Another look at Brandon Weeden

[DFWJC]

They tend to say this about a lot of people this time of year, but the coaches are saying Weeden is looking good.

This is his time to be in the same system two straight offseasons and it's supposedly showing.

I'm a bit indifferent about the guy. He can throw a really nice ball at times, but I have doubts about his mental make-up.

Here's the article. If someone wishes to just have it a s thread, that works too.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...ndon-weeden-has-most-improved-look-to-cowboys
\

 

[Galian Beast]

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...ndon-weeden-has-most-improved-look-to-cowboys

That is a great link in support of what I'm saying here, but that isn't even the point.

My point is that people are really hypocritical. The amount of 1st round busts out there, and the fact that they just want to jump into one, and while they would say that the player we draft won't have to start immediately, they won't give Weeden the same luxury.

His age is immaterial, he is still an inexperienced player in the league who had a high grade in the draft. I don't know if he will work out for us in any capacity, but I'm willing to give him the time and opportunity to find out.

 

[CyberB0b]

They tend to say this about a lot of people this time of year, but the coaches are saying Weeden is looking good.

This is his time to be in the same system two straight offseasons and it's supposedly showing.

I'm a bit indifferent about the guy. He can throw a really nice ball at times, but I have doubts about his mental make-up.

Here's the article. If someone wishes to just have it a s thread, that works too.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...ndon-weeden-has-most-improved-look-to-cowboys
\

They were saying the same thing in the offseason last year.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ndon-weeden-sees-new-life-with-dallas-cowboys

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Please point me to these posts about Weeden.

Not going to post a link to each posts about weeden within the thread. Just going to post a link to the thread...

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/qb-money.323686/

Of the 59 posts in that thread...over 30 (whether by name or by listing backup QB) had to do with Brandon Weeden.

From that thread you could have just went and added this general topic to it instead of creating yet another thread. THAT was my point.

Now I know you and how you operate and how you will try to move the goal posts, change the topic of the argument, make it look as if what I said was not the case in order to fit what you want. But what I said fits.

I don't create threads because I think people are going to agree or disagree with me.

I say you do. I also think you read an article or listen to a show, take an idea found in said article or show and come in here and post it like
it was your own idea out of the blue.

I think you've lost sight of what a message board is, which is pretty ironic.

People like a myriad of topics, both ones they agree with and ones they don't. In many cases the ones they don't agree garner the most traction and replies. Just like the negative Cowboys talking points on sports shows get the most responses with Cowboys fans. If it bleeds it leads.

There are plenty of people who make new threads and sometimes multiple threads. Oddly enough, they don't get pointed out like yours do.
Odd.

Most of your threads I either hit up with a like, post something in it saying I agree with the point or disagree with the point or just leave completely alone.
Sometimes I think you get a little bored and decide to play or troll and although I stay out of most of those, I will occasionally wade in and let my feelings be known on what I think you are doing or why you could not have just left it in an existing thread instead of starting a new one.

 

[Tabascocat]

Do we have to take another look at BW? I have seen enough already

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

They tend to say this about a lot of people this time of year, but the coaches are saying Weeden is looking good.

This is his time to be in the same system two straight offseasons and it's supposedly showing.

I'm a bit indifferent about the guy. He can throw a really nice ball at times, but I have doubts about his mental make-up.

Here's the article. If someone wishes to just have it a s thread, that works too.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...ndon-weeden-has-most-improved-look-to-cowboys
\

You bring it up as this time of the year.

IIRC I think they were saying some good things about Weeden last off season when Romo was hurt and he was getting the majority of the reps. I don't think anyone was saying he was the second coming at QB or anything that far fetched but I was thinking they were saying he was looking good at that time.

 

[Stash]

That is a great link in support of what I'm saying here, but that isn't even the point.

My point is that people are really hypocritical. The amount of 1st round busts out there, and the fact that they just want to jump into one, and while they would say that the player we draft won't have to start immediately, they won't give Weeden the same luxury.

His age is immaterial, he is still an inexperienced player in the league who had a high grade in the draft. I don't know if he will work out for us in any capacity, but I'm willing to give him the time and opportunity to find out.

From a different angle, I definitely notice the collection of former first round talents that this team goes about acquiring.

Brandon Weeden
Darren McFadden
Rolando McClain
Keith Rivers

They've picked up several players that were at one point very highly regarded coming into the league. It says that the players certainly have the physical ability to succeed or at the very least, did at the college level.

I think they're picking some of them up with the thought that maybe with a better coaching staff, better surrounding cast, better team environment, and less overall pressure that one or more of them can be more productive than they have to this point.

 

[Galian Beast]

Not going to post a link to each posts about weeden within the thread. Just going to post a link to the thread...

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/qb-money.323686/

Of the 59 posts in that thread...over 30 (whether by name or by listing backup QB) had to do with Brandon Weeden.

From that thread you could have just went and added this general topic to it instead of creating yet another thread. THAT was my point.

Now I know you and how you operate and how you will try to move the goal posts, change the topic of the argument, make it look as if what I said was not the case in order to fit what you want. But what I said fits.




I say you do. I also think you read an article or listen to a show, take an idea found in said article or show and come in here and post it like
it was your own idea out of the blue.




People like a myriad of topics, both ones they agree with and ones they don't. In many cases the ones they don't agree garner the most traction and replies. Just like the negative Cowboys talking points on sports shows get the most responses with Cowboys fans. If it bleeds it leads.

There are plenty of people who make new threads and sometimes multiple threads. Oddly enough, they don't get pointed out like yours do.
Odd.

Most of your threads I either hit up with a like, post something in it saying I agree with the point or disagree with the point or just leave completely alone.
Sometimes I think you get a little bored and decide to play or troll and although I stay out of most of those, I will occasionally wade in and let my feelings be known on what I think you are doing or why you could not have just left it in an existing thread instead of starting a new one.

You seem to have created your own narrative.

Do I post about what I hear about the Cowboys? Absolutely. That doesn't mean I'm taking someone elses' idea, though you would like that.

That topic was never about Weeden, and if people took the topic off-topic, a moderator such as yourself should have done your job and put it back on topic.

You think I post to have people agree or disagree with me, I don't. Who knows me more you or me?

I take people to task when they're wrong. I make a lot of topics both pro and con relating to the Cowboys. It's not binary, it's not glass full, glass empty, or glass half full or glass half empty.

I can stop making threads altogether, but people continue to tell me that they like me threads. If someone doesn't want to listen to my thread or participate, they don't have to. A certain group of posters seem to have an obsession with me. They say they hate my threads, but are also compelled to participate in them. I think it is pretty telling.

You look on this board and it is flooded with news links that should be in the news zone or weeks old threads and many of you complain about new threads that people want to post in... Get over yourselves.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

this is going to end well

 

[Galian Beast]

From a different angle, I definitely notice the collection of former first round talents that this team goes about acquiring.

Brandon Weeden
Darren McFadden
Rolando McClain
Keith Rivers

They've picked up several players that were at one point very highly regarded coming into the league. It says that the players certainly have the physical ability to succeed or at the very least, did at the college level.

I think they're picking some of them up with the thought that maybe with a better coaching staff, better surrounding cast, better team environment, and less overall pressure that one or more of them can be more productive than they have to this point.

That's exactly what they're doing. It's a cheap way to get talented players without having to pay for them. Does it always work out? Obviously not, but it doesn't cost us anything.

The Cowboys also got AJ Jenkins.

 

[DFWJC]

You bring it up as this time of the year.

IIRC I think they were saying some good things about Weeden last off season when Romo was hurt and he was getting the majority of the reps. I don't think anyone was saying he was the second coming at QB or anything that far fetched but I was thinking they were saying he was looking good at that time.

Yeah. That's why I put the disclaimer in right from the start, and why I mentioned that I was a skeptic.
I think's always looked ok when live fire wasn't happening.

 

[xwalker]

Not going to post a link to each posts about weeden within the thread. Just going to post a link to the thread...

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/qb-money.323686/

Of the 59 posts in that thread...over 30 (whether by name or by listing backup QB) had to do with Brandon Weeden.

From that thread you could have just went and added this general topic to it instead of creating yet another thread. THAT was my point.

Now I know you and how you operate and how you will try to move the goal posts, change the topic of the argument, make it look as if what I said was not the case in order to fit what you want. But what I said fits.




I say you do. I also think you read an article or listen to a show, take an idea found in said article or show and come in here and post it like
it was your own idea out of the blue.




People like a myriad of topics, both ones they agree with and ones they don't. In many cases the ones they don't agree garner the most traction and replies. Just like the negative Cowboys talking points on sports shows get the most responses with Cowboys fans. If it bleeds it leads.

There are plenty of people who make new threads and sometimes multiple threads. Oddly enough, they don't get pointed out like yours do.
Odd.

Most of your threads I either hit up with a like, post something in it saying I agree with the point or disagree with the point or just leave completely alone.
Sometimes I think you get a little bored and decide to play or troll and although I stay out of most of those, I will occasionally wade in and let my feelings be known on what I think you are doing or why you could not have just left it in an existing thread instead of starting a new one.

Great post.

It would be one thing for him to create so many new threads if he really wanted to spur a good discussion, but he just likes to spew out his opinion over and over and does not value any of the feedback he receives.

I guess 1 out of 100 tell him "good job" although I think some of those are just doing it as a joke to see how extreme he will get in terms of new threads per day.

 

[Stash]

That's exactly what they're doing. It's a cheap way to get talented players without having to pay for them. Does it always work out? Obviously not, but it doesn't cost us anything.

The Cowboys also got AJ Jenkins.

I knew there was at least one more I was forgetting!

 

[Galian Beast]

Great post.

It would be one thing for him to create so many new threads if he really wanted to spur a good discussion, but he just likes to spew out his opinion over and over and does not value any of the feedback he receives.

I guess 1 out of 100 tell him "good job" although I think some of those are just doing it as a joke to see how extreme he will get in terms of new threads per day.

Don't get it twisted. I don't care about your opinion, but I certainly care about the opinions of others. Stasheroo for example is making strong contributions here that I enjoyed hearing. Spend less time trying to derail my threads, and maybe you'd enjoy them more. Either way, I don't care.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

You seem to have created your own narrative.

No, that is what you are now attempting to do.

Do I post about what I hear about the Cowboys? Absolutely. That doesn't mean I'm taking someone elses' idea, though you would like that.

Why would I like it...that makes zero sense,

That topic was never about Weeden, and if people took the topic off-topic, a moderator such as yourself should have done your job and put it back on topic.

You may want to argue that it was not your main goal to have Weeden as part of the topic howevere...YOU, did put Weeden in the topic at the end of your original post. Other users followed through on ONE part of your topic. Nobody went off topic with Weeden because it was a part of your original post. So there was also no reason for a moderator, whether myself or others, to push a topic back to something since you had it contained in your original post that started that thread. Maybe you forget that little piece of the pie. You may have wanted to leave the topic about Romo and Cowboys but in doing so you added the line of... "We're also paying basically nothing for Weeden, who despite his struggles probably had the best year of his career last year. I don't think his growth in this system should be ignored. I wouldn't be surprised if the Cowboys lock Weeden up to be Romo's career backup."

You think I post to have people agree or disagree with me, I don't. Who knows me more you or me?

Your reactions to those that disagree with your takes and the lengths you will go to continue arguing a point says otherwise.

I take people to task when they're wrong. I make a lot of topics both pro and con relating to the Cowboys. It's not binary, it's not glass full, glass empty, or glass half full or glass half empty.

Why take them to task when they are wrong? I mean, you don't post things for people to agree or disagree with you. So why would it matter if they disagreed with you? Of course it matters to you, you are human.

I can stop making threads altogether, but people continue to tell me that they like me threads. If someone doesn't want to listen to my thread or participate, they don't have to. A certain group of posters seem to have an obsession with me. They say they hate my threads, but are also compelled to participate in them. I think it is pretty telling.

Yes you could stop, but you won't on your own. It's against your own nature. Also your last line is the line every troll will use...including those in the media who will say outlandish things or have an outlandish headline to an article to use as click bate and get ratings or get someone to read their takes.

You look on this board and it is flooded with news links that should be in the news zone or weeks old threads and many of you complain about new threads that people want to post in... Get over yourselves.

We are not talking about News links or old threads, we are talking about YOUR threads. Goal Posts moving again. Funny thing is I don't have a problem with the majority of your threads as I have stated before. As far as getting over "yourselves"....maybe you need to stop once in awhile and get over yourself...Nors.

 

[Galian Beast]

No, that is what you are now attempting to do.



Why would I like it...that makes zero sense,



You may want to argue that it was not your main goal to have Weeden as part of the topic howevere...YOU, did put Weeden in the topic at the end of your original post. Other users followed through on ONE part of your topic. Nobody went off topic with Weeden because it was a part of your original post. So there was also no reason for a moderator, whether myself or others, to push a topic back to something since you had it contained in your original post that started that thread. Maybe you forget that little piece of the pie. You may have wanted to leave the topic about Romo and Cowboys but in doing so you added the line of... "We're also paying basically nothing for Weeden, who despite his struggles probably had the best year of his career last year. I don't think his growth in this system should be ignored. I wouldn't be surprised if the Cowboys lock Weeden up to be Romo's career backup."



Your reactions to those that disagree with your takes and the lengths you will go to continue arguing a point says otherwise.



Why take them to task when they are wrong? I mean, you don't post things for people to agree or disagree with you. So why would it matter if they disagreed with you? Of course it matters to you, you are human.



Yes you could stop, but you won't on your own. It's against your own nature. Also your last line is the line every troll will use...including those in the media who will say outlandish things or have an outlandish headline to an article to use as click bate and get ratings or get someone to read their takes.



We are not talking about News links or old threads, we are talking about YOUR threads. Goal Posts moving again. Funny thing is I don't have a problem with the majority of your threads as I have stated before. As far as getting over "yourselves"....maybe you need to stop once in awhile and get over yourself...Nors.

You would like it because it would fit your narrative, the fact that it isn't true doesn't sway you in the least.

I put a couple sentences about Weeden in a post that was 99% about Romo. Many topics I have created have been derailed by people like xwalker and yourself, no work from moderators to keep in topic though. I don't care particularly, but I do think it is a waste of good discussion material.

If someone doesn't agree with me, I'll certainly argue my point against theirs, that isn't to suggest that I post just for people to agree with me. That would be quite boring. Nor do I necessarily want everyone to disagree with me, because that is counterproductive as well. This is a message board, it's about discussing ideas.
Nothing we post here has any impact on the game.

If someone posts something that is ridiculous, I'll take them to task for it. I expect the same for me.
It's called keeping someone honest.

Who is derailing whose thread here? Who is the troll again? Please tell show me a thread you have created that I have derailed.. Exactly...

I was making a point not moving the goal posts. I have had users tell me they like the fact that I create new topics because otherwise the page is filled with the same stale threads. If people don't want to post in my threads, the threads can die out naturally. Somehow a few of you don't see it that way and chose to launch personal attacks on the threads. It's disappointing.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

You would like it because it would fit your narrative, the fact that it isn't true doesn't sway you in the least.

Wrong. I would think it is nice that if you are going to take a topic off a radio show or article you would give credit to the radio show and in the case of the article...post the article if it has not been posted and give your takes on the article. If the article has already been posted, go in that thread and put your thoughts into that one. Not really hard to understand unless you make it hard to understand.

I put a couple sentences about Weeden in a post that was 99% about Romo. Many topics I have created have been derailed by people like xwalker and yourself, no work from moderators to keep in topic though. I don't care particularly, but I do think it is a waste of good discussion material.

and Although you posted 99% about Romo in that topic you did indeed put a couple of sentences of talk about Weeden which in turn made the majority of the thread about Weeden which was my original statement to which you went and argued that it was OTHER people who changed the topic and I as a mod or others as mods should have steered it back to the topic...uh...it was part of the topic you brought forward. This is another example of moving the goal posts. If you did not want that to involve Weeden, don't bring weeden up whether it is 1% or 99% because as you are very aware any one part of an argument is fair game as you are notorious for ignoring 99% someone's argument against your takes and only focusing on 1% of what they said to try and prove your point.

If someone doesn't agree with me, I'll certainly argue my point against theirs, that isn't to suggest that I post just for people to agree with me. That would be quite boring. Nor do I necessarily want everyone to disagree with me, because that is counterproductive as well. This is a message board, it's about discussing ideas.
Nothing we post here has any impact on the game.

Agreed we all will argue a stance that does not agree with ours or we will agree with those with a same view point as ourselves. yet you would have us believe that you do not post to have someone agree or disagree with you. I could understand that if you are posting an article that you did not write and just putting it up for discussion. Hard to have a post where you have preconceived notions about the topic and then say you did not post it to have someone agree or disagree with it. Kind of silly to argue it really...just say, yeah that makes sense and move on.

If someone posts something that is ridiculous, I'll take them to task for it. I expect the same for me.
It's called keeping someone honest.

Kind of like what I am doing here or what I did in your 99% Romo thread and 1% Weeden thread where I agreed with your romo portion and called you out because I thought your weeden take was crazy. Magic.

Who is derailing whose thread here? Who is the troll again? Please tell show me a thread you have created that I have derailed.. Exactly...

Difference Is I have not been banned from multiple cowboys boards for trolling nor have I came back to the board under a different name trying to pretend like I am not a former banned member and start troll threads.

I was making a point not moving the goal posts. I have had users tell me they like the fact that I create new topics because otherwise the page is filled with the same stale threads. If people don't want to post in my threads, the threads can die out naturally. Somehow a few of you don't see it that way and chose to launch personal attacks on the threads. It's disappointing.

So which one is right...those that say they like your threads or those that say they don't?

Again...keep in mind that I don't bother a multitude of your threads. I either comment on them for the topic, give them a like or read them and do not comment as I don't have anything I feel like saying in them. I could be wrong on the total but of the last 20 or so threads you have stared, I think I have only had THIS type of discussion with you a couple times.

Otherwise if I was talking with you it was of the topic at hand.

 

[Galian Beast]

Wrong. I would think it is nice that if you are going to take a topic off a radio show or article you would give credit to the radio show and in the case of the article...post the article if it has not been posted and give your takes on the article. If the article has already been posted, go in that thread and put your thoughts into that one. Not really hard to understand unless you make it hard to understand.

and Although you posted 99% about Romo in that topic you did indeed put a couple of sentences of talk about Weeden which in turn made the majority of the thread about Weeden which was my original statement to which you went and argued that it was OTHER people who changed the topic and I as a mod or others as mods should have steered it back to the topic...uh...it was part of the topic you brought forward. This is another example of moving the goal posts. If you did not want that to involve Weeden, don't bring weeden up whether it is 1% or 99% because as you are very aware any one part of an argument is fair game as you are notorious for ignoring 99% someone's argument against your takes and only focusing on 1% of what they said to try and prove your point.



Agreed we all will argue a stance that does not agree with ours or we will agree with those with a same view point as ourselves. yet you would have us believe that you do not post to have someone agree or disagree with you. I could understand that if you are posting an article that you did not write and just putting it up for discussion. Hard to have a post where you have preconceived notions about the topic and then say you did not post it to have someone agree or disagree with it. Kind of silly to argue it really...just say, yeah that makes sense and move on.


Kind of like what I am doing here or what I did in your 99% Romo thread and 1% Weeden thread where I agreed with your romo portion and called you out because I thought your weeden take was crazy. Magic.


Difference Is I have not been banned from multiple cowboys boards for trolling nor have I came back to the board under a different name trying to pretend like I am not a former banned member and start troll threads.



So which one is right...those that say they like your threads or those that say they don't?

Again...keep in mind that I don't bother a multitude of your threads. I either comment on them for the topic, give them a like or read them and do not comment as I don't have anything I feel like saying in them. I could be wrong on the total but of the last 20 or so threads you have stared, I think I have only had THIS type of discussion with you a couple times.

Otherwise if I was talking with you it was of the topic at hand.

Unless it is a unique idea or a quote, it doesn't need to be cited. If I hear that the cowboys sign a player for 10 million dollars that doesn't need to be cited, it's general information. You think I stole something from Mickey Spagnola and I did not. I listened to the radio show, and they discussed Scandrick. I did not quote him nor did I still his idea. I said that the way he structured his contract would leave him vulnerable to being released.

Anytime I post something, I don't necessarily care how someone responds. I'm interested in the discussion, not whether or not someone agrees or disagrees. It's more about how they agree or how they disagree. That's what a message board is.

No, you haven't broken down why you disagree about Weeden, instead you've attacked the thread itself.
That's called trolling. Weeden was clearly not the subject of the other thread as well, but you and a few others keyed in on a small comment to derail the thread.

I'm not Nors, but you can continue to suggest that I am. I've been a member here since 2005. Keep writing your own narrative though.

I don't care about those who like or dislike my threads. Again, that isn't what this is about. If you don't agree with something I say in a thread, by all means say you disagree and make your point. If you like my thread and agree, that's fine too. But why derail a thread?

 

[Idgit]

On Weeden, though. My beef with the guy is just that he's too old to be spending time getting him up to speed with the mental part of an NFL offense. When he was drafted, if CLE had used his first two years properly, it'd be one thing. But that very small window he had was basically wasted.

That said, as a dude, I have to say that I kind of like the guy. He had this to say about Sticks Wilson saying he was a most-improved player candidate:

“It’s just a comfort thing,” Weeden said. “Now I can really fine tune what we’re doing because I’m not having to go home to study for three hours just learning plays and calling plays and doing all that. Now I can out and fine tine what I want to do, work on reading defenses, work on understanding everything versus just making sure I don’t screw the first part of it up. I appreciate that from Sticks [Wilson]. That’s a good comment because I busted my ***. I’ve worked so hard this offseason, training wise, throwing wise to put myself in position.”

He was an old guy, who got overdrafted, thrown to the wolves, cut, and is finally getting a chance to develop behind a good starter. It's not really his fault he sucks, because he sucks because he hasn't been able to develop the mental part of his game. And then fans just dump on him. I guess it's ok if it also comes with that big rookie pay check, but for his sake, it'd be great to see him put it together better this offseason. Better for us if it's Vaughan who does it, instead.

 

[CyberB0b]

I say you do. I also think you read an article or listen to a show, take an idea found in said article or show and come in here and post it like
it was your own idea out of the blue.

Ding ding ding. We have a winner.
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/scandrick-screwed-himself.323063/#post-6136128