From an 'At the Game' Perspective
-
I thought DA showed many things in what I saw of the game.
1. Completely shrugged off the sea of negativity that has dogged him since BQ arrived, got under centre and got on with it = Mature & professional
2. Used his limited experience as a starter to look like a starter - bossed the huddle and line.
3. Went through quick check downs and made some smart choices, not all but enough to make us look like a team to keep a defense honest
4. Didn't look like he was filling his nappy (daiper) on every 3rd down
5. Showed commitment to the team in congratulating good line work and WR play
and most importantly
6. Showed he cared more about the win than I have seen so far this season from a Browns QB.
IMVHO, I think Quinn has huge self doubt issues, not helped by the to-ing and fro-ing of managment for sure, but if he was the real deal we would have had the light come on above his head before now. The bulb is still dull.
I hope DA is still our man when I come over in December. I am not at all sold on Quinn. I don't think Quinn could ever have had a game like the Giants last season, I don't see it in him.
But as I always say, what the hell do I know, I'm a limey.
Ta ta for now. Howie.
-
The exact same guy? You don't think he has worked hard on touch on his short passes? Last year that is all we heard about the guy, today it seems put to bed.
He has made the players around him play better. He did it in 2007 and he did it again yesterday.
The team seems more supportive to have him in, the offense clicks better, he's had SIX TIMES more experience and is only 16 months older.
He's our guy, if you can't handle it, stay home.
Stan, I think you're mostly just chicken-shitting, but I'll play along for fun.
DA is most certainly not "our guy" if by "our guy" you mean "the Browns guy". If he was, he'd have beaten Quinn out in preseason, he'd have started the season, he'd have showed more interest and passion for the job when it was on the line.
He didn't, he didn't and he didn't.
Once again, there is NO ARGUING he is the best QB on our roster RIGHT NOW.
That's NOT THE POINT. The point is -- and always has been -- about finding a LONG-TERM answer at QB.
IF you are going to say "We did that! It's DA!" then I'm going to ask "Why have two different coaching staffs given him the job BY DEFAULT?"
Is that "our guy"? The default guy? The other guy? The not-as-bad guy?
Because that's what DA is. That doesn't make him a bad guy, or a bad player, or a bad QB.
It just makes him what he has SHOWN himself to be: a totally average NFL QB.
So, sure, a totally average veteran starter is better than a rookie starter. Okay. Great.
I'm not getting excited about going 4-12 with a totally average veteran starter instead of 3-13 with the rookie starter.
Sorry. You can keep extolling DA's "growth" all you want, but it still doesn't make sense to play the guy this year unless you're CONVINCED he is your franchise guy.
Which I just can't imagine is the case.
Finally, will I be upset if I'm wrong? Hell no! I'll be incredibly excited to be wrong.
I'm just not expecting it and I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen like you seem to be.
Stan, I think you're mostly just chicken-shitting, but I'll play along for fun.
DA is most certainly not "our guy" if by "our guy" you mean "the Browns guy". If he was, he'd have beaten Quinn out in preseason, he'd have started the season, he'd have showed more interest and passion for the job when it was on the line.
He didn't, he didn't and he didn't.
Once again, there is NO ARGUING he is the best QB on our roster RIGHT NOW.
That's NOT THE POINT. The point is -- and always has been -- about finding a LONG-TERM answer at QB.
IF you are going to say "We did that! It's DA!" then I'm going to ask "Why have two different coaching staffs given him the job BY DEFAULT?"
Is that "our guy"? The default guy? The other guy? The not-as-bad guy?
Because that's what DA is. That doesn't make him a bad guy, or a bad player, or a bad QB.
It just makes him what he has SHOWN himself to be: a totally average NFL QB.
So, sure, a totally average veteran starter is better than a rookie starter. Okay. Great.
I'm not getting excited about going 4-12 with a totally average veteran starter instead of 3-13 with the rookie starter.
Sorry. You can keep extolling DA's "growth" all you want, but it still doesn't make sense to play the guy this year unless you're CONVINCED he is your franchise guy.
Which I just can't imagine is the case.
Finally, will I be upset if I'm wrong? Hell no! I'll be incredibly excited to be wrong.
I'm just not expecting it and I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen like you seem to be.
You've totally misinterpreted my post somewhere.
DA is our best QB on staff right now, as you've agreed. He has made some steps in improving some small parts of his game, as I pointed out. He's here to stay this season and Quinn, as far as I'm concerned is worthless to potty train because it hurts the development of so many other young positions, and I don't believe he's worth the time. DA is more worth the time to continue working on short-comings. I have not thought beyond this season, I'm taking what we have and you guys must be dreaming about what we need.
I was talking about DA's work ethic on trying to improve his short game, inwhich everyone dwelled on last year as a flaw needing improved. If he improves his reads and decisions in the same manner, we will have a guy to continue to build with in honing the other 23 positions on the field in a competitive manner. I never said DA was our future, our franchise, nor have I said anyone else on this team is our mainstay.
We have a game Sunday, are you guys tuning in, or is it 'next year' already for ya and you are looking to clean up the yard a bit on Sunday afternoon?
-
@planet-0range said:
This board is really starting to plummet like Anderceptions career completion percentage.That is still better than BQ's career completion percentage. Nobody is saying that DA is the long term answer. But at least the Browns look like they have an offense now.
-
@planet-0range said:
This board is really starting to plummet like Anderceptions career completion percentage.Don't rack your brain over this revelation all by yourself, TheBrownsBoard has spent tens of thousands of dollars on reform committee's to study this demise in attitude. We've determined that we should create a focus group on losing franchises, we think it has something to do with a decade of losing ... but it could be rampant racism and homophobia among us.
-
Stan, I think you're mostly just chicken-shitting, but I'll play along for fun.
DA is most certainly not "our guy" if by "our guy" you mean "the Browns guy". If he was, he'd have beaten Quinn out in preseason, he'd have started the season, he'd have showed more interest and passion for the job when it was on the line.
He didn't, he didn't and he didn't.
Once again, there is NO ARGUING he is the best QB on our roster RIGHT NOW.
That's NOT THE POINT. The point is -- and always has been -- about finding a LONG-TERM answer at QB.
IF you are going to say "We did that! It's DA!" then I'm going to ask "Why have two different coaching staffs given him the job BY DEFAULT?"
Is that "our guy"? The default guy? The other guy? The not-as-bad guy?
Because that's what DA is. That doesn't make him a bad guy, or a bad player, or a bad QB.
It just makes him what he has SHOWN himself to be: a totally average NFL QB.
So, sure, a totally average veteran starter is better than a rookie starter. Okay. Great.
I'm not getting excited about going 4-12 with a totally average veteran starter instead of 3-13 with the rookie starter.
Sorry. You can keep extolling DA's "growth" all you want, but it still doesn't make sense to play the guy this year unless you're CONVINCED he is your franchise guy.
Which I just can't imagine is the case.
Finally, will I be upset if I'm wrong? Hell no! I'll be incredibly excited to be wrong.
I'm just not expecting it and I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen like you seem to be.
You've totally misinterpreted my post somewhere.
DA is our best QB on staff right now, as you've agreed. He has made some steps in improving some small parts of his game, as I pointed out. He's here to stay this season and Quinn, as far as I'm concerned is worthless to potty train because it hurts the development of so many other young positions, and I don't believe he's worth the time. DA is more worth the time to continue working on short-comings. I have not thought beyond this season, I'm taking what we have and you guys must be dreaming about what we need.
I was talking about DA's work ethic on trying to improve his short game, inwhich everyone dwelled on last year as a flaw needing improved. If he improves his reads and decisions in the same manner, we will have a guy to continue to build with in honing the other 23 positions on the field in a competitive manner. I never said DA was our future, our franchise, nor have I said anyone else on this team is our mainstay.
We have a game Sunday, are you guys tuning in, or is it 'next year' already for ya and you are looking to clean up the yard a bit on Sunday afternoon?
You've totally misinterpreted my post somewhere.
DA is our best QB on staff right now, as you've agreed. He has made some steps in improving some small parts of his game, as I pointed out. He's here to stay this season and Quinn, as far as I'm concerned is worthless to potty train because it hurts the development of so many other young positions, and I don't believe he's worth the time. DA is more worth the time to continue working on short-comings. I have not thought beyond this season, I'm taking what we have and you guys must be dreaming about what we need.
I was talking about DA's work ethic on trying to improve his short game, inwhich everyone dwelled on last year as a flaw needing improved. If he improves his reads and decisions in the same manner, we will have a guy to continue to build with in honing the other 23 positions on the field in a competitive manner. I never said DA was our future, our franchise, nor have I said anyone else on this team is our mainstay.
We have a game Sunday, are you guys tuning in, or is it 'next year' already for ya and you are looking to clean up the yard a bit on Sunday afternoon?
No, I haven't misinterpreted you. You are for winning right now, as you've made clear here, and I'm for building the team for the future.
You think DA will help with both the short and long term and that's fair. Given what we know about him, it's POSSIBLE he'll help guys develop more quickly.
But to what end? What does it matter if he ends up leaving after this year? What's it worth, long-term?
We've been thinking short-term for far too long as an organization and it keeps failing. I was pro-Mangini because I thought he was actually going to take the long view and give a bunch of young players a chance to develop together. He appeared to be doing that by starting Mack and Quinn and we thought MoMass and Robo would be thrown in there. Give a young offense a chance to grow up together.
But then he threw a developemental WR in Cribbs out there along with an aging Lewis along with Mack and Quinn against three top D's and when things looked bad he bailed on the whole plan (it appears).
THAT'S my main issue with this whole thing and it's made worse with each game we lose with DA at the helm because it's another game that he's playing to no purpose. If we are going to lose, it should be in the service of getting better as a team, not just watching DA do what he does.
Bottom line: I was prepared to watch bad football this year in the hopes that it would lead to better football, and one way or another, we need answer on Quinn. Results, for me, were secondary to the growth that had to take place throughout the ENTIRE team.
Now, that's gone. Now, I'll watch slightly better football with DA in there but with no real hope of it getting ANY better because I believe DA is showing us EXACTLY what he is: a .500 QB who will be average in everything: Comp %, TD/INT ratio, Win %.
Yippee.
-
Zombo said:
Ummm .. yes, that is the point.Generally the better guy gives your team a better chance to win.
You play to win the game.
Do you need a Herm Edwards motivational speech?
Zombo
--Not only is he better now, he has better tools to work with for the future ... what was the issue again?
Sure you play to win the individual game, Z, but you also play to learn, to grow, to improve, in the hopes of building a consistent team that's capable of winning future games as well.
You sound like Romeo: playing veterans gives me the best chance to win, so I won't play young guys at all. We've seen how well that's worked.
And yet, you and Stan are all about winning the next game. Well, great for you.
But for me, as long as we only care about winning one game, we'll never get out of the basement. We've been taking the "one game" approach for 10 years. It's been a blast, hasn't it?
-
Zombo said:
Ummm .. yes, that is the point.Generally the better guy gives your team a better chance to win.
You play to win the game.
Do you need a Herm Edwards motivational speech?
Zombo
--Not only is he better now, he has better tools to work with for the future ... what was the issue again?
Sure you play to win the individual game, Z, but you also play to learn, to grow, to improve, in the hopes of building a consistent team that's capable of winning future games as well.
You sound like Romeo: playing veterans gives me the best chance to win, so I won't play young guys at all. We've seen how well that's worked.
And yet, you and Stan are all about winning the next game. Well, great for you.
But for me, as long as we only care about winning one game, we'll never get out of the basement. We've been taking the "one game" approach for 10 years. It's been a blast, hasn't it?
Sure you play to win the individual game, Z, but you also play to learn, to grow, to improve, in the hopes of building a consistent team that's capable of winning future games as well.
You sound like Romeo: playing veterans gives me the best chance to win, so I won't play young guys at all. We've seen how well that's worked.
And yet, you and Stan are all about winning the next game. Well, great for you.
But for me, as long as we only care about winning one game, we'll never get out of the basement. We've been taking the "one game" approach for 10 years. It's been a blast, hasn't it?
What is amusing to me is that "best chance to win", considering the end result. I don't know about you, but when watching that game, I never actually felt like CLE truly had a chance to win it.
Early in the game, in the red zone, I was expecting a DA red zone pick. Sure enough, he delivered. Chance to close out that game late in the 4th QTR, Cribbs returns a punt to the to the CINCY 14. What do we get, the QB basically sacking himself and we walk away w/ only 3.
Really late in the 4th, tie game, 1:52 left, CLE starts at their own 33 yard line. Get the ball to Cincy's 40 only needing maybe 10~15 yards for a FG, 0:27 left on the clock, and what do we get? 2 incomplete passes.
OT, CLE gets the ball 3 times (how often do you see that in OT, especially after losing the toss), what happens? Nothing.
Progress and best chance to win......(more like same old, same old, and best chance to get your hopes up then dashed)
-
We're on the same page, Mik.
Seems to me that everyone knows that to beat DA, you double up the outsides and pressure him on occasion.
Confuse him just enough to delay him and you can handle him. The only time he's dangerous is when he has time and an open WR downfield. He won't check down regularly and he won't be patient so as a D you know you can push him into INTs or INCs.
He absolutely is the anti-Quinn in that regard. All he wants to do is go downfield which is why the methodical, incremental approach at the end of a game is a weakness for him.
Hence, we lost on Sunday.
-
Sure you play to win the individual game, Z, but you also play to learn, to grow, to improve, in the hopes of building a consistent team that's capable of winning future games as well.
You sound like Romeo: playing veterans gives me the best chance to win, so I won't play young guys at all. We've seen how well that's worked.
And yet, you and Stan are all about winning the next game. Well, great for you.
But for me, as long as we only care about winning one game, we'll never get out of the basement. We've been taking the "one game" approach for 10 years. It's been a blast, hasn't it?
What is amusing to me is that "best chance to win", considering the end result. I don't know about you, but when watching that game, I never actually felt like CLE truly had a chance to win it.
Early in the game, in the red zone, I was expecting a DA red zone pick. Sure enough, he delivered. Chance to close out that game late in the 4th QTR, Cribbs returns a punt to the to the CINCY 14. What do we get, the QB basically sacking himself and we walk away w/ only 3.
Really late in the 4th, tie game, 1:52 left, CLE starts at their own 33 yard line. Get the ball to Cincy's 40 only needing maybe 10~15 yards for a FG, 0:27 left on the clock, and what do we get? 2 incomplete passes.
OT, CLE gets the ball 3 times (how often do you see that in OT, especially after losing the toss), what happens? Nothing.
Progress and best chance to win......(more like same old, same old, and best chance to get your hopes up then dashed)
Masters said:
What is amusing to me is that "best chance to win", considering the end result. I don't know about you, but when watching that game, I never actually felt like CLE truly had a chance to win it.Dude, what's wrong with you? We had a 6 point lead with 6:00 minutes to go. Then the D gave up a 70 yard drive. Sorry to hear that you turned the TV off after the first quarter. Nearly everyone at the Stadium stayed until Carson's long run.
-
We're on the same page, Mik.
Seems to me that everyone knows that to beat DA, you double up the outsides and pressure him on occasion.
Confuse him just enough to delay him and you can handle him. The only time he's dangerous is when he has time and an open WR downfield. He won't check down regularly and he won't be patient so as a D you know you can push him into INTs or INCs.
He absolutely is the anti-Quinn in that regard. All he wants to do is go downfield which is why the methodical, incremental approach at the end of a game is a weakness for him.
Hence, we lost on Sunday.
We're on the same page, Mik.
Seems to me that everyone knows that to beat DA, you double up the outsides and pressure him on occasion.
Confuse him just enough to delay him and you can handle him. The only time he's dangerous is when he has time and an open WR downfield. He won't check down regularly and he won't be patient so as a D you know you can push him into INTs or INCs.
He absolutely is the anti-Quinn in that regard. All he wants to do is go downfield which is why the methodical, incremental approach at the end of a game is a weakness for him.
Hence, we lost on Sunday.
I'm working on a machine in my shop that we can dwarf Quinn & Anderson into one premium QB. It's called the Ken Stablizer. Although everytime I experiment with two blondes I land from the strip club, they come out throwing lefthanded and with a beard.
-
Masters said:
What is amusing to me is that "best chance to win", considering the end result. I don't know about you, but when watching that game, I never actually felt like CLE truly had a chance to win it.Dude, what's wrong with you? We had a 6 point lead with 6:00 minutes to go. Then the D gave up a 70 yard drive. Sorry to hear that you turned the TV off after the first quarter. Nearly everyone at the Stadium stayed until Carson's long run.
Dude, what's wrong with you? We had a 6 point lead with 6:00 minutes to go. Then the D gave up a 70 yard drive. Sorry to hear that you turned the TV off after the first quarter. Nearly everyone at the Stadium stayed until Carson's long run.
I never tuned off the game. 6 point lead (that should have been 9 or 10) with 6 minutes left is an eternaty. I have been watching the new Browns long enough to know they will find a way to lose a game like that. Especially this team, based on what I have seen of them. Hence why I am saying in other threads that the staff and team needs to show me real wins and progress, not finding new ways to lose games, before I start trying to blow sunshine out my ass. They need to put teams away when they gift wrap the opportunity over and over again. That's what teams getting better and good teams do. This is the same thing as last year right now.
It's not like I want to watch a Browns game like Sundays and know in the pit of my stomach that the team will find a way to lose that game. Hopefully that will change sometime in the near future.
-
We're on the same page, Mik.
Seems to me that everyone knows that to beat DA, you double up the outsides and pressure him on occasion.
Confuse him just enough to delay him and you can handle him. The only time he's dangerous is when he has time and an open WR downfield. He won't check down regularly and he won't be patient so as a D you know you can push him into INTs or INCs.
He absolutely is the anti-Quinn in that regard. All he wants to do is go downfield which is why the methodical, incremental approach at the end of a game is a weakness for him.
Hence, we lost on Sunday.
I'm working on a machine in my shop that we can dwarf Quinn & Anderson into one premium QB. It's called the Ken Stablizer. Although everytime I experiment with two blondes I land from the strip club, they come out throwing lefthanded and with a beard.
I'm working on a machine in my shop that we can dwarf Quinn & Anderson into one premium QB. It's called the Ken Stablizer. Although everytime I experiment with two blondes I land from the strip club, they come out throwing lefthanded and with a beard.
i never noticed that HagII was lefthanded.
-
I am a football guy astute as I am.
I refrain from this board because it is toxic
Regards to the QB situation in Cleveland...
Anderson can be a OK qb, not elite
Quinn is a bust which I surmised and got castrated for among other astute judgments
Carry on Browns and please move forward and do not salute any more sewage......if you get that
-
@planet-0range said:
I have higher hopes for our offense than this.I'm starting to think that neither of our QB's will be here next year. Bitter sweet.
I can't believe you are just now thinking that. Considering the Mankok tried to get rid of both during hte offseason with no success other than a 5th round pick, tells me alot.
DA,BQ,BE........no value.
-
@planet-0range said:
I have higher hopes for our offense than this.I'm starting to think that neither of our QB's will be here next year. Bitter sweet.
I can't believe you are just now thinking that. Considering the Mankok tried to get rid of both during hte offseason with no success other than a 5th round pick, tells me alot.
DA,BQ,BE........no value.
I can't believe you are just now thinking that. Considering the Mankok tried to get rid of both during hte offseason with no success other than a 5th round pick, tells me alot.
DA,BQ,BE........no value.
apparently BE had value.
-
Zombo said:
Belichick, Coughlin, Parcels, Dungy ... they all take the "one game" approach.You play the better players.
Waiting and hoping for someone to develop on the job is a candy-ass approach. That is what all those off-season camps and pe-season games are for. If you go out and shit your pants three weeks in a row how is that good for the team? How is that improving?
Play the best players.
Zombo
In general, I agree with you. Faster RB? Get him in there. Bigger, badder LB? Roger, go get 'em. Glue hands WR? Get in there, son.
But QB is a different animal and I think you know that.
QB's simply cannot learn or grow without playing. The less experienced QB will always be the inferior QB until he gains experience.
So, you can say you prefer DA, and you can say "he's the better player right now so he gives us a better chance to win" but I don't think you can reasonably say he's the "better player so don't EVER play a POTENTIALLY better player."
The Lumberghian-logic disclaimer: Quinn may not EVER be the better player. Fine. Doesn't mean we should quit looking for guys who are better than average, which is what DA undeniably is at this point, which is what your logic seems to support.
-
Yep, my argument is obviously that not only is Anderson better now, he has more potential as well.
You either must not think much of our coach's ability to judge QB's or you buy into Lum's conspiracy theories.
-
Bitter beer face? You're comical. I just took a group of 20 family and friends to the Bengals game and lost my voice cheering. Yeah, I need you to tell me how to be a fan. Get a clue.
My point, which you seem to have missed, is that the coaching staff put a guy out there ahead of DA who was SO bad he lost his job in 2.5 games. I remain concerned about that gigantic miss in talent evaluation.
Nothing more, nothing less.
-
Gave up 21 1st down.
Gave up 3-3 on 4th down attempts.
Gave up 154 yards rushing to the tune of 5.1YPC
Gave up 221 passing yards
That's marked improvement?
Look, I get the D forced a couple of turn overs and put some pressure on the QB, but that is nothing we have not seen before. On top of that, CIN offense coming in was doing less than what CLE allowed them to do on Sunday. I don't see it as an improvement by allowing another team to come into your house and put up numbers ABOVE their average. Maybe I am just crazy that way.
The only real improvement was they only gave up 20 13 points in regulation and 23 16 for the game. If not for big plays by the special teams group blocking a FG and an extra point, that score creeps up higher.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login