Statler Waldorf
Bench Warmer
I see what you're saying, but spending a 2nd on a guy who has already had substance abuse problems in college seems a bit rash to me. Those guys usually don't start behaving once they are given millions of dollars.
Supplemental Draft Question/Gordon to the Browns
- Thread starter Serik
- Start date
I see what you're saying, but spending a 2nd on a guy who has already had substance abuse problems in college seems a bit rash to me. Those guys usually don't start behaving once they are given millions of dollars.
tazthenomad
Club Member
Gee... I know you like Wheeden a lot but he is still a rookie, even if he is very old for one. Not buying that he will be that ready so quickly.
SuperMarksBros.
Formerly Fiedler for MVP
Lets all laugh and point at the laughingstock Browns. Someone remind me, when was the last time we beat them?
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2006
- Messages
- 5,192
- Reaction score
- 3,479
Ah yes Weed, the wonder drug. Look how bad it's hurt the Patriots! And Vikings! Those guys are clearly causing all kinds of problems because of the sticky icky!
I can't stand how silly this thought process is.
Why didn't they just draft S. Hill in the 2nd?
I mean, I know Mitchell Schwartz is a hard name to pass, but . . .
I mean, I know Mitchell Schwartz is a hard name to pass, but . . .
Dolphins can't seem to beat those mother****ers anyway so they're already better
I'm not getting into the are the Browns better or worse than us because on paper it means nothing. As far as them spending a second on Gordon . . . . while there are always the few exceptions, most supplemental players just don't end up being that great. And to give up a second, probably a high second, was probably not the smartest choice. It's a huge gamble in order to try and improve/win now and if it doesn't work, it hurts them in the future, especially considering all the question marks surrounding him.
ckparrothead
Premium Member
Has nothing to do with Weeden. I consider Weeden and Garrard to be comparable in Weeden's rookie season.
Just looking at the skill players. You'd have to take Trent Richardson WAY over Miami's stable of runners. I would take Greg Little, Josh Cribbs and Josh Gordon over Brian Hartline, Davone Bess and Chad OchoCinco. And I think most NFL GMs would as well. Ben Watson and Evan Moore are more athletic, proven pass catching tight ends than Anthony Fasano and Charles Clay, and have more inside-outside versatility. You can talk about 1st rounders Jake Long and Mike Pouncey but the Browns have 1st rounders Joe Thomas and Alex Mack at the same positions.
I think it's you that has something you need to get over. You're seeing Weeden in anything I say.
ckparrothead
Premium Member
Let me put it this way. I consider him comparable to David Garrard as a rookie, and I think the Browns have an equal offensive line, and better skill position players.
You guys are making this about Weeden. It's not about him.
---------- Post added at 05:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:16 PM ----------
That's a really good question, btw.
ITS!MATEO
Active Roster
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,625
- Reaction score
- 7
Now that's going a little far there, Ck.
And a rookie supplementary drafted' player over any one of our 3 established receivers?
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2006
- Messages
- 5,192
- Reaction score
- 3,479
Honestly the only thing I disagree with, CK, is Garrard vs Weeden. If Garrard is healthy and on the field, he's much better than Weeden in his rookie season... and it's not even close IMO. Weeden could go out there and have a "good rookie year" and still look like crap compared to Garrard.
The big caveat there is if Garrard is healthy, which he very well may be. If Garrard didn't have the major question mark looming over him I think a lot of teams (Seattle, especially) would have been bidding against Miami. He is a solid stop gap QB. I think Weeden would be lucky to go 60% completion with 1:1 TD/INT, just so you know where my thinking is.
The big caveat there is if Garrard is healthy, which he very well may be. If Garrard didn't have the major question mark looming over him I think a lot of teams (Seattle, especially) would have been bidding against Miami. He is a solid stop gap QB. I think Weeden would be lucky to go 60% completion with 1:1 TD/INT, just so you know where my thinking is.
ckparrothead
Premium Member
Now that's going a little far there, Ck.
And a rookie supplementary drafted' player over any one of our 3 established receivers?
I think you misunderstood the line. I meant that as a group, if you had to choose between Little, Cribbs and Gordon, or Hartline, Bess and OchoCinco, you'd choose the former not the latter. I think most NFL general managers would as well.
As for Trent Richardson over our stable of backs? Agree to disagree. Richardson the best tailback prospect I have seen since Adrian Peterson. It was really amazing how complete his game was from an NFL standpoint. We'll see of course, and of course a lot of it comes down to blocking, but I think Trent is spectacular.
ckparrothead
Premium Member
I currently have a bet set up with someone in the Draft industry on Weeden. We set over/unders at a 78 passer rating, a 1.25 TD/INT ratio, and 6.5 wins. If Brandon nails the over on any two of those, I win. That's the confidence I have in him.
Even so, I'm not saying he's definitely better than Garrard. I'm saying they're comparable. I think Weeden is going to stretch the field better than Garrard, but probably be less efficient from a ratings standpoint. The end result though of stretching the field better should be points put on the board, IMO...especially handing the ball off to Trent Richardson.
I know one man that directly coached David Garrard in 2010 and then directly coached Brandon Weeden the following year in 2011, and said point blank Brandon Weeden is the best quarterback I've ever coached. He didn't couch it as "has the most potential". He said best. Period. I'm not bringing that up because I agree with Todd Monken, as I have already said I think Weeden will be less efficient from a ratings standpoint particularly the TD/INT ratio stuff where I expect Garrard to be a bit safer with the football, but I think Weeden will open up the field more and lead a more productive scoring offense. Also I wouldn't be surprised if Garrard fumbles a lot. He and Moore both have that problem.
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2006
- Messages
- 5,192
- Reaction score
- 3,479
Wow, well it's pretty tough to argue with a man who coached Garrard and then immediately coached Weeden the next year saying that... so... touche.