Phil Taylor Ready To Get Ben Roethlisberger
-
Smack talking rookie. You gotta love it. The cockiness.
-
I would say Mitchell and Benard will be in the equation starting opposite of Sheard. Roth doesn't fit with the scheme, as Heckert has said repeatedly he wants to go with more speed and athleticism at DE.
Drafting Taylor is more reminiscent of the lines Jauron had in Chicago with Ted Washington and Keith Traylor. Huge guys in the middle and athleticism on the ends.
-
I would say Mitchell and Benard will be in the equation starting opposite of Sheard. Roth doesn't fit with the scheme, as Heckert has said repeatedly he wants to go with more speed and athleticism at DE.
Drafting Taylor is more reminiscent of the lines Jauron had in Chicago with Ted Washington and Keith Traylor. Huge guys in the middle and athleticism on the ends.
I would say Mitchell and Benard will be in the equation starting opposite of Sheard. Roth doesn't fit with the scheme, as Heckert has said repeatedly he wants to go with more speed and athleticism at DE.
Drafting Taylor is more reminiscent of the lines Jauron had in Chicago with Ted Washington and Keith Traylor. Huge guys in the middle and athleticism on the ends.
I'm not really here to rain on the parade but what makes anyone think all these rookies are going to hit the field? I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren chooses to "slow play' most of them much like the Steelers do. Although Lebeau's defense is notoriously difficult to grasp so rookies in our scheme usually don't start right away. We may have one or two this year tho with Heyward and possible Curtis Brown.
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth, they usually don't back it up right away and all he's doing is creating bulletin board material EARLY in the process.
AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month) -
I would say Mitchell and Benard will be in the equation starting opposite of Sheard. Roth doesn't fit with the scheme, as Heckert has said repeatedly he wants to go with more speed and athleticism at DE.
Drafting Taylor is more reminiscent of the lines Jauron had in Chicago with Ted Washington and Keith Traylor. Huge guys in the middle and athleticism on the ends.
I'm not really here to rain on the parade but what makes anyone think all these rookies are going to hit the field? I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren chooses to "slow play' most of them much like the Steelers do. Although Lebeau's defense is notoriously difficult to grasp so rookies in our scheme usually don't start right away. We may have one or two this year tho with Heyward and possible Curtis Brown.
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth, they usually don't back it up right away and all he's doing is creating bulletin board material EARLY in the process.
Homotron said:
I'm not really here to rain on the parade but what makes anyone think all these rookies are going to hit the field? I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren chooses to "slow play' most of them much like the Steelers do. Although Lebeau's defense is notoriously difficult to grasp so rookies in our scheme usually don't start right away. We may have one or two this year tho with Heyward and possible Curtis Brown.
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth, they usually don't back it up right away and all he's doing is creating bulletin board material EARLY in the process.
In the Browns case we know that these guys are going to start right away because we don't have players at those positions. We have only one 4-3 DE on the roster who has never started a game in his 5 year NFL career so Sheard is a sure thing to start, I'm 90% sure Taylor starts right out of the gate as well when the only guys at DT we have besides Rubin are DE's being moved to DT or undrafted guys be pulled off our practice squad at the end of the season.
-
Homotron said:
I'm not really here to rain on the parade but what makes anyone think all these rookies are going to hit the field? I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren chooses to "slow play' most of them much like the Steelers do. Although Lebeau's defense is notoriously difficult to grasp so rookies in our scheme usually don't start right away. We may have one or two this year tho with Heyward and possible Curtis Brown.
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth, they usually don't back it up right away and all he's doing is creating bulletin board material EARLY in the process.
In the Browns case we know that these guys are going to start right away because we don't have players at those positions. We have only one 4-3 DE on the roster who has never started a game in his 5 year NFL career so Sheard is a sure thing to start, I'm 90% sure Taylor starts right out of the gate as well when the only guys at DT we have besides Rubin are DE's being moved to DT or undrafted guys be pulled off our practice squad at the end of the season.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
In the Browns case we know that these guys are going to start right away because we don't have players at those positions. We have only one 4-3 DE on the roster who has never started a game in his 5 year NFL career so Sheard is a sure thing to start, I'm 90% sure Taylor starts right out of the gate as well when the only guys at DT we have besides Rubin are DE's being moved to DT or undrafted guys be pulled off our practice squad at the end of the season.
Don't discredit the potential for free agents if and when this lock out ever ends. I'd say one of the worst things you can do with a rookie is throw him into the starting line up when he's not ready. It has the potential to kill confidence and form bad habits.
AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month) -
In my opinion if you take a 1st round pick and he isn't starting by the end of the season you failed with that pick. You shouldn't be taking backups in the first round. Plus the FO isn't going to spend the money on someone good enough to start when they just picked Taylor. They are going to use the money on other positions of need like LB and Safety.
-
In my opinion if you take a 1st round pick and he isn't starting by the end of the season you failed with that pick. You shouldn't be taking backups in the first round. Plus the FO isn't going to spend the money on someone good enough to start when they just picked Taylor. They are going to use the money on other positions of need like LB and Safety.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
In my opinion if you take a 1st round pick and he isn't starting by the end of the season you failed with that pick. You shouldn't be taking backups in the first round. Plus the FO isn't going to spend the money on someone good enough to start when they just picked Taylor. They are going to use the money on other positions of need like LB and Safety.
I guess the Steelers do it wrong then. Timmons didn't start year one, Polamalu didn't start year one, Woodley didn't start year one. Ziggy Hood didn't start year one. Jason Worilds didn't start year one. Mind you Woodley and Worilds aren't first rounders but you get the point. No reason to rush rookies in to the starting line up unless of course talent across the board is less than stellar and they are forced in to the line up. How many rookies have made a significant impact over the last decade? I know there have been a bunch but there have also been guys not forced in to the line up as rookies. Pouncey was forced to start for us this past season and excelled thankfully.
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
In my opinion if you take a 1st round pick and he isn't starting by the end of the season you failed with that pick. You shouldn't be taking backups in the first round. Plus the FO isn't going to spend the money on someone good enough to start when they just picked Taylor. They are going to use the money on other positions of need like LB and Safety.
I guess the Steelers do it wrong then. Timmons didn't start year one, Polamalu didn't start year one, Woodley didn't start year one. Ziggy Hood didn't start year one. Jason Worilds didn't start year one. Mind you Woodley and Worilds aren't first rounders but you get the point. No reason to rush rookies in to the starting line up unless of course talent across the board is less than stellar and they are forced in to the line up. How many rookies have made a significant impact over the last decade? I know there have been a bunch but there have also been guys not forced in to the line up as rookies. Pouncey was forced to start for us this past season and excelled thankfully.
Homotron said:
I guess the Steelers do it wrong then. Timmons didn't start year one, Polamalu didn't start year one, Woodley didn't start year one. Ziggy Hood didn't start year one. Jason Worilds didn't start year one. Mind you Woodley and Worilds aren't first rounders but you get the point. No reason to rush rookies in to the starting line up unless of course talent across the board is less than stellar and they are forced in to the line up. How many rookies have made a significant impact over the last decade? I know there have been a bunch but there have also been guys not forced in to the line up as rookies. Pouncey was forced to start for us this past season and excelled thankfully.
why do you even need to ask when u know the answer....
i wont bore u with the details....but this isn't exactly the ideal situation to be bringing along rookies slowly.
-
Homotron said:
I guess the Steelers do it wrong then. Timmons didn't start year one, Polamalu didn't start year one, Woodley didn't start year one. Ziggy Hood didn't start year one. Jason Worilds didn't start year one. Mind you Woodley and Worilds aren't first rounders but you get the point. No reason to rush rookies in to the starting line up unless of course talent across the board is less than stellar and they are forced in to the line up. How many rookies have made a significant impact over the last decade? I know there have been a bunch but there have also been guys not forced in to the line up as rookies. Pouncey was forced to start for us this past season and excelled thankfully.
why do you even need to ask when u know the answer....
i wont bore u with the details....but this isn't exactly the ideal situation to be bringing along rookies slowly.
why do you even need to ask when u know the answer....
i wont bore u with the details....but this isn't exactly the ideal situation to be bringing along rookies slowly.
Umm it certainly could and can be. It's not like the talent pool fielding last season was awful and with the further maturation of McCoy and maybe a few key free agents the Browns could be fine. If you continue to rush rookies, you continue to dance with the devil. Obviously certain players can succeed but I'd say that's more of a rarity and most can and will agree. Rush a bunch of guys and send them to the sh.itter you aren't any better come next draft. The AFC North isn't exactly the best division to experiment either. Just my own personal observation/opinion. I wouldn't rush any of the rookies in to the starting line up until they are absolutely ready or the Browns are completely desperate. A lot of teams will still make a splash in free agency, plus ALL the undrafted guys.
AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month) -
I would say Mitchell and Benard will be in the equation starting opposite of Sheard. Roth doesn't fit with the scheme, as Heckert has said repeatedly he wants to go with more speed and athleticism at DE.
Drafting Taylor is more reminiscent of the lines Jauron had in Chicago with Ted Washington and Keith Traylor. Huge guys in the middle and athleticism on the ends.
I'm not really here to rain on the parade but what makes anyone think all these rookies are going to hit the field? I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren chooses to "slow play' most of them much like the Steelers do. Although Lebeau's defense is notoriously difficult to grasp so rookies in our scheme usually don't start right away. We may have one or two this year tho with Heyward and possible Curtis Brown.
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth, they usually don't back it up right away and all he's doing is creating bulletin board material EARLY in the process.
Homotron said:
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth
is mendenhall a rookie? DUMB
-
why do you even need to ask when u know the answer....
i wont bore u with the details....but this isn't exactly the ideal situation to be bringing along rookies slowly.
Umm it certainly could and can be. It's not like the talent pool fielding last season was awful and with the further maturation of McCoy and maybe a few key free agents the Browns could be fine. If you continue to rush rookies, you continue to dance with the devil. Obviously certain players can succeed but I'd say that's more of a rarity and most can and will agree. Rush a bunch of guys and send them to the sh.itter you aren't any better come next draft. The AFC North isn't exactly the best division to experiment either. Just my own personal observation/opinion. I wouldn't rush any of the rookies in to the starting line up until they are absolutely ready or the Browns are completely desperate. A lot of teams will still make a splash in free agency, plus ALL the undrafted guys.
Homotron said:
Umm it certainly could and can be. It's not like the talent pool fielding last season was awful and with the further maturation of McCoy and maybe a few key free agents the Browns could be fine. If you continue to rush rookies, you continue to dance with the devil. Obviously certain players can succeed but I'd say that's more of a rarity and most can and will agree. Rush a bunch of guys and send them to the sh.itter you aren't any better come next draft. The AFC North isn't exactly the best division to experiment either. Just my own personal observation/opinion. I wouldn't rush any of the rookies in to the starting line up until they are absolutely ready or the Browns are completely desperate. A lot of teams will still make a splash in free agency, plus ALL the undrafted guys.
Why should the Browns bring spend good money on guys in FA that they only want to start for a year or two!? That doesn't make sense, the FA's that we pick up need to be for positions we still have a strong need for, getting a high priced DT isn't in the best interests of the team right now. On top of that it wasn't the fact that the Browns used their rookies too soon that they have failed over the past decade, it was the fact that the rookie they brought in were horrible.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
Homotron said:
Umm it certainly could and can be. It's not like the talent pool fielding last season was awful and with the further maturation of McCoy and maybe a few key free agents the Browns could be fine. If you continue to rush rookies, you continue to dance with the devil. Obviously certain players can succeed but I'd say that's more of a rarity and most can and will agree. Rush a bunch of guys and send them to the sh.itter you aren't any better come next draft. The AFC North isn't exactly the best division to experiment either. Just my own personal observation/opinion. I wouldn't rush any of the rookies in to the starting line up until they are absolutely ready or the Browns are completely desperate. A lot of teams will still make a splash in free agency, plus ALL the undrafted guys.
Why should the Browns bring spend good money on guys in FA that they only want to start for a year or two!? That doesn't make sense, the FA's that we pick up need to be for positions we still have a strong need for, getting a high priced DT isn't in the best interests of the team right now. On top of that it wasn't the fact that the Browns used their rookies too soon that they have failed over the past decade, it was the fact that the rookie they brought in were horrible.
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
Why should the Browns bring spend good money on guys in FA that they only want to start for a year or two!? That doesn't make sense, the FA's that we pick up need to be for positions we still have a strong need for, getting a high priced DT isn't in the best interests of the team right now. On top of that it wasn't the fact that the Browns used their rookies too soon that they have failed over the past decade, it was the fact that the rookie they brought in were horrible.
Tim Couch was ruined because he was thrown in early in my opinion and I'd be REALLY uncomfortable going in to the season if I felt 4 rookies had a chance to start. I'm honestly not sure why any of you appear excited about it. It just means the team at those positions are really weak because MOST rookies aren't capable of starting right out of the gate, especially at certain positions. I would feel good at all about 2 rookies potentially starting on my defensive line, especially when a lot of the team is going to be completely new to the 4-3 scheme. Just saying. As I said before I didn't chime in to rain on a parade.
EDIT: and as far as the Coaches are concerned you have a completely unproven Head Coach. I'm guessing Holmgren takes a really expanded role but we'll see. Right now I just want the lock out to be over.
2nd edit: and it does make sense to bring in capable free agents to allow for a grooming process with the rookies. Rushing players to start isn't the way to go, it never has been.
-
I would say Mitchell and Benard will be in the equation starting opposite of Sheard. Roth doesn't fit with the scheme, as Heckert has said repeatedly he wants to go with more speed and athleticism at DE.
Drafting Taylor is more reminiscent of the lines Jauron had in Chicago with Ted Washington and Keith Traylor. Huge guys in the middle and athleticism on the ends.
I'm not really here to rain on the parade but what makes anyone think all these rookies are going to hit the field? I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren chooses to "slow play' most of them much like the Steelers do. Although Lebeau's defense is notoriously difficult to grasp so rookies in our scheme usually don't start right away. We may have one or two this year tho with Heyward and possible Curtis Brown.
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth, they usually don't back it up right away and all he's doing is creating bulletin board material EARLY in the process.
Homotron said:
I'm not really here to rain on the parade but what makes anyone think all these rookies are going to hit the field? I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren chooses to "slow play' most of them much like the Steelers do. Although Lebeau's defense is notoriously difficult to grasp so rookies in our scheme usually don't start right away. We may have one or two this year tho with Heyward and possible Curtis Brown.
I also think it's stupid when Rookies run their mouth, they usually don't back it up right away and all he's doing is creating bulletin board material EARLY in the process.
Does "Bulletin Board Material" really help a team win? Talent and coaching help a team win.
Steelers obviously have the defensive coaching with LeBeau back. I also think you are right that Heyward will be a find for the Steelers. Too bad. I think LeBeau will coach him up to meet his potential that he may not have been able to reach had he gone elsewhere..
-
Hillis-iz-Boss said:
In the Browns case we know that these guys are going to start right away because we don't have players at those positions. We have only one 4-3 DE on the roster who has never started a game in his 5 year NFL career so Sheard is a sure thing to start, I'm 90% sure Taylor starts right out of the gate as well when the only guys at DT we have besides Rubin are DE's being moved to DT or undrafted guys be pulled off our practice squad at the end of the season.
Don't discredit the potential for free agents if and when this lock out ever ends. I'd say one of the worst things you can do with a rookie is throw him into the starting line up when he's not ready. It has the potential to kill confidence and form bad habits.
Homotron said:
Don't discredit the potential for free agents if and when this lock out ever ends. I'd say one of the worst things you can do with a rookie is throw him into the starting line up when he's not ready. It has the potential to kill confidence and form bad habits.
I think it is less a problem with a DT than it is for say a QB.
-
Zombo said:
Shut up, Homotron. The Packers started four rookies last year, sometimes five.
Were their fans "REALLY Uncomfortable" that they had a rookie TE, rookie RT, two rookie LBs and a rookie Safety? Hell, they never trailed by more than a TD the entire year.
You play the best players. Phil Taylor will be starting at DT ... that's good for the Browns. DT is not QB, your Tim Couch comparison is laughable. If three other rookies are ready to lineup on oppening day, than that means they were better than the guy that used to play that spot. Just shut up ... why do you have to keep arguing when you are forced into talking out your ass? Just quietly slip away and maybe we'll forget how stupid you are until next time.
Zombo
They HAD to start those rookies because a absurd amount of injuries just like the Steelers. I'd say that's a big difference. I'm also not saying the rookies aren't possibly capable but rather may be forced into the lineup because there isn't anything better. Which in my opinion isn't a positive but rather a negative. I like Phil Taylor and would have liked to have him as a Casey Hampton replacement. I just find it odd that some are excited about 4 rookies starting or possibly starting. It's not a positive. I just means you have sh.it else to start.
-
Homotron said:
Don't discredit the potential for free agents if and when this lock out ever ends. I'd say one of the worst things you can do with a rookie is throw him into the starting line up when he's not ready. It has the potential to kill confidence and form bad habits.
I think it is less a problem with a DT than it is for say a QB.
I think it is less a problem with a DT than it is for say a QB.
I totally agree and that wasn't a direct comparison. Dip sh.it zombo just took it that way. It was said that the rookies that started and failed just sucked and I argued that Couch would have been just fine had he not been rushed under center with absolutely NOTHING around him. The Browns organization ruined Tim Couch. It wasn't because lack of talent, that was my point. Phil Taylor should be fine but then people go on to mention Sheard and 2 others. Little was/is VERY raw and missed a lot of time. I just wouldn't be comfortable with 4 rookies starting. One or two fine, but 4? Most of the time that only happens in time of substantial injury. Insert GB of last year as well as the Steelers. Only we had to emergency sign Adams and put Pouncey in at center.
-
I think it is less a problem with a DT than it is for say a QB.
I totally agree and that wasn't a direct comparison. Dip sh.it zombo just took it that way. It was said that the rookies that started and failed just sucked and I argued that Couch would have been just fine had he not been rushed under center with absolutely NOTHING around him. The Browns organization ruined Tim Couch. It wasn't because lack of talent, that was my point. Phil Taylor should be fine but then people go on to mention Sheard and 2 others. Little was/is VERY raw and missed a lot of time. I just wouldn't be comfortable with 4 rookies starting. One or two fine, but 4? Most of the time that only happens in time of substantial injury. Insert GB of last year as well as the Steelers. Only we had to emergency sign Adams and put Pouncey in at center.
Homotron said:
I totally agree and that wasn't a direct comparison. Dip sh.it zombo just took it that way. It was said that the rookies that started and failed just sucked and I argued that Couch would have been just fine had he not been rushed under center with absolutely NOTHING around him. The Browns organization ruined Tim Couch. It wasn't because lack of talent, that was my point. Phil Taylor should be fine but then people go on to mention Sheard and 2 others. Little was/is VERY raw and missed a lot of time. I just wouldn't be comfortable with 4 rookies starting. One or two fine, but 4? Most of the time that only happens in time of substantial injury. Insert GB of last year as well as the Steelers. Only we had to emergency sign Adams and put Pouncey in at center.
Well, you know, the Browns have the same kind of emergency, unfortunately. The don't have people to play those positions. Especially the D-Line. Maybe at WR they can give Little some time to develop by putting Robo and MoMass in there, but at DLine with the release of Shaun Rogers they really don't have the bodies to fill in. Shear and Taylor will have to come in and contribute right away. Oh, I suppose they could put Schaefering in.....or some street FA that is basically a roster filler, but unless they go out and really get something of quality in whatever FA field will be out there, these two rooks may be the best the Browns have.
-
From the Browns official website, these are the names of the people that play DL for the Browns that show up on their roster:
Titus Adams
Travis Ivy
Jayme Mitchell
Scott Paxson
Ko Quaye
Derreck Robinson
Ahtyba Rubin
Brian Sanford
Brian Schaefering
Robaire Smith
Other than Smith, Schaefering and Rubin I do not recall ever hearing any of these other names called making a tackle when the Browns played this year. Do you?
-
From the Browns official website, these are the names of the people that play DL for the Browns that show up on their roster:
Titus Adams
Travis Ivy
Jayme Mitchell
Scott Paxson
Ko Quaye
Derreck Robinson
Ahtyba Rubin
Brian Sanford
Brian Schaefering
Robaire Smith
Other than Smith, Schaefering and Rubin I do not recall ever hearing any of these other names called making a tackle when the Browns played this year. Do you?
From the Browns official website, these are the names of the people that play DL for the Browns that show up on their roster:
Titus Adams
Travis Ivy
Jayme Mitchell
Scott Paxson
Ko Quaye
Derreck Robinson
Ahtyba Rubin
Brian Sanford
Brian Schaefering
Robaire Smith
Other than Smith, Schaefering and Rubin I do not recall ever hearing any of these other names called making a tackle when the Browns played this year. Do you?
Robinson saw some time and showed some promise, especially in preseason. He should be able to convert to a 4-3 LDE occasionally and also see action at the 3 technique.
Mitchell is not signed yet, but by all accounts Heckert likes him and thinks he could be a nice edge rusher, basically insinuating EM didn't use him like he should have.
.jpg.a1a2b9a0c33008fdaf4097d8fe2cfd64.jpg "Riffer X"){kind=avatar}
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