5 moves doesn’t prove anything about whether this regime can work together. I hope they can, and (safely) assuming there’s no one on our current staff as wholly irredeemable and incompetent as Crennel, the chances are better… but consensus was the norm durning Savage’s years, not the aberration. (Edwards, Bentley, Thomas, Quinn, Rogers, Williams, etc)
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
I’d say this regime is working well together. Mangini and Heckert both like the same kinds of guys. Mangini will provide imput on defensive players and Heckert/Holmgren are experts on offensive players.
I dont think anybody in our front office is power hungry or inept like the savage / crennel regime.
I have fantastically high hopes for our current structure.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
In the end, Romeo and Phil failed to work together. They did work together early, but it fell apart. Both did some throwing under the bus. Obviously, this regime has a very SSS, but I can’t say I’m not optimistic of their ability to work together.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Pete William wrote a book called “The Draft” that followed a few teams during the 2005 NFL draft.
The real interesting part was when the asked Rich McKay about drafting a bust. He went on to raise the point that players become busts for many different reasons, but the only one that should soley be on the shoulders of a GM was if a player just didn’t have the drive to be successful. His explanation was that a good GM should be able to read a player and view laziness on tape. Pretty much it isn’t hard to spot a lazy player. IMO, that is why it is such a huge deal when a player cough, Rolando McClain, cough is always “taking plays off”.
The coaching staff is responsible for putting a player in the best position possible to succeed. All players excel in some areas and struggle in others. A coaching staff should always be able to get something out of a player, no matter how poor of a player they are. There should be something they do well.
IMO, a bad draft pick should be a 50/50 split.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 13, 2010 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think it’s more like 33/33/33, as the player also accounts to whether or not he will be a bust.
The sporting gods hate Cleveland, they give us false hopes, then yank it out from under us like a tablecloth.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 13, 2010 4:45 PM EST up reply actions
A good GM differs from a casual fan like myself, because he needs to display good foresight and make good draft choices or else he will fail at his job.
Yes, but my point is that a “good choice” doesn’t always mean the player ends up being a good player. Smart shots in basketball, smart throws in football will be missed/incomplete. Some smart draft picks will fail.
Savage did need to select good players in the draft, and he did. The fact that one smart pick he made ended up being a “miss” does not mean it was not a smart pick.
No GM is a fortune-teller, there is no moneyball formula that NFL teams can use to determine the future. There is a huge element of chance in the draft.
End of the day, he needs to select good players in the draft, and he needs to do it better than the other GMs in the league or else the Browns aren’t going anywhere.
I completely agree with this, and have not disagreed with it anywhere. This still does not make the Quinn selection or trade a bad one.
Obviously the terminology I am using here is my own, but a “miss” is not the same as a “bad pick”. GMs need to “hit” to keep their jobs, but they don’t necessarily need to make “good picks”. But GMs who make “good picks” will always “hit” more than GMs who make “bad picks” over an extended period of time.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
OK, maybe it’s a terminology difference. Quinn was a miss, we need our GM to outperform the rest of the league on hits if we want to get anywhere.
This is hilariously wrong. The fact is the move to get Quinn was tradeupforaQBinthe1stround 101. It’s the same deal Newsome made for Boller. This isn’t science, and acquiring a QB is the hardest thing in the world to do. Just because Quinn hasn’t panned out doesn’t make the “value” of the trade the day it was done poor.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
And every GM is wrong in evaluations a significant % of the time.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
And we all know how Boller turned out!
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 16, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
didnt we trade that pick to dallas, not philly?
by BrutalMovement on Mar 11, 2010 1:17 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, and then Dallas traded it to Philly for their first round pick, and added in a 3rd and a 5th (NOT a first, like we did to exchange late 1st round pick for early 2nd).
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 11, 2010 1:21 PM EST up reply actions
Hy.per.bole.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
agree with ruf.
QBs present amazing positonal value (obviously) and the fact that quinn fell so far made him an unbelievable value in the late first. The guy was scouted to be “franchise quarterback in the mold of carson palmer”
We probably shouldn’t have surrendered our next years first round pick, but at the time it could easily have been a great move. I mean we could have gotten the Cowboys first and third round picks for Derek Anderson. Hindsight is always 20/20.
We could trade Quinn tomorrow and get what amounts to decent value for him and then he could go somewhere else find his stride and become a decent NFL starter, there is just too many factors to predict.
Savage’s real failure is not finding good value late in the draft (especially the beau bell year) and having that one good season that kept the terrible Romeo Crennel around way too long.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
Who was a worse Browns GM than Savage?
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 11, 2010 10:07 PM EST up reply actions
kokinis
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 11, 2010 10:20 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, he didn’t make any bad trades. . . . Didn’t make any moves really.
by TheDriveStillHurts on Mar 11, 2010 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
The only move he made was out of the Browns HQ.
by emily522 on Mar 11, 2010 11:00 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Ummm…Butch Davis? Dwight Clark??
NO matter how much we might dislike savage, he was miles better than those guys.
Every other GM we’ve had since 1999.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
That isn’t to say Savage was especially good.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
but he was just better than Davis and Dwight clark. I agree…that is like saying I would rather watch paint dry when compared to getting drowned or getting your limbs chopped off…No one wants to watch paint dry. its all relative.
You cannot be a Browns fan and state that Phil Savage was the worst GM ever. He wasn’t even the worst GM in recent Browns memory. I mean, come on. He was actually the best the new Browns have seen until, perhaps, last year.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Blowing two second round picks would be Savage’s worst off season, not his best.
www.lowbrowsophisticate.com
no, only hitting one pick would be his worst offseason. please see the 2008 draft. Even if you count the trades, he hit on a 6th (Rubin) and a third (Rogers, though he also gave up a decent corner). He colossally whiffed on a first and a second, then gave that second (Williams) a huge contract.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 16, 2010 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Colossally whiffed on Williams?
He may have been bad, but he wasn’t a complete bust, the guy started 30 games in two seasons here.
His contract was bad and he struggled here, but that doesn’t mean he was garbage. In fact over the last 4 games of this season I would say he was our best DL (with Rubin close behind).
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 16, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
would you say he was worth the second round pick we gave up to get him and his contract? He was an average rotation lineman. you can get those in the third or fourth round, and pay them a lot less money. So yes, Williams was a colossal whiff on a second round pick and giant contract.
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 17, 2010 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions
that was because he didn’t fit our defensive system. It was a mistake in hindsight b/c he didn’t fit but it didn’t look bad at the time. personally however, I would have not given up much more than a 3rd for him, even at the time of the trade.
He still did perform solidly when he figured out the 3-4
I teach good life choices. That’s why I almost didn’t graduate High School.
No thanks to either Philly QB.
I would really love to land Berry.
I think it is unfortunate that we have the 7th pick this year because I feel that there are about 5 elite prospects, and after those 5 there is a big dropoff. The more LTs taken in front of us, the better chances we have of landing someone elite. I really hope someone likes Campbell, Bulaga, and/or Okung enough to take them.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Couldn’t agree more. I’m pushing all in on acquiring berry at this point. I hope walterfootball is right that the lions are looking at drafting a tackle (so as to not draft over Sammie Lee Hill or Corey Williams). Berry becomes more possible if one of the DTs falls past #3.
That win over the chiefs really looks terrible right now… Berry would be a virtual sure thing at #5.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
too much cost to get either. I wouldn’t give up our first round pick that’s for sure.
McNabb might help in the short run, but hes not worth our #1 pick.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
yep…I agree. Kolb I have heard is going for a first round pick…seriously? What has he done to deserve this Oh yeah, he has been a backup drafted in the SECOND round.
What has Bradford done to deserve it? HE HASN"T PROVEN IT IN THE NFL DONT DRAFT HIM.
Umm. by this logic, the draft is pointless.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
at the same time, what has kolb proven more than bradford at this point? Nothing. there were some significant questions about kolb coming out and they still exist…that is why he was drafted in the second round. Kolb has not shown anything significant to be worth a first round pick IMO.
my point is that, trading for a guy who has been a backup and performed pretty well for a game or two with a great supporting cast, is not a guarantee he will be good. There is not the body of work to warrant giving up a first round pick to acquire him. this in some ways is similar to when schaub got traded/
while schaub did not cost a first rounder, the teams switched firsts, and atlanta got their second rounder. at the time this move was considered very risky and criticized by many. however, he did end up living up to the deal. while I do feel kolb could be good, it is still taking a risk making a large trade for him. just because it worked out for the texans does not mean it will work out every time (this type of risky deal)
Kolb hasn’t proven more than Bradford? Are you serious? What about his two really good games he had as a starter this past season — those don’t count for anything?
Kolb certainly hasn’t proven that he can be a great NFL starting QB, or even a good one, but he’s proven more than any college QB without a doubt. As I said below, our GM should know more than anyone outside Philly what Kolb’s talent is and what his chances are of becoming a good starting QB, so if he thinks he can do it and is worthy of a first round pick then you or I cannot disagree with him. This isn’t like trading for an unkown player from another organization; Heckert has watching him for three years.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 12, 2010 10:42 AM EST up reply actions
I am not saying he hasn’t been proven more than bradford, I just don’t see a reason to give up the first rounder for him.
I agree with you that heckert probably knows best the value. from what I have seen though, even with those 2 good games (with a great, high octane offense) I am not convinced that he is 100% a legitimate starting QB. I believe he is but i still have my doubts.
If he gives up our first round pick, i might not agree, and might not like it at the time, but i will accept that he really knows kolb and would know his value.
I am not saying he hasn’t been proven more than bradford, I just don’t see a reason to give up the first rounder for him.
You understand that’s the implication, though, when you ask what he’s done to deserve being traded for a first rounder?
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
What Brad said.
Plus, the point to my above post was that even if Kolb hasn’t proven anything, neither has any draftee. If there is a cost, say the #7 overall, for either Kolb or Bradford, then the decision (money aside, which would greatly swing the value in Kolb’s favor) has to come down to an evaluation between the two players. Saying that one (kolb) hasn’t proven anything makes no damn sense, because neither has the other.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Shaun Hill’s available. I’d rather take a shot on him at what he’d command in a trade than drop two first rounders on Kolb.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Mar 12, 2010 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
I’m quite certain that nobody would give up two first rounders for Kolb. Philly may be asking for that but they aren’t getting it. I think the question is would they take our #7 pick if we offered it, and is Kolb worth that pick to the Browns? I hope Heckert and Holmgren know the answer to that second question.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 12, 2010 11:48 AM EST up reply actions
And I hope that that answer is No.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Mar 12, 2010 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
If that was the case, maybe. But how many years do you think he has left? 3? Do you really see us as a legit contender by then with McNabb at the helm?
I’d rather use our 1st on a QB than trade it for Donnovan.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
agree, McNabb I don’t feel is the answer to our QB situation. I’m guessing he would require a second rounder or so to get him and with 3yrs (tops) of production left, it doesn’t seem worth it to me. I would like us to give Brady a full season this year and see how it goes. Then we address this issue. My opinion though, I’m not in training camp or watching Quinn’s video files, so I could be way off with that.
I think he has more than 3, maybe closer to 5-6. Maybe not 5-6 at the same level, but he will be in the league in 5 years.
So at what point does he drop below a replacement level guy who could be found for no draft picks? The only reason you would give up that kind of pick for him would be for the 3 or so years he plays like a pro bowler. There will always be Delhommes, Shaun Hills, etc. available.
Yeah, McNabb will probably be in the league that long, but I don’t see him putting up the kinds of numbers that Favre or Warner are at that age. Maybe that’s just me.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
McNabb has always been decently consistent, but pretty overrated. I think he has been a good quarterback for a number of years but never a truly great one. He doesn’t have the ring despite getting deep in the playoffs several times.
They had the players around him on in Philly and he couldn’t get it done in the Superbowl. McNabb could make this team mediocre for 2 or 3 seasons but we definitely wouldn’t be going anywhere special.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
First, someone is going to whip out the Trent Dilfer picture if you don’t stop that “he doesn’t have a ring” nonsense.
Second, McNabb is a very good QB. He’s just older and has a significant injury history. Which is the only reason he is available.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
He is good and he is consistent. But he isn’t Brett Favre. I don’t think he can take a pretty good team and make them elite. He had a great team before and he couldn’t push them over the hump.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
Because we all know that winning is all about the quarterback . . . .
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 13, 2010 11:55 PM EST up reply actions
Yup, just ask anyone from Pittsburgh, BEN IS A WINNER GOD
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 14, 2010 12:01 AM EST up reply actions
in todays NFL, it practically is.
The parity in talent across the board among the playoff teams is really really good. The other players make a difference of course. Differences in scheme and preperation go into it.
But the adage is true. In the NFL you have to do 3 things in order to succeed.
1) have a quarterback
2) protect the quarterback
3) rush the opposing quarterback.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
If your coverage is good enough, rushing the passer isn’t as big a need.
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 14, 2010 12:05 AM EST up reply actions
False. Pass rush of equal talent > Coverage of equal talent.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
Hanford Dixon and Frank Minnifield say otherwise.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Mar 14, 2010 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions
In an era when you could mug the opposing WRs?
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
I always find myself wishing for those guys back, then have to remember that they played a far different game then they’d have to contend with now.
by RelapsingDawgCatcher on Mar 15, 2010 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Also an era when you could mug the quarterback. In my mind, two shutdown corners are more valuable than a pair of pass rushing linebackers or linemen.
Revis + Asomougha > Dumervil + Allen
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Mar 15, 2010 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
No, they don’t. Neither did Denver when they didn’t have a front 7. Baltimore has an awesome defense (as much as I hate them) every year, and their corners are awful.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
yeah its been years since they had an elite CB
I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.
by notthatnoise on Mar 16, 2010 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
I would scheme around both of those DBs and pwn your team. It would really be too easy. You can completely take two WRs out of the play and I still have 3 people to throw to. 99.99% of the passing offense goes through the QB.
I will take Ware and Freeney over any two corners any day. And I’d play in some bastardized, probably unsound 4-3/3-4 to put both of them on the field at the same time.
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein
absolutely right. The pass rush is more important than coverage these days. the biggest advantage of talented corners is that they can be left in single coverage more often. If you can blitz more and still feel pretty confident about 1on1 coverage, you have a big advantage.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
Not necessarily, if the QB has nowhere to throw, and holds on to the ball like Ben, it will make an anemic pass rush look semi-decent.
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 15, 2010 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
And two of those three things have nothing to do with the QB himself.
Thank you for making my point for me.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 14, 2010 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Especially step 1, every team has at least 2 QBs.
I DON'T CONDONE INCEST. All I did was ask a question.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 14, 2010 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m trying to think whether I would want Berry or Clausen
by The Licensed Pessimist on Mar 12, 2010 9:57 AM EST up reply actions
Between those two, Berry 10000 times over.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
So you’d rather have a franchise S over a franchise QB?
by The Licensed Pessimist on Mar 12, 2010 2:25 PM EST up reply actions
My point is, I don’t think Clausen and “franchise” belong in the same sentence unless you’re discussing his future with a “Banana Republic” franchise.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
I happen to think he’s worthy of taking a chance over. He may not be very likable, but I can’t believe how much people are allowing his cockiness to blind them from his tangibles
by The Licensed Pessimist on Mar 12, 2010 4:46 PM EST up reply actions
It’s not just us, Daniel Jeremiah of Movethesticks.com is a former scout and talks to other scouts everyday.
He says Clausen has a real chance to drop out of the first round.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 12, 2010 6:20 PM EST up reply actions
On Jeremiah, he had us taking Derrick Morgan at 7th with Berry going 5th.
Wouldn’t necessarily mind. I think a good corner can be found in the 2nd round.
Probably the only Cleveland Browns fan in all of Sydney, NSW.
just watching NFL network…Mike Lombardi just gave his mock draft and it was identical to what Jeremiah is saying
Morgan is really gaining steam as an OLB.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 13, 2010 1:09 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t know much on Morgan….is he worth a #7 pick…I personally either take Haden or trade down to mid first round level
I think Derek Morgan is going to be a good player in this league for a long time.
Plus against the run and has a very well rounded pass rush game. Doesn’t have the explosive first step that teams love, but is quick enough to cause problems for OT’s.
IMO he is 10 sacks a year with great run defense. Pretty much Willie McGinnest.
I would take him over Haden all day, but I am biased against Haden so I may not be the best judge.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 13, 2010 3:30 PM EST up reply actions
Morgan is probably more valuable to the 4-3 teams.
In my mind its Berry, berry, or berry. He just does too much for you in terms of defending the pass. Rob Ryan is the perfect Defensive cordinator to use his talents to the fullest. Nobody else could make such an impact right away. (especially if we got one of the better corners in the draft in the second round)
Nobody else makes nearly as much sense, even Haden. (safety crop is much thinner early in the second) Berry has got to be the pick.
"My signature is only one line. You're welcome."
In my mind its Berry, berry, or berry.
This is dangerous thinking.
This is how a team trades their entire draft for one pick (think Ricky Williams and the Saints).
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 14, 2010 12:54 AM EST up reply actions
I am starting to agree with this. He is not a flashy player but contributes against the run and can rush the passer. in general, Wimbley was only good IMO for rushing the passer. he could make plays against the run but was not anything special. his run stopping skills were replacable and his pass rushing skills were too.
Your point is fair though, because my comment implies that I think there is a 0% chance Clausen is a franchise QB, whereas I would increase the likelihood of that opinion. That said, I don’t think he is a franchise QB.
tRSS just crapped his pants in class.
"Spartans never die Jorge. They're just missing in action."
by SpecialBrownie on Mar 12, 2010 2:58 PM EST up reply actions
Kevin Kolb sucked so bad last year, when given a chance.
Donovan McNabb is so strongly associated with the Eagles, that he could not play for the Browns convincingly. He´d be akin to a mercenary, doing p.o.´d fans dirty biddings.
Also, bullsh*t on Kolb sucking last year. He went 1-1 as a starter, losing only to the future Superbowl champions. He posted 8.4 YPA, two 300 yard games, a 64.7% completion percentage, and a 4-3 TD-INT rate in those two starts. In his very limited window, he played very well.
So, kindly, do some research before you post another blatantly false errant thought.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
Yeah, but I refuse to allow such a blatantly obvious lie stand, even if it is from the resident loon. Some people may read sentiment, and without a rebuttal, think it holds water.
Brady Quinn will never be a good quarterback for the Browns.
You can get belligerent all you want, it doesn´t matter how many yards he threw for, if the impression is sucked, then the impression is sucked. If I was disappointed by the performance of a guy who was widely accepted as a steal in the second round, then that´s how I see it, and a lot of people trust how I see things.
I trust you to give me a good chuckle every now and then, sometimes you even say something that blows my mind because I agree with it.
The sporting gods hate Cleveland, they give us false hopes, then yank it out from under us like a tablecloth.
by North Coast Flea on Mar 13, 2010 1:24 PM EST up reply actions
eagles fan here
Kolb isn’t going anywhere. The two 1sts demand is proof that our FO has wet dreams about Kevin leading our offense. He has proven to be very, very good when given a full week to prepare for a game. He is the first QB to EVER throw for 300+ yards in his first 2 starts. Kevin’s accuracy, touch, and ability to read coverage is his advantage over McNabb.
McNabb is the only QB who will leave Philly. The price is probably gonna be a late 1st / early 2nd. But, should Holmgren go for a WCO QB, he will have to give up a 2nd and 5th, and most likely a future conditional along with a long term deal to get #5.
Good day,
An Eagles fan who likes you guys.
by birds'n'raiders on Mar 12, 2010 9:57 PM EST reply actions
or maybe the FO is bluffing or just trying to get the best offer possible with kolb. don’t claim to know how the fromt office is thinking. it is just as likely that they are just trying to drive his value up, as your scenario is likely to be accurate.
Not a troll. You might get stripped of your welcoming privileges.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
I am not calling him a troll. I am just saying that in these kinds of things, sometimes a team will ask for more than they expect to start with to drive the price up. it happens in many types of negotiations…agents do it when getting contracts…what makes teams different?
I don’t see how I was calling him a troll though or insulting him. I did say his scenario could be possible but also, the one I mentioned could be too.
don’t claim to know how the fromt office is thinking.
Your greeting was just a little rough for someone who came in peace.
They gone have to stop sleeping on me one day.. I gotta be one of the best
About 3 hours ago by Eric Wright Cleveland Browns – Cornerback
oh, and by the way
we are very, very fine at RB. LeSean McCoy broke all Eagles rookie rushing records. He had a better YPC than Brian Westbrook in his rookie year. So, don’t forget his name in your fantasy draft this summer.
by birds'n'raiders on Mar 12, 2010 10:08 PM EST reply actions
now, i'm not saying we don't need depth,
but unless Adrian Peterson is re-entering the draft, there is no way in hell that we draft a RB in the first 2 rounds.
by birds'n'raiders on Mar 12, 2010 10:11 PM EST up reply actions
Thus the ‘stand-out sure-fire top ten’ bit that preceded ‘running back’ in my post.
Dawgs By Nature -- where Hitler, apparently, 'did some good things'.
by golanbatrac on Mar 12, 2010 10:27 PM EST up reply actions
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.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
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
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
