Seneca Wallace Wants "One Browns QB".
-
I don't mean to ruffle feathers, but having only recently started following the Browns, I find that certain beat writers tend to look for stories that create controversy needlessly. They ask questions that beg the kind of responses that can create juicy conflict. None of what Wallace is saying sounds controversial on it's own; these guys are professionals, and they're going to fight for playing time by doing their best, not by bellyaching to reporters.. which is how the article kind of makes it seem.
-
We all want one QB, thats why we have coaches to make that decision, however Im sure MH will have a tad bit of pull in that decision. I do think Seneca should start the next game against the Pats and maybe the Jets. He was playing pretty good while he was in, if he tanks against the next 2 teams then you will probably see Colt the rest of the way. I like what Mccoy brings to the table and i'm sure we will see him again this year. As for Jake, we all knew from the begining that he would be hit or miss, but not hit or miss cuz of injuries. Its week 8 and he pretty much hasn't played with our ones for awhile, so ya he is going to be an expensive back up.
-
Wallace needs to start. I'm telling you. Colt has played two games and people are praising him. I know he didn't lose games for us, but I know he didn't exactly win games for us.
There is no need to throw Colt in the mix of things in the middle of the season. Let's take time to develop this QB and not rush things. We don't need another quarterback controversy.
Then again, I'm just a fan and probably don't know what the hell I am talking about.
-
Wallace needs to start. I'm telling you. Colt has played two games and people are praising him. I know he didn't lose games for us, but I know he didn't exactly win games for us.
There is no need to throw Colt in the mix of things in the middle of the season. Let's take time to develop this QB and not rush things. We don't need another quarterback controversy.
Then again, I'm just a fan and probably don't know what the hell I am talking about.
Wallace needs to start. I'm telling you. Colt has played two games and people are praising him. I know he didn't lose games for us, but I know he didn't exactly win games for us.
There is no need to throw Colt in the mix of things in the middle of the season. Let's take time to develop this QB and not rush things. We don't need another quarterback controversy.
Then again, I'm just a fan and probably don't know what the hell I am talking about.
It has already started. It's just not that noisy, yet.
Seems that we just cannot escape this burden.
It's nice to see the rest of the team is coming along, though.
-
I really like Seneca, he's a decent QB, something we haven't had. But the guy is not very accurate. Look at his sideline throws, they sail out of bounds. Seneca is a great back up QB.
Benching Colt now will only hinder his progress. Why are you going to stick him on the bench when he's proving that he can play at this level? Is it better for him to sit and watch? He can do that in the film room! Let him get his OJT and he'll be much better learning while playing and still watching film than just watching film only.
Colt is more accurate, has the arm strength, smarter, and can scramble just as well as Wallace. I want one good reason why he shouldn't be the starter.
-
I really like Seneca, he's a decent QB, something we haven't had. But the guy is not very accurate. Look at his sideline throws, they sail out of bounds. Seneca is a great back up QB.
Benching Colt now will only hinder his progress. Why are you going to stick him on the bench when he's proving that he can play at this level? Is it better for him to sit and watch? He can do that in the film room! Let him get his OJT and he'll be much better learning while playing and still watching film than just watching film only.
Colt is more accurate, has the arm strength, smarter, and can scramble just as well as Wallace. I want one good reason why he shouldn't be the starter.
I really like Seneca, he's a decent QB, something we haven't had. But the guy is not very accurate. Look at his sideline throws, they sail out of bounds. Seneca is a great back up QB.
Benching Colt now will only hinder his progress. Why are you going to stick him on the bench when he's proving that he can play at this level? Is it better for him to sit and watch? He can do that in the film room! Let him get his OJT and he'll be much better learning while playing and still watching film than just watching film.
Colt is more accurate, has the arm strength, smarter, and can scramble just as well as Wallace. I want one good reason why he shouldn't be the starter.
I hope they Keep Colt in as starter. He started against the Steelers and the Saints and did damn good. He improved each quarter of the game as his confidence grew. If he is to be our future, we need to find out by starting him. Sitting on the bench watching Seneca (career back-up) and Delhomme (on his last legs) will accomplish nothing for him or the team. Delhomme can still be on the sidelines giving veteran advice, etc.
-
Non-story it is...
Ask any QB of any team who should start this sunday and they will all of course say "ME" the fact is colt looked pretty good to me, he did his job with great poise for a rook and did as he was asked and managed the game, but i thinks we all know mangini will most likely start jake or seneca if they are healthy not only to avert a QB controversy but also because both have more experience and this regime isnt ready to pack it in and call the rest of the season colts on the job training just yet, but i wouldnt be surprised if we see colt start again at some point this season...
Hopefully demetrius williams will have some impact for our passing game regardless of who starts...
-
The only person I don't want starting is Delhomme... He needs to be cut at the end of the season, or even now! Either Seneca or Colt is fine with me. Both make good cases to start. I'd say start Seneca to see if they can get on a winning streak and maybe get back into the race.. if this does not happen, put Colt in for the rest of the season. Wallace at this point I'd say gives us the best chance to win... He did show a lot of improvement week to week...
-
we would be 3-4 if wallace hadn't gotten injured vs atl
-
we would be 3-4 if wallace hadn't gotten injured vs atl
we would be 3-4 if wallace hadn't gotten injured vs atl
Please esplain...
-
we would be 3-4 if wallace hadn't gotten injured vs atl
Please esplain...
-
we would be 3-4 if wallace hadn't gotten injured vs atl
Please esplain...
Please esplain...
Wallace definitely had the game under control and I was confident in winning. But who knows.
-
Zombo said:
I'm OK with Wallace or McCoy, let's just not make it a revolving door. Let one guy be the leader for the rest of the season and don't pull him if he struggles in one game.I like Jake, but I think he should fade into the veteran backup/mentor role at this point in his career.
That said ... he's getting paid the most ... so don't have a stroke if the Browns go back to him when he is healthy. Personally, Wallace or McCoy just makes much more sense.
Zombo
Starting Delhomme would be a HUGE set back for both Seneca and Colt.... It just really makes NO sense to start delhomme from here on forward. He was just a filler anyway.. cut delhomme after the season. he is not needed.
-
Wallace definitely had the game under control and I was confident in winning. But who knows.
Yeah, I forgot about that. If we brought in McCoy, it would have gave us a better chance than Old Man Hobbles McGee Delhomme.
-
In my opinion, the remaining games in this year's schedule should serve one purpose so far as the QB position is concerned. That is, "do we have a QB who can lead the team in the future or do we still need to find that QB in the draft or via trades?". With that said, Wallace doesn't seem to be THE starting QB of the future for the Browns or anyone else. He is a decent backup and that will likely be his role on any team in the future. Delhomme is near the end of his career, not the beginning so he doesn't fit the need. McCoy has yet to prove himself. There is a lot of season left. I say give McCoy the starts until he either proves himself a success or a failure. What are you saving McCoy for if he doesn't have the skills to prove himself? Think of the experience he will get if he can lead the team for the rest of the year. If he is not the Browns QB of the future, proven by not playing well the rest of this year, then everyone will know it and a new QB must be found.
Long term, what do the Browns REALLY gain if Wallace starts the rest of the year? Is he going to take the team to the playoff's?
-
If you change the depth chart to put McCoy on top of it, you've got a big problem...
Eventually, he's going to play a bad game. It happens to Peyton Manning. It happened to Drew Brees last week. The Sam Bradfords and Andrew Lucks of the world get a pass when they lay an egg as a rookie. The franchise has already committed to them, so they get the benefit of the doubt.
Fans and media are by their nature fickle and possess horrible long term memory. Colt plays a bad game and he probably doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because of his draft position; one bad game and you'll hear a lot of "wow, this kid isn't the guy, we need Andrew Luck or Jake Locker." So you either bring Jake or Seneca back in (instant musical-chairs QB drama), or you let McCoy play through it in the face of a media that has quickly returned to their preseason impression. "Why are you playing McCoy? He's a project at best and isn't our long term answer anyways."
There's no justifiable reason to give him the start over a healthy Wallace unless you revise the depth chart. That would mean the organization would be committing to McCoy as the QB for the next couple of years -- or at least formally commit to evaluating him to be that guy.
I think this "controversy" will get resolved by Holmgren making a public statement, to be honest. Everyone sees a week-to-week mentality behind Mangini's decisions, whereas Holmgren will look at the "three year timeline."
-
If you change the depth chart to put McCoy on top of it, you've got a big problem...
Eventually, he's going to play a bad game. It happens to Peyton Manning. It happened to Drew Brees last week. The Sam Bradfords and Andrew Lucks of the world get a pass when they lay an egg as a rookie. The franchise has already committed to them, so they get the benefit of the doubt.
Fans and media are by their nature fickle and possess horrible long term memory. Colt plays a bad game and he probably doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because of his draft position; one bad game and you'll hear a lot of "wow, this kid isn't the guy, we need Andrew Luck or Jake Locker." So you either bring Jake or Seneca back in (instant musical-chairs QB drama), or you let McCoy play through it in the face of a media that has quickly returned to their preseason impression. "Why are you playing McCoy? He's a project at best and isn't our long term answer anyways."
There's no justifiable reason to give him the start over a healthy Wallace unless you revise the depth chart. That would mean the organization would be committing to McCoy as the QB for the next couple of years -- or at least formally commit to evaluating him to be that guy.
I think this "controversy" will get resolved by Holmgren making a public statement, to be honest. Everyone sees a week-to-week mentality behind Mangini's decisions, whereas Holmgren will look at the "three year timeline."
If you change the depth chart to put McCoy on top of it, you've got a big problem...
Eventually, he's going to play a bad game. It happens to Peyton Manning. It happened to Drew Brees last week. The Sam Bradfords and Andrew Lucks of the world get a pass when they lay an egg as a rookie. The franchise has already committed to them, so they get the benefit of the doubt.
Fans and media are by their nature fickle and possess horrible long term memory. Colt plays a bad game and he probably doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because of his draft position; one bad game and you'll hear a lot of "wow, this kid isn't the guy, we need Andrew Luck or Jake Locker." So you either bring Jake or Seneca back in (instant musical-chairs QB drama), or you let McCoy play through it in the face of a media that has quickly returned to their preseason impression. "Why are you playing McCoy? He's a project at best and isn't our long term answer anyways."
There's no justifiable reason to give him the start over a healthy Wallace unless you revise the depth chart. That would mean the organization would be committing to McCoy as the QB for the next couple of years -- or at least formally commit to evaluating him to be that guy.
I think this "controversy" will get resolved by Holmgren making a public statement, to be honest. Everyone sees a week-to-week mentality behind Mangini's decisions, whereas Holmgren will look at the "three year timeline."
Your last sentence says it all. I seriously doubt Homgren's three year plan includes Seneca Wallace as the starting QB. The biggest hole to fill for the Browns is at wide receiver and I believe they will either draft a receiver with their first pick or select the best blue chipper they can find to trade for an existing NFL receiver.
Mangini has already been quoted as saying he was not going to choose a starter based on the future, but would choose whoever has the best chance of winning the next game. Not a good perspective for the head coach in my opinion when the boss, Holmgren, has already gone on record he would have to see Colt play in 4-5 more games to make a future decision.
Either Wallace or McCoy would be fine for this year, but I think they have to answer the future QB question this year now that they are where they are, or we're all wrong and they already have made up their mind to go with "none of the above" and find someone new next year. I doubt that though given their other needs.
As to the inevitable bad game, that will happen. The key is to not have 3 or 4 bad games in a row.
Here's the Browns depth chart from NFL.com. It needs to be updated.
http://www.nfl.com/teams/clevelandbrowns/depthchart?team=CLE
-
The way i look at it is this...this year is clearly over for us.....but there is hope im so sick of picking a new QB every year...go with colt let him run the offense trade away seneca for a WR colt needs to develop a relationship with our WR core.....the thing that i truly believe is that if we can fix this QB mess we can make a legit run at the playoffs next year...and colt needs to be that guy in my opinion i dont want to draft another QB. colt is hard working and doesnt take being in the NFL for granted, hes our guy
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