Browns looking for a QB?

[DCBoysfan]

Originally Posted by Manwiththeplan

The Holmgren experiment was a complete cluster ****.

In 2011, they pass up an opportunity to draft Julio Jones
-Phil Taylor, DT, Baylor
-Greg Little, WR, North Carolina
-Owen Marecic, RB Stanford
-Brandon Weeden, QB, Oklahoma State
-James-Michael Johnson, LB, Nevada

In 2012, they opt to not trade up for RG3 and instead take Trent Richardson, who while a good player, does not have the impact of a QB.

If I was a Browns fan, it would make me sick that my team could've had Julio Jones and RG3, and really only have Trent Richardson to show.

Wow the Browns have really screwed the pooch.

[Biggems]

They should have drafted Foles or Cousins this year and used the Weeden 1st to improve either the OL or secondary.

[CowboysFanSince88]

Weeden is not the QB you want to build your franchise around.

[CowboysFanSince88]

Originally Posted by Biggems

They should have drafted Foles or Cousins this year and used the Weeden 1st to improve either the OL or secondary.

Please tell me you are not talking about Nick Foles because he is 1-4 in 5 starts

[Manwiththeplan]

Originally Posted by CowboysFanSince88

Please tell me you are not talking about Nick Foles because he is 1-4 in 5 starts

he's shown just about the same amount, despite being picked at the end of round 3.

Weeden has a 72.6 QB rating, Foles has a 79.1 rating

Weeden has completed 57.4% of his passes, Foles has completed 60.8%

Weeden has a 6.5 ypa averege, Foles has a 6.4 ypa averege

Weeden has a 2.7% TD ratio and a 3.3% int ratio, Foles has a 2.3% TD ratio and a 1.9% int ratio (noticable difference there)

So while I don't think he was saying Foles would have made Cleveland better, it's clear using that first rounder on any other position and taking a QB like Foles later, would've been better.

When you factor in Weeden will be 30 early next season, vs Foles being 24, it's clear that he would've been a better choice, if you were gonna take a QB

[CowboysFanSince88]

Originally Posted by Manwiththeplan

he's shown just about the same amount, despite being picked at the end of round 3.

Weeden has a 72.6 QB rating, Foles has a 79.1 rating

Weeden has completed 57.4% of his passes, Foles has completed 60.8%

Weeden has a 6.5 ypa averege, Foles has a 6.4 ypa averege

Weeden has a 2.7% TD ratio and a 3.3% int ratio, Foles has a 2.3% TD ratio and a 1.9% int ratio (noticable difference there)

So while I don't think he was saying Foles would have made Cleveland better, it's clear using that first rounder on any other position and taking a QB like Foles later, would've been better.

When you factor in Weeden will be 30 early next season, vs Foles being 24, it's clear that he would've been a better choice, if you were gonna take a QB

I look at wins and losses, not all that other nonsense.

[Manwiththeplan]

Originally Posted by CowboysFanSince88

I look at wins and losses, not all that other nonsense.

Wins and losses are team stats, not individual. Is there a WR having a better year than Calvin Johnson? No. Is there a RB having a better season than Adrian Peterson? Ofcourse not.

Even if that was the be all stat for judging a QB, Weeden got an entire offseason to prep as a starter and is only 5-10. Foles took over an offense that was designed for Michael Vick, whom he couldn't be more different than and didn't get to play until the Eagles season was just about over.

In the end, I don't think either player will ever be a productive NFL starter, but I'll take Foles as a third rounder over Weeden as a first any day of the week

[Biggems]

Originally Posted by Manwiththeplan

Wins and losses are team stats, not individual. Is there a WR having a better year than Calvin Johnson? No. Is there a RB having a better season than Adrian Peterson? Ofcourse not.

Even if that was the be all stat for judging a QB, Weeden got an entire offseason to prep as a starter and is only 5-10. Foles took over an offense that was designed for Michael Vick, whom he couldn't be more different than and didn't get to play until the Eagles season was just about over.

In the end, I don't think either player will ever be a productive NFL starter, but I'll take Foles as a third rounder over Weeden as a first any day of the week

TY, you understand what I am saying.

Weeden should have been no higher than a 3rd or 4th. This is why the new Browns are annual bottom feeders....if you want an example of how not to build a football franchise, just study the 2nd installment of the Cleveland Browns.

[Pabst]

I've heard that the Browns were desperately trying to trade up for RG3, and even offered more than the Redskins did. It just didn't matter, since Fisher and Shanahan are such good friends, and they were going to deal with each other. They more or less used Cleveland as a gauge for the trade value.

So I don't know if you can blame Cleveland for that. For drafting Weeden, sure, that was incredibly foolish, and will cost people jobs. But they tried for RG3, for what it's worth.

[Biggems]

Originally Posted by Pabst

I've heard that the Browns were desperately trying to trade up for RG3, and even offered more than the Redskins did. It just didn't matter, since Fisher and Shanahan are such good friends, and they were going to deal with each other. They more or less used Cleveland as a gauge for the trade value.

So I don't know if you can blame Cleveland for that. For drafting Weeden, sure, that was incredibly foolish, and will cost people jobs. But they tried for RG3, for what it's worth.

i know they tried for RG3 and probably offered what the Saints offered for Ricky.....but it just wasnt enough.....they cannot be faulted for that.

But it is the other moves both last year and this year with the players they did take.....I know McCoy is just an average QB at best, but when Weeden was throwing 3-4 INTs a game, he should have been benched for McCoy....make the rookie watch from the bench, see things for a different perspective, and learn some accountability. Instead, no matter how poor he played, his leash seemed to get longer and longer, and it really hurt the Browns, who lost quite a few close games. For this, the HC should be held accountable.

[NickZepp]

I don't think McCoy was ever really that bad last year either. Cleveland has a lot deeper problems than QB. They don't have much at WR or RB at all. I'm not sure any QBs in the league can really succeed with what they've got in talent.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by tyke1doe

They should have kept their picks and drafted RGIII. Now they're going to spend precious time and draft picks trying to find a franchise quarterback.

This.

[Manwiththeplan]

Originally Posted by Pabst

I've heard that the Browns were desperately trying to trade up for RG3, and even offered more than the Redskins did. It just didn't matter, since Fisher and Shanahan are such good friends, and they were going to deal with each other. They more or less used Cleveland as a gauge for the trade value.

So I don't know if you can blame Cleveland for that. For drafting Weeden, sure, that was incredibly foolish, and will cost people jobs. But they tried for RG3, for what it's worth.

I'm pretty sure this isn't true. Cleveland was only luke warm about trading up for RG3. Reports were leaked that they didn't like his height, that they liked other QBs just as much and were concerned about his fit in the offense.

When it came time to put in their bid, they did ultimately offer both #1s as well as a #1 next year and their #2, which is a great offer, but Fisher said accepted the Redskins offer because he would rather have 2 #1s for 2012-14, as opposed to 3 #1s this year and 2 the next.

Common sense says no matter what, the Browns #4 pick+#37 p > the Skins # 6 pick+# 39 pick, and future picks are weighed the same, so if you wanted him, match the future picks. Yes Fisher and Shanahan were friends, but Fisher wouldn't turn down a better deal, especially if it became known in the media, and thus the owner would find out.