Discussion in 'NFL Zone' started by RS12, Dec 28, 2012.
I dont think the Browns are that far away.
They should take another one in the draft.
A first round pick for Kyle Orton. We'll throw in Dexter Coakley as a sweetener.
The Browns drafted Brady Quinn in 2007. Quinn is still a year younger than Brandon Weeden. Both aren't very good.
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.
:lmao2: Never thought about that.
I think I am missing the humor although I am laughing. The Browns were originally slated to draft 4th overall, but traded up to the 3rd spot. They should have stayed pat and drafted Ryan Tannehill. Even if he doesn't turn out to be a good QB, he is still better than Brandon Weeden based on age alone. Then they could have used their other picks to build the team.
The Browns have always been looking for a QB, when are they going to finally get it right?
My bad. I thought the Browns had the No. 2 pick. It was the Rams who traded with the Redskins. My bad.
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.
When they trade a couple 1s for Kirk Cousins.
Weeden isn't that bad a QB. Cleveland has very little talent at any of the receiver positions and Richardson has been pretty average. Cleveland has no big play guys. I wouldn't mind having Weeden as a backup for Romo.
People give Weeden a tough time because he's 29 and other rookie qb's are having success but let's be honest with ourselves. He's played like a rookie. Its far too early to write him off yet. If you felt good enough to trade up in the 1st round to get him then you should still feel that way. Don't worry about what RGIII, Luck and Russell Wilson are doing. What they are doing is rare and shouldn't be the standard for rookie qb's.
Even Luck has looked relatively human most of the time. And he has one of the top receivers in the game in Reggie Wayne to throw to.
I think most of the pressure people put on Weeden comes from his age. Kurt Warner got his big break later in his life. Warner had a ton more talent around him, but still. I am sure the new owner will continue to surround him with weapons.
Wow the Browns have really screwed the pooch.
They should have drafted Foles or Cousins this year and used the Weeden 1st to improve either the OL or secondary.
Weeden is not the QB you want to build your franchise around.
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