Colt should start the rest of the season
-
Did I miss something? Somebody else made an issue of the color of the player's skin?
Maybe I missed it, but I thought you brought it up unnecessarily.
In my opinion its people such as yourself that jump all over the topic of skin color when its brought up that allows racism to even continue being an issue in this country. Just let it go man
In my opinion its people such as yourself that jump all over the topic of skin color when its brought up that allows racism to even continue being an issue in this country. Just let it go man
yikes! i'm with Calfox on this, it totally was unnecessary.
and in my opinion people that segregate and see in color constantly need called out.
can't WAIT til we all get blurred and populated by simple shades and pigments.
-
and this thread was started sometime around half time
when i responded to it i was thinking the same thing.....there is still a lot of time left
up to that point colt hadnt done a whole lot and had only thrown the ball 16 times
i know you guys are loving colt and for good reason, but considering he is only starting due to injuries, i wouldnt say that he is the best QB on the team
whats wrong with letting him sit and learn when jake and seneca are healthy?
You have to go with the hot hand. McCoy is still learning, and while he is managing the game well, he is still the hot hand, and you have to stick with it! It can only help him, and keep the momentum going, as well as continuing to gain confidence week after week.
You have to go with the hot hand. McCoy is still learning, and while he is managing the game well, he is still the hot hand, and you have to stick with it! It can only help him, and keep the momentum going, as well as continuing to gain confidence week after week.
the team is the hot hand, imo.iirc, seneca was the QB hot hand vs atlanta after beating the bengals the week before. so, how is that not hypocrytical?
-
in the browns case, the running game opens up the passing game.....not the other way around
sure there are lots of examples of QBs coming in and doing well when the starters go down.....there are also lots of examples of the exact opposite
david carr, alex smith.....im not even going to get into the browns QBs because that basically sums up the history of browns QBs.....tim couch, holcomb, frye, anderson, etc etc etc
something the browns havent done over a consistant basis for several years is stick to the plan.....the plan is to let colt learn behind seneca and jake
i know browns fans are impatient but they arent makin the playoffs this year......why get him hurt and risk the future that we all know is very bright?
Because we are not making the playoffs is the reason to start him. Our season is basically over, so what is the point of going back to a QB that is only supposed to be here fora year or two or to a QB that was supposed to be a back up until he retires in 5-7 years. Since the season is just about guaranteed to end with out a playoff birth, and with a draft coming up heavy with potential franchise QB's, we need to know how good Colt is NOW. You can not guarantee that he is going to be good off of 3 games no matter how good the teams were and no matter how impressive the performance was. The rest of the season is where we will be able to judge just how good Colt is. We can't just sit back and go "the experiment is over time to put back in the old guys and hope we didn't make a mistake". This isn't like the past years where we pushed people into soon. Back then we did it because we wanted to win NOW, this year we are doing it so we can tell if we need to sell the car and pick up a newer model. We can not sit around anymore and pray and hope. We did that with Quinn and look where it got us. We NEED to know if Colt is the future starter, future back up, or future waiver wire pick up for another team. So please stop saying he is the best, the future, and continue to say how we need to sit him.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Because we are not making the playoffs is the reason to start him. Our season is basically over, so what is the point of going back to a QB that is only supposed to be here fora year or two or to a QB that was supposed to be a back up until he retires in 5-7 years. Since the season is just about guaranteed to end with out a playoff birth, and with a draft coming up heavy with potential franchise QB's, we need to know how good Colt is NOW. You can not guarantee that he is going to be good off of 3 games no matter how good the teams were and no matter how impressive the performance was. The rest of the season is where we will be able to judge just how good Colt is. We can't just sit back and go "the experiment is over time to put back in the old guys and hope we didn't make a mistake". This isn't like the past years where we pushed people into soon. Back then we did it because we wanted to win NOW, this year we are doing it so we can tell if we need to sell the car and pick up a newer model. We can not sit around anymore and pray and hope. We did that with Quinn and look where it got us. We NEED to know if Colt is the future starter, future back up, or future waiver wire pick up for another team. So please stop saying he is the best, the future, and continue to say how we need to sit him.you say we're just about guaranteed not to make the playoffs?!? wow! you know, i liked quite a few of your posts until this one.
EDIT: i just read how stupid you think it is to protect your starters when games are meaningless because injuries can happen whenever. so i guess teams should play their franchise QBs every snap all preseason long, or during end of the season games when you're already a lock for the playoffs, like the Colts did when they lost with their backups and killed our playoff hopes. you might think it's stupid, and guys can get hurt whenever, but you're absolutely dense if you don't think limiting risk to the guys that get it done is a good idea. in fact it's not only a good idea, it's what teams do.
so our season is over after 8 games with 3 wins? when we've been in every game, and all those losses against winning teams?
what if we win the next 4 straight, are our playoff hopes still over then?
it's a long season, still plenty of time to turn it around. we have only played our division once each for heaven's sake. not even close to being time to panic.
H-I-B, you also say seneca still might have 5-7 years left in him (your words). the team was just starting to really gel vs the Bengals, as was SW in the new offensive system. they had a nice lead in the next game vs ATL and all signs pointed to Wallace leading the Browns to a win when he unfortunately left the game due to injury. not just managing the game, but leading the team to victory with a sophisticated gameplan.
after 8 (9?) years of solid sustainability in the NFL, 2-3 games in CLE have shown it's now overwhelmingly clear we should totally give up on the guy as a viable starter and pass him by for our rookie. do i have that right?
you want to reestablish the QB depth chart after 3 games the coaches game-planned around a rookie in order to know whether or not they should draft a QB in April. do i have that right?
if that's your entire reason for playing Colt i can't say i can agree at all. let's leave the drafting up to the one's qualified to do so and just win some effin games, no matter who's at QB.
you cited how previous Browns teams have been forced to start rookies, like Frye, too early. the difference between previous Browns teams and now is that THIS team was specifically built so the rookie doesn't have to be rushed into starting, unless injury forced of course. so why continue the same trend?
we as fans always love to put the cart before the horse in CLE. Colt's played awesome, and against some great opponents, but i still think it's paramount to let the kid season a bit more.
or, we could blow off the season to see if he's our franchise QB and risk getting him hurt.
i bet season ticket holders would love that one.
if the season's a wash by week 12, i'm all about enduring his growing pains then. but certainly not now just to see if he's our future guy.
the reason teams like the Steelers and the Colts are consistent winners year after year is because their depth chart is like shark teeth. one falls out, there's another that's been growing behind it ready to step up to fill the hole. this concept has been proven to work again and again, but it requires patience and emotionless decision-making, something the previous fan-influenced CLE coaching staffs have lacked, hopefully up until now.
or, maybe Colt actually gives us the best chance to win. is it possible?
it's drama like this that makes the NFL the original and very best reality tv on the planet.
-
wrong on every level.
the browns have been in every game this year but could never get over the top with the exception of the bengals game. neither jake or seneca was making those plays that sustained the drives to give the browns the W. the first 4 losses of the season are indicative of this.
the browns aren't only winning with colt mccoy. they are winning decisively. it is clear that he has emerged as the new leader of the browns. the way that he kept those drives alive yesterday is testament that he gives the browns a chance to win every single game that they play for the rest of the season.
you need to watch game film of delhomme from TB and ATL games this year before saying he IS a smart QB. he WAS a smart qb. seneca is exactly what we need as a back-up but from watching every game this year, it is clear that he can't carry the team on his back in the same way that colt can.
i was wrong that colt should start if he truely is the best QB on the team?....am i wrong about that too?
the browns were in every game this season against some tough competition......except colts first start against the pittsburgh steelers which is the browns biggest rival......the browns are a good team that has played the toughest schedule in the league so far this season.....its unfortunate because the record is not indicative of how good they are
the browns also traded jerome harrison for mike bell.....maybe mike bell is the reason they have won so many games. maybe stuckey and robiskie playing more is the reason. maybe starting the backup RT due to injury is the reason. maybe playing rubin over rogers was the reason for so much success
maybe its not?
there are a lot of things that have changed for the browns this season and pointing to colt as the reason is ignoring the big picture. fwiw the browns have only won 3 games so far this season and you cant honestly say that colt is the reason 2 of those wins
i was wrong that colt should start if he truely is the best QB on the team?....am i wrong about that too?
the browns were in every game this season against some tough competition......except colts first start against the pittsburgh steelers which is the browns biggest rival......the browns are a good team that has played the toughest schedule in the league so far this season.....its unfortunate because the record is not indicative of how good they are
the browns also traded jerome harrison for mike bell.....maybe mike bell is the reason they have won so many games. maybe stuckey and robiskie playing more is the reason. maybe starting the backup RT due to injury is the reason. maybe playing rubin over rogers was the reason for so much success
maybe its not?
there are a lot of things that have changed for the browns this season and pointing to colt as the reason is ignoring the big picture. fwiw the browns have only won 3 games so far this season and you cant honestly say that colt is the reason 2 of those wins
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
-
It looks to me that he is ready to win games. He beat the defending SB Champs and he beat the team with the best record in football. I guess if you consider the Saints and the Pats "not much" then perhaps he hasn't done much. But he "lead" them the way any QB leads a team. Some win by throwing for 450 yards. Others win by doing all the right things at the right time. So far, that is what McCoy has done.
i disagree, Gipper, and my reasoning is not splitting hairs either. contrary to what you wrote, he did not "beat" those teams the way Tom Brady and Peyton Manning beat teams. sure, he checked out of some plays into better ones and took stellar care of the football but let's be real: he started at QB against the defending SB champs and the team won. he started at QB against the team with the best record in football and again, the Browns won. let's call it like it is.
re: the game, loved what Colt showed us again.
re: starting the rest of the season, i feel when it's time to commit to Colt, we commit to Colt all the way. the team is playing awesome around him and if the Coaches, FO, etc feel the rookie gives the Browns the best chance to win, i'm behind it all the way. and that means through the good and the bad.
some on here have posted that they feel after the other 2 QBs return from injury Colt should be the guy for the rest of the season...unless he starts playing poorly, making mistakes, or however you want to word it. then and only then you bench him, if i understand them correctly. well that's where i differ. imo don't make him "the guy" until you're sure, and you stick with him through it all, coaching him up the whole way.
that's where i'm coming from when i cast my JD and SW votes fwiw.
i disagree, Gipper, and my reasoning and is not splitting hairs either. contrary to what you wrote, imo he started at QB against the defending SB champs and the team won. he started at QB against the team with the best record on football and again, the Browns won. let's call it like it is.
re: the game, loved what Colt showed us again.
re: starting the rest of the season, i feel when it's time to commit to Colt, we commit to Colt all the way. the team is playing awesome around him and if the Coaches, FO, etc feel the rookie gives the Browns the best chance to win, i'm behind it all the way. and that means through the good and the bad.
some on here have posted that they feel after the other 2 QBs return from injury Colt should be the guy for the rest of the season...unless he starts playing poorly, making mistakes, or however you want to word it. then and only then you bench him, if i understand them correctly. well that's where i differ. imo don't make him "the guy" until you're sure, and you stick with him through it all, coaching him up the whole way.
that's where i'm coming from when i cast my JD and SW votes fwiw.
agreed.....you dont just start him until he screws up then bench him
thats not the continuity the browns need. they need a guy who can lead them to victory when the game is on the line and colt isnt ready for that IMO. seneca and jake are better prepared for those situations and if the gameplan remains the same with either of them at QB then the browns should continue to win games
but "riding the hot hand" is something you do with a running back or WR. you dont do that with a QB. they are too important to an offense and if and when jake and seneca get back, they should start on the simple basis that they are better and more experienced as of now
-
i was wrong that colt should start if he truely is the best QB on the team?....am i wrong about that too?
the browns were in every game this season against some tough competition......except colts first start against the pittsburgh steelers which is the browns biggest rival......the browns are a good team that has played the toughest schedule in the league so far this season.....its unfortunate because the record is not indicative of how good they are
the browns also traded jerome harrison for mike bell.....maybe mike bell is the reason they have won so many games. maybe stuckey and robiskie playing more is the reason. maybe starting the backup RT due to injury is the reason. maybe playing rubin over rogers was the reason for so much success
maybe its not?
there are a lot of things that have changed for the browns this season and pointing to colt as the reason is ignoring the big picture. fwiw the browns have only won 3 games so far this season and you cant honestly say that colt is the reason 2 of those wins
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
-
i was wrong that colt should start if he truely is the best QB on the team?....am i wrong about that too?
the browns were in every game this season against some tough competition......except colts first start against the pittsburgh steelers which is the browns biggest rival......the browns are a good team that has played the toughest schedule in the league so far this season.....its unfortunate because the record is not indicative of how good they are
the browns also traded jerome harrison for mike bell.....maybe mike bell is the reason they have won so many games. maybe stuckey and robiskie playing more is the reason. maybe starting the backup RT due to injury is the reason. maybe playing rubin over rogers was the reason for so much success
maybe its not?
there are a lot of things that have changed for the browns this season and pointing to colt as the reason is ignoring the big picture. fwiw the browns have only won 3 games so far this season and you cant honestly say that colt is the reason 2 of those wins
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
i like how you exaggerate Jake's age and Seneca's prior second string status to help illustrate your point.
-
CL, you are perhaps one of the dumbest people I have ever seen on a sports message board.
Long and short, Colt is 2-1 as a starter. Seneca and Jake were a combined 1-4. End of story.
Colt makes amazing plays with his feet. He extends drives.
-
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
Jake played against superior defenses? Better than the Steelers? Better than the Patriots?
-
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
The flaw with your stats is that you're going off of total numbers instead of efficiency, Colt is more efficient than both Delhomme and Senaca. You can just tell from watching Colt that he makes less mistakes too.
I would love to keep Senaca as a backup, but if he's not happy with that, give him kind regards and trade him to the Cowboys, Cardinals, Panthers, anyone who needs a QB(for the Cowboys it's only until Romo gets healthy). I think he can succeed as a solid average QB, hard to believe Seattle favored Whitehurst over Senaca.
-
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
Jake played against superior defenses? Better than the Steelers? Better than the Patriots?
Jake played against superior defenses? Better than the Steelers? Better than the Patriots?
howd colt do against the steelers there champ?
the pats defense is bottom 3rd in the league
the falcons and buccs have 2 of the better pass defenses in the league
-
CL, you are perhaps one of the dumbest people I have ever seen on a sports message board.
Long and short, Colt is 2-1 as a starter. Seneca and Jake were a combined 1-4. End of story.
Colt makes amazing plays with his feet. He extends drives.
CL, you are perhaps one of the dumbest people I have ever seen on a sports message board.
Long and short, Colt is 2-1 as a starter. Seneca and Jake were a combined 1-4. End of story.
Colt makes amazing plays with his feet. He extends drives.
and joe thomas is the best tackle in the league.....whats his overall career record? i bet its pretty terrible
you are crediting colt for a team win a discrediting jake and seneca for team losses......thats cool tho
it shows that there are people dumber than me
-
He might not be the sole reason for the wins. But I tell you what he has done FAR FAR better then Jake or Seneca - Cut down on penaltys and turnovers - The little things are what keeps you from getting the edge at the end of a game - and so far, Colt has done well. He just seems to command the offense better thus far. Why the hell would you bench him with things going well with him. I guess the idea of a 60yr old QB or a career 3rd string QB is just to tantilizing....
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
You cannot pick a QB based on the numbers. You have to take into account the intangibles. Like knowing when to throw the ball away rather then throwing into triple coverage. He has not commited big turnover or penaltys WHEN IT COUNTS. So he HAS done a far better job. Look at people like Brett Favre. He can throw for 500 yards, but lose the game throwing costly int's when it counts. Oh, and the most important stat - WINS.
And like I said before, you cant determine if he is going to start the rest of the season. Gotta go game to game.
-
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
The flaw with your stats is that you're going off of total numbers instead of efficiency, Colt is more efficient than both Delhomme and Senaca. You can just tell from watching Colt that he makes less mistakes too.
I would love to keep Senaca as a backup, but if he's not happy with that, give him kind regards and trade him to the Cowboys, Cardinals, Panthers, anyone who needs a QB(for the Cowboys it's only until Romo gets healthy). I think he can succeed as a solid average QB, hard to believe Seattle favored Whitehurst over Senaca.
The flaw with your stats is that you're going off of total numbers instead of efficiency, Colt is more efficient than both Delhomme and Senaca. You can just tell from watching Colt that he makes less mistakes too.
colt hasnt made less mistakes than seneca.....he hasnt been more successful than seneca either
and when you are looking at the stats at the end of the game, you can say colt has been more efficient......but when you turn on the games you pickup on little things like the gameplan that is based around short passes and high percentage passes
colt doesnt throw the ball deep very much, and when he does its usually incomplete.....what colt does is throw the ball short......he completes 4 yard passes once or twice every series and the occassional 3rd down pass to keep drives alive
-
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
You cannot pick a QB based on the numbers. You have to take into account the intangibles. Like knowing when to throw the ball away rather then throwing into triple coverage. He has not commited big turnover or penaltys WHEN IT COUNTS. So he HAS done a far better job. Look at people like Brett Favre. He can throw for 500 yards, but lose the game throwing costly int's when it counts. Oh, and the most important stat - WINS.
And like I said before, you cant determine if he is going to start the rest of the season. Gotta go game to game.
You cannot pick a QB based on the numbers. You have to take into account the intangibles. Like knowing when to throw the ball away rather then throwing into triple coverage. He has not commited big turnover or penaltys WHEN IT COUNTS. So he HAS done a far better job. Look at people like Brett Favre. He can throw for 500 yards, but lose the game throwing costly int's when it counts. Oh, and the most important stat - WINS.
you are going to throw the numbers out? then what are you going to judge colt on? because if you are looking at the intangibles like arm strength, decision making, and experience then you have to go with the other 2
penalties on a QB? when? what penalties did jake or seneca get?
and the only stat that matters is wins.......colt has 2 wins as a starter.....the browns are a team tho. you can say that colt won those games, but then id know for sure that you werent watching. you can say that colt has played better, but then id really know you werent watching.
the browns won 2 games as a team when colt was the starter......THEY DIDNT WIN BECAUSE OF COLT MCCOY
im not sure i can say it any clearer than that
-
You cannot pick a QB based on the numbers. You have to take into account the intangibles. Like knowing when to throw the ball away rather then throwing into triple coverage. He has not commited big turnover or penaltys WHEN IT COUNTS. So he HAS done a far better job. Look at people like Brett Favre. He can throw for 500 yards, but lose the game throwing costly int's when it counts. Oh, and the most important stat - WINS.
you are going to throw the numbers out? then what are you going to judge colt on? because if you are looking at the intangibles like arm strength, decision making, and experience then you have to go with the other 2
penalties on a QB? when? what penalties did jake or seneca get?
and the only stat that matters is wins.......colt has 2 wins as a starter.....the browns are a team tho. you can say that colt won those games, but then id know for sure that you werent watching. you can say that colt has played better, but then id really know you werent watching.
the browns won 2 games as a team when colt was the starter......THEY DIDNT WIN BECAUSE OF COLT MCCOY
im not sure i can say it any clearer than that
you are going to throw the numbers out? then what are you going to judge colt on? because if you are looking at the intangibles like arm strength, decision making, and experience then you have to go with the other 2
penalties on a QB? when? what penalties did jake or seneca get?
and the only stat that matters is wins.......colt has 2 wins as a starter.....the browns are a team tho. you can say that colt won those games, but then id know for sure that you werent watching. you can say that colt has played better, but then id really know you werent watching.
the browns won 2 games as a team when colt was the starter......THEY DIDNT WIN BECAUSE OF COLT MCCOY
im not sure i can say it any clearer than that
Wow, you really dont know anything about football. I didnt say throw the numbers out - But this isnt fantasy football. "All he has had is two wins in his first three games" Please stick to fantasy football, you obviously have completely missed the point of real football.
-
he hasnt done far far better than jake or seneca......he has 1 TD and 2 INTs in 3 games
he has only thrown for 530 yards
the only thing he has done is started when the browns won the game
jake also has 1 INT but has played against superior defenses and has had to throw the ball more in his games
seneca has nearly 700 yards passing with 4 TDs and 2 INTs
if you ask me who the best QB is by looking at those numbers, id say seneca by a landslide
he isnt a career 3rd stringer.....hes backed up one of the most consistant QBs in the NFL for the past several years and come in and performed well when hasselback goes down
Jake played against superior defenses? Better than the Steelers? Better than the Patriots?
Jake played against superior defenses? Better than the Steelers? Better than the Patriots?
Patriots defense was ranked 28th going into the game, and the Browns D neutralized their 29.3 scoring average.some Colt homerism combined with an innate Brownie desire to play with the new shiny toy=CL having absolutely no chance in this thread, regardless of having some salient points. but that's just like, my opinion, man.
-
you are going to throw the numbers out? then what are you going to judge colt on? because if you are looking at the intangibles like arm strength, decision making, and experience then you have to go with the other 2
penalties on a QB? when? what penalties did jake or seneca get?
and the only stat that matters is wins.......colt has 2 wins as a starter.....the browns are a team tho. you can say that colt won those games, but then id know for sure that you werent watching. you can say that colt has played better, but then id really know you werent watching.
the browns won 2 games as a team when colt was the starter......THEY DIDNT WIN BECAUSE OF COLT MCCOY
im not sure i can say it any clearer than that
Wow, you really dont know anything about football. I didnt say throw the numbers out - But this isnt fantasy football. "All he has had is two wins in his first three games" Please stick to fantasy football, you obviously have completely missed the point of real football.
Wow, you really dont know anything about football. I didnt say throw the numbers out - But this isnt fantasy football. "All he has had is two wins in his first three games" Please stick to fantasy football, you obviously have completely missed the point of real football.
instead of trying to prove that your dick is bigger than mine.....why dont you explain to me why i dont know football or how the browns wins have anything to do with the starting QB?
-
Jake played against superior defenses? Better than the Steelers? Better than the Patriots?
Patriots defense was ranked 28th going into the game, and the Browns D neutralized their 29.3 scoring average.some Colt homerism combined with an innate Brownie desire to play with the new shiny toy=CL having absolutely no chance in this thread, regardless of having some salient points. but that's just like, my opinion, man.
Patriots defense was ranked 28th going into the game, and the Browns D neutralized their 29.3 scoring average.
some Colt homerism combined with an innate Brownie desire to play with the new shiny toy=CL having absolutely no chance in this thread, regardless of having some salient points. but that's just like, my opinion, man.
Its not homerism. I am not saying hes gonna be Joe Montana, or even win the next game. But you have a rookie QB, with alot of pressue on him come into games and do relatively well - while winning . He is maturing and gaining good exp, and has the potential to be a great QB. Also, players will rally around a QB. So you are saying, lets mess with the good chemistry we have had over the last few games and toss in the band-aids we traded for. So please explain the logic on pulling him out.
-
Disclaimer: I just signed up with nfl.com game rewind.. and have been going over game footage.
One thing that Colt has not yet delivered is a deep ball from the pocket. He's thrown deep on the run really well, but not from behind the offensive line during the initial stages of the play. There have been a few attempts, but none of them have really been on target enough for a completion.
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