Just A Reminder
-
alright choco, I'm going to try and rationally explain my point one more time before I'm just done with beating my head against the wall with you. First off, it's vital to look past what NFL'ers say directly and try and determine the indirect result. The NFL is a game of smoke and mirrors, anyone with half a brain understands that. Front office guys say stuff they don't mean or intend all the time, especially around draft day. So no, it has nothing to do with me hearing what I want to hear. It's actually understanding how NFL jargon goes.
The fundamental argument is whether to get the QB first or build the team and get the QB last. I base my opinion on how the vast majority of teams have done it in the past 5-8 years. The Falcons, Saints, Lions, Bengals, Panthers, Bucs, Chargers and Giants all went and got the QB first or traded on a bad team. It's clear to me that people way more in the know than you and I that this is basis of building a team in more cases than not in the current NFL. Franchise QB's make the team around them better. This is basic knowledge and no one denies this. Look at Eli manning, outside of Hakeem Nicks he's working with 3rd round and undrafted WR's and making them look like pro-bowlers. This is same with Brady, it's really not that hard to see. Our offensive line isn't great and it's obvious RT is a need we need to address. But that doesn't excuse Colt for his failures.
When I see Colt this past year, I saw a guy who didn't go through reads, threw behind or too low to receivers constantly, struggled with deep passes, left the pocket early, and wasn't crisp on throws. That's not anyone's fault but his. There were plenty of times where the pocket was there and he just bolted.
As for Holmgren, he's had two years to make a QB and we haven't been in a position to really take a first round, franchise guy. I don't consider after bringing in backups to help a potential guy out a lack of faith. He's been known as a QB guru his whole career, but I'm sure those guys don't know what they're talking about right? If he thinks Colt is the franchise guy, I trust him. If he thinks RGIII or any other guy is the answer, i trust him too.
So what's my bottom line? I'm tired of hearing excuses for bad QB's. "oh he didn't have a run game", "oh his line sucked", "oh the WR core is bad". It's tiring to hear after a while. A franchise guy is a franchise guy and makes the team better. If peyton manning missing this season isn't a prime example of what I'm talking about, I don't know what is. the QB position makes or breaks the team, and you're living in a dream world if you don't see that. But I suppose we could have Anderson and Quinn and Frye still on our roster and wait until we have elite talent to see if they were actually good too.
It's actually understanding how NFL jargon goes.
right, in other words...its left open for interpretation. thanks....
I base my opinion on how the vast majority of teams have done it in the past 5-8 years. The Falcons, Saints, Lions, Bengals, Panthers, Bucs, Chargers and Giants all went and got the QB first or traded on a bad team.
thats the majority of teams? or just the ones that prove your point? perception and reality mismatch....
There were plenty of times where the pocket was there and he just bolted.
there were plenty other times he was on the ground before he hit his third step.
As for Holmgren, he's had two years to make a QB and we haven't been in a position to really take a first round, franchise guy.
you know how many 1st round QB's holmgren has mentored? i believe zero is the correct answer there. i believe farve was his highest draft pick he worked with, and he didn't even draft him. you realize holmgren has made "franchise guys"? i think youre under the incorrect assumption that only 1st rounders are franchise guys. now wherre you should really blow a gasket is that holmgren isn't making the fucking personnel decisions. he pulled his trump card for colt....well, here you are dumping on your saviors hand picked QB.
He's been known as a QB guru his whole career, but I'm sure those guys don't know what they're talking about right? If he thinks Colt is the franchise guy, I trust him.
lol...youre just a clueless as the rest of the holmgren cheerleading parade. holmgren was a great QB mentor, meaning he could teach a guy that was provided to him. holmgren didn't draft or trade for farve, he didn't draft hasselbeck, he didn't draft brunnel. you say QB guru....is say mentor. cause he hasn't once demonstrated an ability to find a QB....which is what you contend this "QB guru" knows how to do. have you even looked at his resume and bio? or do you always believe what people tell you? mcfly?
A franchise guy is a franchise guy and makes the team better.
wow...genius. when you find the franchise QB tree, let us know. m'kay?
If peyton manning missing this season isn't a prime example of what I'm talking about, I don't know what is.
lmao....this is too easy. so, what about matt cassell stepping in when brady went down. please...give me a break with these flimsy arguments that suggest a trend can be lifted from a single season/person event.
the QB position makes or breaks the team, and you're living in a dream world if you don't see that. But I suppose we could have Anderson and Quinn and Frye still on our roster and wait until we have elite talent to see if they were actually good too.
you mean, the person that touches the ball the most has the greatest impact on the teams performance? you dont say? well, no need for the other 21 guys i guess. then why not draft a QB in every round till we get this franchise guy that seems to be the only thing that matters. surely, tim couch agrees.
-
alright choco, I'm going to try and rationally explain my point one more time before I'm just done with beating my head against the wall with you. First off, it's vital to look past what NFL'ers say directly and try and determine the indirect result. The NFL is a game of smoke and mirrors, anyone with half a brain understands that. Front office guys say stuff they don't mean or intend all the time, especially around draft day. So no, it has nothing to do with me hearing what I want to hear. It's actually understanding how NFL jargon goes.
The fundamental argument is whether to get the QB first or build the team and get the QB last. I base my opinion on how the vast majority of teams have done it in the past 5-8 years. The Falcons, Saints, Lions, Bengals, Panthers, Bucs, Chargers and Giants all went and got the QB first or traded on a bad team. It's clear to me that people way more in the know than you and I that this is basis of building a team in more cases than not in the current NFL. Franchise QB's make the team around them better. This is basic knowledge and no one denies this. Look at Eli manning, outside of Hakeem Nicks he's working with 3rd round and undrafted WR's and making them look like pro-bowlers. This is same with Brady, it's really not that hard to see. Our offensive line isn't great and it's obvious RT is a need we need to address. But that doesn't excuse Colt for his failures.
When I see Colt this past year, I saw a guy who didn't go through reads, threw behind or too low to receivers constantly, struggled with deep passes, left the pocket early, and wasn't crisp on throws. That's not anyone's fault but his. There were plenty of times where the pocket was there and he just bolted.
As for Holmgren, he's had two years to make a QB and we haven't been in a position to really take a first round, franchise guy. I don't consider after bringing in backups to help a potential guy out a lack of faith. He's been known as a QB guru his whole career, but I'm sure those guys don't know what they're talking about right? If he thinks Colt is the franchise guy, I trust him. If he thinks RGIII or any other guy is the answer, i trust him too.
So what's my bottom line? I'm tired of hearing excuses for bad QB's. "oh he didn't have a run game", "oh his line sucked", "oh the WR core is bad". It's tiring to hear after a while. A franchise guy is a franchise guy and makes the team better. If peyton manning missing this season isn't a prime example of what I'm talking about, I don't know what is. the QB position makes or breaks the team, and you're living in a dream world if you don't see that. But I suppose we could have Anderson and Quinn and Frye still on our roster and wait until we have elite talent to see if they were actually good too.
how the vast majority of teams have done it in the past 5-8 years. The Falcons, Saints, Lions, Bengals, Panthers, Bucs, Chargers and Giants all went and got the QB first or traded on a bad team.
wrong. wrong. wrong.
those teams (before landing their franchise qb) were stocked with first round picks year in and out. saints had one if not the best OL in the league. remember willie roaf? detroit had one of the best offenses with all those receivers they piled up while matt millen was gm. giants have been consistent for the past 2 decades so they do even belong in the mix. bengals built a great defense with their picks same as the chargers plus added offensive threats. uh oh yeah panthers just suck.
do you see any of those things in cleveland? exactly.
-
Again, you will never be willing take a qb in the top of the draft. If we draft at the top next year you'll find another hole somewhere else to fill. Its not that McCoy put up shitty numbers. He regressed in every way. Accuracy, confidence in arm, decision making, mechanics, and so on. The defenses around the league salivate at the thought of facing him.
On numerous occasions when Colt was blitzed he would tuck the ball, take off running, and not look downfield while the secondary was in man. So the brief instances his subpar receivers were open he wasn't looking to pass. He will be blitzed to death until he makes those plays. Talk about unfair, you want to draft a rookie RT to block 2 guys for 5 seconds so Colt can read a play a quality NFL qb would do in less than half the time. Colt creates problems all on his own. Therefore he is a hole to be filled.
Not exactly. If the Browns had the #1 overall, I'd want Andrew Luck. And forget about that one- right now it looks like Irsay isn't going to trade out of that pick regardless of what anyone offers him for it. RGIII? Not so certain about him.
This difference is me and Cal don't fall in love with "this year's model". Superstud top of the first round qbs can, and do bust all the time- and if you take one of those mega busts- like say Ryan Leaf or Joey Harrington- you've totally shot yourself in the collective team's foot wasting about two seasons of starter time to find out they can't play worth a damn. The Bengals blew about 10 years that way trying to prove Dave Kingler and Akilli Smith were "the guy". Ponder and Gabbert were both 1st round picks, and did as poorly as McCoy on bad teams.
So sure, if H&H have decided Colt ain't "the guy", (they say they have enough tape on him to make that decision) then I have no problems with them drafting someone else to see if he is. For sure, Holmgren's forgotten more about football than I'll ever know.
Not exactly. If the Browns had the #1 overall, I'd want Andrew Luck. And forget about that one- right now it looks like Irsay isn't going to trade out of that pick regardless of what anyone offers him for it. RGIII? Not so certain about him.
This difference is me and Cal don't fall in love with "this year's model". Superstud top of the first round qbs can, and do bust all the time- and if you take one of those mega busts- like say Ryan Leaf or Joey Harrington- you've totally shot yourself in the collective team's foot wasting about two seasons of starter time to find out they can't play worth a damn. The Bengals blew about 10 years that way trying to prove Dave Kingler and Akilli Smith were "the guy". Ponder and Gabbert were both 1st round picks, and did as poorly as McCoy on bad teams.
So sure, if H&H have decided Colt ain't "the guy", (they say they have enough tape on him to make that decision) then I have no problems with them drafting someone else to see if he is. For sure, Holmgren's forgotten more about football than I'll ever know.
No Im exactly right. If you can convince yourself, as Cal has, that McCoy is a legitimate QB it will always be someone else's fault. We will never fill this roster with all 1st round talent. Never is it going to happen for us or anybody else. No one position will change the capabilities of a team more than a QB. We may capitalize on our opportunities more so than this year, but our potential will be the exact same as this year. Our potential and capabilities are directly tied to the QB position.
βIt is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding.β -
See, here is the thing......As long as it is Shurmur that is coaching us, I dont know why we are arguing about the QB. It is kinda like standing in the Titanic as it is sinking and complaining that the toilet is not flushing !
-
See, here is the thing......As long as it is Shurmur that is coaching us, I dont know why we are arguing about the QB. It is kinda like standing in the Titanic as it is sinking and complaining that the toilet is not flushing !
See, here is the thing......As long as it is Shurmur that is coaching us, I dont know why we are arguing about the QB. It is kinda like standing in the Titanic as it is sinking and complaining that the toilet is not flushing !
Fair enough, but we have to draft someone. Might as be the most talent we can get, right?
-
how the vast majority of teams have done it in the past 5-8 years. The Falcons, Saints, Lions, Bengals, Panthers, Bucs, Chargers and Giants all went and got the QB first or traded on a bad team.
wrong. wrong. wrong.
those teams (before landing their franchise qb) were stocked with first round picks year in and out. saints had one if not the best OL in the league. remember willie roaf? detroit had one of the best offenses with all those receivers they piled up while matt millen was gm. giants have been consistent for the past 2 decades so they do even belong in the mix. bengals built a great defense with their picks same as the chargers plus added offensive threats. uh oh yeah panthers just suck.
do you see any of those things in cleveland? exactly.
wrong. wrong. wrong.
those teams (before landing their franchise qb) were stocked with first round picks year in and out. saints had one if not the best OL in the league. remember willie roaf? detroit had one of the best offenses with all those receivers they piled up while matt millen was gm. giants have been consistent for the past 2 decades so they do even belong in the mix. bengals built a great defense with their picks same as the chargers plus added offensive threats. uh oh yeah panthers just suck.
do you see any of those things in cleveland? exactly.
Willie Roaf was long gone by the time Brees got to New Orleans.
-
Not exactly. If the Browns had the #1 overall, I'd want Andrew Luck. And forget about that one- right now it looks like Irsay isn't going to trade out of that pick regardless of what anyone offers him for it. RGIII? Not so certain about him.
This difference is me and Cal don't fall in love with "this year's model". Superstud top of the first round qbs can, and do bust all the time- and if you take one of those mega busts- like say Ryan Leaf or Joey Harrington- you've totally shot yourself in the collective team's foot wasting about two seasons of starter time to find out they can't play worth a damn. The Bengals blew about 10 years that way trying to prove Dave Kingler and Akilli Smith were "the guy". Ponder and Gabbert were both 1st round picks, and did as poorly as McCoy on bad teams.
So sure, if H&H have decided Colt ain't "the guy", (they say they have enough tape on him to make that decision) then I have no problems with them drafting someone else to see if he is. For sure, Holmgren's forgotten more about football than I'll ever know.
No Im exactly right. If you can convince yourself, as Cal has, that McCoy is a legitimate QB it will always be someone else's fault. We will never fill this roster with all 1st round talent. Never is it going to happen for us or anybody else. No one position will change the capabilities of a team more than a QB. We may capitalize on our opportunities more so than this year, but our potential will be the exact same as this year. Our potential and capabilities are directly tied to the QB position.
No Im exactly right. If you can convince yourself, as Cal has, that McCoy is a legitimate QB it will always be someone else's fault. We will never fill this roster with all 1st round talent. Never is it going to happen for us or anybody else. No one position will change the capabilities of a team more than a QB. We may capitalize on our opportunities more so than this year, but our potential will be the exact same as this year. Our potential and capabilities are directly tied to the QB position.
I have to defend Cal here. He & I have discussed Colt many times & while we both SUPPORT his efforts, NEITHER of us nor ANYONE else here, really knows what he can do with other pieces in place. Let's just take Colt off the field last year & plug in ANY QB in the NFL as our 2011 starter. Who's going to convince me they would have taken us to the playoffs? Would ANY of those QBs take 3 times the money they currently make to go back & play in Colt's shoes in 2011? I don't think so. Heckert has done fine with the drafts so far. In addition, we have added Childress & will have a full off season. I trust that Colt, or whoever plays QB for the 2012 Browns, will have quite a bit more to work with in 2012 than previously.
Mike
-
Not exactly. If the Browns had the #1 overall, I'd want Andrew Luck. And forget about that one- right now it looks like Irsay isn't going to trade out of that pick regardless of what anyone offers him for it. RGIII? Not so certain about him.
This difference is me and Cal don't fall in love with "this year's model". Superstud top of the first round qbs can, and do bust all the time- and if you take one of those mega busts- like say Ryan Leaf or Joey Harrington- you've totally shot yourself in the collective team's foot wasting about two seasons of starter time to find out they can't play worth a damn. The Bengals blew about 10 years that way trying to prove Dave Kingler and Akilli Smith were "the guy". Ponder and Gabbert were both 1st round picks, and did as poorly as McCoy on bad teams.
So sure, if H&H have decided Colt ain't "the guy", (they say they have enough tape on him to make that decision) then I have no problems with them drafting someone else to see if he is. For sure, Holmgren's forgotten more about football than I'll ever know.
No Im exactly right. If you can convince yourself, as Cal has, that McCoy is a legitimate QB it will always be someone else's fault. We will never fill this roster with all 1st round talent. Never is it going to happen for us or anybody else. No one position will change the capabilities of a team more than a QB. We may capitalize on our opportunities more so than this year, but our potential will be the exact same as this year. Our potential and capabilities are directly tied to the QB position.
No Im exactly right. If you can convince yourself, as Cal has, that McCoy is a legitimate QB it will always be someone else's fault. We will never fill this roster with all 1st round talent. Never is it going to happen for us or anybody else. No one position will change the capabilities of a team more than a QB. We may capitalize on our opportunities more so than this year, but our potential will be the exact same as this year. Our potential and capabilities are directly tied to the QB position.
I have to defend Cal here. He & I have discussed Colt many times & while we both SUPPORT his efforts, NEITHER of us nor ANYONE else here, really knows what he can do with other pieces in place. Let's just take Colt off the field last year & plug in ANY QB in the NFL as our 2011 starter. Who's going to convince me they would have taken us to the playoffs? Would ANY of those QBs take 3 times the money they currently make to go back & play in Colt's shoes in 2011? I don't think so. Heckert has done fine with the drafts so far. In addition, we have added Childress & will have a full off season. I trust that Colt, or whoever plays QB for the 2012 Browns, will have quite a bit more to work with in 2012 than previously.
Mike
+1 to Canton Mike
Not first round talent htown, just adequate talent- like a decent right side of the o-line, a real #1 wr, and maybe a healthy Hillis?
I believe I said "So sure, if H&H have decided Colt ain't "the guy", (they say they have enough tape on him to make that decision) then I have no problems with them drafting someone else to see if he is. For sure, Holmgren's forgotten more about football than I'll ever know." You just flunked reading comprehension.
The Steelers drafted Rothlisberger LAST, if you remember- so what's wrong with going that route if necessary? You under the mistaken impression we mussst gotttta take a qb THIS year? Like this is our one and only chance ever, ever to get a franchise guy? Bulls**t. Not if there's a player H&H have rated higher at a position of need. Outside of Luck, there isn't a sure-fire-can't miss qb in this years draft that I can see.
Look no farther than the Bengals for exhibit "A" as to why you don't necessarily have to spend a top 10 pick on a qb. They drafted Dalton in the second round after Ponder and Gabbert, and he's far outperformed either.
-
I read all of this arguing and it just shows how uncertain everything is. The NFL is all about the QB. Winning or losing is all the QBs fault it seems like. Let me start by stating that Im NOT saying Colt is the man by any means, but I'm just so sick of ditching guys and coaches (not that I'm a huge Shurmur fan). It seems like all the guys that are for Colt make valid arguments and while some that are against him do, others have their minds made up, say the same things over and over, and everything goes in one ear and out the other. "NOPE!!" "He's too short, no arm strength, 3rd round pick, good Qbs make the team better" and on and on...Just like many said the similarities between Brees and Mccoy are eerie and Brady was a 6th rounder!! Who all did Brees make look good when he played for the chargers? I mean do any of the top QBs out there not have any big name playmakers? I know that point has been beat to death and the nay sayers cant stand it, but I'll mention it again. Sure you cant only compare Colt to successful QBs without looking at all the failures in the past but like I said, nothing is certain. The only thing that SEEMS certain, is a new QB every few years ISN'T the answer but why? Is Andy Dalton even on the map without AJ Green? Sure RG3 is a great COLLEGE athlete who can run and throw and make a game entertaining when each offense scores on every possession and the final score is 55-60. Could he have done that against Pitt or the ravens defense with our current roster? Ya know guys on both sides could throw comparisons back and forth for hours and still not agree. In interviews Mccoy and Tebow both talked about how much more open guys were in college, and after hearing that I find it kind of silly to get all worked up when comparing apples to oranges like some of the RG3 fans (NO OFFENSE!!!). Does anyone take into account all the top QBs and how high their Olines are ranked? or just that their team won and they have this big name QB and that's why? Does anyone realize how long these top guys have played on the same team and under the same coaches year after year? Like I said I'm in no way shape or form saying Colt is the man, but in our case drafting a new QB every 2 years HASN'T worked, so lets try something difference for once and build the team like say, the steelers did. OR JUST SOMETHING DIFFERENT! It simply amazes me how anyone could've expected this 25 year old KID to just turn the team around in his first year starting with a brand new coach and offense to learn and NO time to practice it due to the lock out. No I'm not making excuses, I'm just SHOCKED that anyone could expect so much from someone in that situation!!! Noone looks at the positive things we did last season considering our circumstances and the tough division we play in. A lot of fans already have their minds made up and wont pay much attention to the obvious holes we need to fill, they want to win and they want it now. Ive been a browns fan for 20 years so I'm used to suffering, but heck, Id like to see what Colt can do with some talent and some MORE TIME playing with the same guys and under one coaching staff. FLAME SUIT ON
. The top draft QB is always a 50/50 gamble of being a bust so I don't understand how some people are so certain RG3 is going to be great? same with Luck? Just because they played good college ball or watched some highlight videos of them against Big 12 or PAC 10 defenses or because the prospectors say so? While RG3 is a GREAT college athlete....I'm not risking it. I am curious to see though, if we do draft RG3 SOMEHOW...How many of his current drooling Cleveland fans will want him thrown out to the wolves in a year or 2 if he doesn't produce. -
I read all of this arguing and it just shows how uncertain everything is. The NFL is all about the QB. Winning or losing is all the QBs fault it seems like. Let me start by stating that Im NOT saying Colt is the man by any means, but I'm just so sick of ditching guys and coaches (not that I'm a huge Shurmur fan). It seems like all the guys that are for Colt make valid arguments and while some that are against him do, others have their minds made up, say the same things over and over, and everything goes in one ear and out the other. "NOPE!!" "He's too short, no arm strength, 3rd round pick, good Qbs make the team better" and on and on...Just like many said the similarities between Brees and Mccoy are eerie and Brady was a 6th rounder!! Who all did Brees make look good when he played for the chargers? I mean do any of the top QBs out there not have any big name playmakers? I know that point has been beat to death and the nay sayers cant stand it, but I'll mention it again. Sure you cant only compare Colt to successful QBs without looking at all the failures in the past but like I said, nothing is certain. The only thing that SEEMS certain, is a new QB every few years ISN'T the answer but why? Is Andy Dalton even on the map without AJ Green? Sure RG3 is a great COLLEGE athlete who can run and throw and make a game entertaining when each offense scores on every possession and the final score is 55-60. Could he have done that against Pitt or the ravens defense with our current roster? Ya know guys on both sides could throw comparisons back and forth for hours and still not agree. In interviews Mccoy and Tebow both talked about how much more open guys were in college, and after hearing that I find it kind of silly to get all worked up when comparing apples to oranges like some of the RG3 fans (NO OFFENSE!!!). Does anyone take into account all the top QBs and how high their Olines are ranked? or just that their team won and they have this big name QB and that's why? Does anyone realize how long these top guys have played on the same team and under the same coaches year after year? Like I said I'm in no way shape or form saying Colt is the man, but in our case drafting a new QB every 2 years HASN'T worked, so lets try something difference for once and build the team like say, the steelers did. OR JUST SOMETHING DIFFERENT! It simply amazes me how anyone could've expected this 25 year old KID to just turn the team around in his first year starting with a brand new coach and offense to learn and NO time to practice it due to the lock out. No I'm not making excuses, I'm just SHOCKED that anyone could expect so much from someone in that situation!!! Noone looks at the positive things we did last season considering our circumstances and the tough division we play in. A lot of fans already have their minds made up and wont pay much attention to the obvious holes we need to fill, they want to win and they want it now. Ive been a browns fan for 20 years so I'm used to suffering, but heck, Id like to see what Colt can do with some talent and some MORE TIME playing with the same guys and under one coaching staff. FLAME SUIT ON
. The top draft QB is always a 50/50 gamble of being a bust so I don't understand how some people are so certain RG3 is going to be great? same with Luck? Just because they played good college ball or watched some highlight videos of them against Big 12 or PAC 10 defenses or because the prospectors say so? While RG3 is a GREAT college athlete....I'm not risking it. I am curious to see though, if we do draft RG3 SOMEHOW...How many of his current drooling Cleveland fans will want him thrown out to the wolves in a year or 2 if he doesn't produce.I read all of this arguing and it just shows how uncertain everything is. The NFL is all about the QB. Winning or losing is all the QBs fault it seems like. Let me start by stating that Im NOT saying Colt is the man by any means, but I'm just so sick of ditching guys and coaches (not that I'm a huge Shurmur fan). It seems like all the guys that are for Colt make valid arguments and while some that are against him do, others have their minds made up, say the same things over and over, and everything goes in one ear and out the other. "NOPE!!" "He's too short, no arm strength, 3rd round pick, good Qbs make the team better" and on and on...Just like many said the similarities between Brees and Mccoy are eerie and Brady was a 6th rounder!! Who all did Brees make look good when he played for the chargers? I mean do any of the top QBs out there not have any big name playmakers? I know that point has been beat to death and the nay sayers cant stand it, but I'll mention it again. Sure you cant only compare Colt to successful QBs without looking at all the failures in the past but like I said, nothing is certain. The only thing that SEEMS certain, is a new QB every few years ISN'T the answer but why? Is Andy Dalton even on the map without AJ Green? Sure RG3 is a great COLLEGE athlete who can run and throw and make a game entertaining when each offense scores on every possession and the final score is 55-60. Could he have done that against Pitt or the ravens defense with our current roster? Ya know guys on both sides could throw comparisons back and forth for hours and still not agree. In interviews Mccoy and Tebow both talked about how much more open guys were in college, and after hearing that I find it kind of silly to get all worked up when comparing apples to oranges like some of the RG3 fans (NO OFFENSE!!!). Does anyone take into account all the top QBs and how high their Olines are ranked? or just that their team won and they have this big name QB and that's why? Does anyone realize how long these top guys have played on the same team and under the same coaches year after year? Like I said I'm in no way shape or form saying Colt is the man, but in our case drafting a new QB every 2 years HASN'T worked, so lets try something difference for once and build the team like say, the steelers did. OR JUST SOMETHING DIFFERENT! It simply amazes me how anyone could've expected this 25 year old KID to just turn the team around in his first year starting with a brand new coach and offense to learn and NO time to practice it due to the lock out. No I'm not making excuses, I'm just SHOCKED that anyone could expect so much from someone in that situation!!! Noone looks at the positive things we did last season considering our circumstances and the tough division we play in. A lot of fans already have their minds made up and wont pay much attention to the obvious holes we need to fill, they want to win and they want it now. Ive been a browns fan for 20 years so I'm used to suffering, but heck, Id like to see what Colt can do with some talent and some MORE TIME playing with the same guys and under one coaching staff. FLAME SUIT ON
. The top draft QB is always a 50/50 gamble of being a bust so I don't understand how some people are so certain RG3 is going to be great? same with Luck? Just because they played good college ball or watched some highlight videos of them against Big 12 or PAC 10 defenses or because the prospectors say so? While RG3 is a GREAT college athlete....I'm not risking it. I am curious to see though, if we do draft RG3 SOMEHOW...How many of his current drooling Cleveland fans will want him thrown out to the wolves in a year or 2 if he doesn't produce.Excellent post!
Mike
-
I read all of this arguing and it just shows how uncertain everything is. The NFL is all about the QB. Winning or losing is all the QBs fault it seems like. Let me start by stating that Im NOT saying Colt is the man by any means, but I'm just so sick of ditching guys and coaches (not that I'm a huge Shurmur fan). It seems like all the guys that are for Colt make valid arguments and while some that are against him do, others have their minds made up, say the same things over and over, and everything goes in one ear and out the other. "NOPE!!" "He's too short, no arm strength, 3rd round pick, good Qbs make the team better" and on and on...Just like many said the similarities between Brees and Mccoy are eerie and Brady was a 6th rounder!! Who all did Brees make look good when he played for the chargers? I mean do any of the top QBs out there not have any big name playmakers? I know that point has been beat to death and the nay sayers cant stand it, but I'll mention it again. Sure you cant only compare Colt to successful QBs without looking at all the failures in the past but like I said, nothing is certain. The only thing that SEEMS certain, is a new QB every few years ISN'T the answer but why? Is Andy Dalton even on the map without AJ Green? Sure RG3 is a great COLLEGE athlete who can run and throw and make a game entertaining when each offense scores on every possession and the final score is 55-60. Could he have done that against Pitt or the ravens defense with our current roster? Ya know guys on both sides could throw comparisons back and forth for hours and still not agree. In interviews Mccoy and Tebow both talked about how much more open guys were in college, and after hearing that I find it kind of silly to get all worked up when comparing apples to oranges like some of the RG3 fans (NO OFFENSE!!!). Does anyone take into account all the top QBs and how high their Olines are ranked? or just that their team won and they have this big name QB and that's why? Does anyone realize how long these top guys have played on the same team and under the same coaches year after year? Like I said I'm in no way shape or form saying Colt is the man, but in our case drafting a new QB every 2 years HASN'T worked, so lets try something difference for once and build the team like say, the steelers did. OR JUST SOMETHING DIFFERENT! It simply amazes me how anyone could've expected this 25 year old KID to just turn the team around in his first year starting with a brand new coach and offense to learn and NO time to practice it due to the lock out. No I'm not making excuses, I'm just SHOCKED that anyone could expect so much from someone in that situation!!! Noone looks at the positive things we did last season considering our circumstances and the tough division we play in. A lot of fans already have their minds made up and wont pay much attention to the obvious holes we need to fill, they want to win and they want it now. Ive been a browns fan for 20 years so I'm used to suffering, but heck, Id like to see what Colt can do with some talent and some MORE TIME playing with the same guys and under one coaching staff. FLAME SUIT ON
. The top draft QB is always a 50/50 gamble of being a bust so I don't understand how some people are so certain RG3 is going to be great? same with Luck? Just because they played good college ball or watched some highlight videos of them against Big 12 or PAC 10 defenses or because the prospectors say so? While RG3 is a GREAT college athlete....I'm not risking it. I am curious to see though, if we do draft RG3 SOMEHOW...How many of his current drooling Cleveland fans will want him thrown out to the wolves in a year or 2 if he doesn't produce.I read all of this arguing and it just shows how uncertain everything is. The NFL is all about the QB. Winning or losing is all the QBs fault it seems like. Let me start by stating that Im NOT saying Colt is the man by any means, but I'm just so sick of ditching guys and coaches (not that I'm a huge Shurmur fan). It seems like all the guys that are for Colt make valid arguments and while some that are against him do, others have their minds made up, say the same things over and over, and everything goes in one ear and out the other. "NOPE!!" "He's too short, no arm strength, 3rd round pick, good Qbs make the team better" and on and on...Just like many said the similarities between Brees and Mccoy are eerie and Brady was a 6th rounder!! Who all did Brees make look good when he played for the chargers? I mean do any of the top QBs out there not have any big name playmakers? I know that point has been beat to death and the nay sayers cant stand it, but I'll mention it again. Sure you cant only compare Colt to successful QBs without looking at all the failures in the past but like I said, nothing is certain. The only thing that SEEMS certain, is a new QB every few years ISN'T the answer but why? Is Andy Dalton even on the map without AJ Green? Sure RG3 is a great COLLEGE athlete who can run and throw and make a game entertaining when each offense scores on every possession and the final score is 55-60. Could he have done that against Pitt or the ravens defense with our current roster? Ya know guys on both sides could throw comparisons back and forth for hours and still not agree. In interviews Mccoy and Tebow both talked about how much more open guys were in college, and after hearing that I find it kind of silly to get all worked up when comparing apples to oranges like some of the RG3 fans (NO OFFENSE!!!). Does anyone take into account all the top QBs and how high their Olines are ranked? or just that their team won and they have this big name QB and that's why? Does anyone realize how long these top guys have played on the same team and under the same coaches year after year? Like I said I'm in no way shape or form saying Colt is the man, but in our case drafting a new QB every 2 years HASN'T worked, so lets try something difference for once and build the team like say, the steelers did. OR JUST SOMETHING DIFFERENT! It simply amazes me how anyone could've expected this 25 year old KID to just turn the team around in his first year starting with a brand new coach and offense to learn and NO time to practice it due to the lock out. No I'm not making excuses, I'm just SHOCKED that anyone could expect so much from someone in that situation!!! Noone looks at the positive things we did last season considering our circumstances and the tough division we play in. A lot of fans already have their minds made up and wont pay much attention to the obvious holes we need to fill, they want to win and they want it now. Ive been a browns fan for 20 years so I'm used to suffering, but heck, Id like to see what Colt can do with some talent and some MORE TIME playing with the same guys and under one coaching staff. FLAME SUIT ON
. The top draft QB is always a 50/50 gamble of being a bust so I don't understand how some people are so certain RG3 is going to be great? same with Luck? Just because they played good college ball or watched some highlight videos of them against Big 12 or PAC 10 defenses or because the prospectors say so? While RG3 is a GREAT college athlete....I'm not risking it. I am curious to see though, if we do draft RG3 SOMEHOW...How many of his current drooling Cleveland fans will want him thrown out to the wolves in a year or 2 if he doesn't produce.THEORY OF -RELATIVITY instance of motion of a particular body or also of almost any
observable motion of bodies in general, leading to a high degree
of completeness, exactness and simplicity, while other frame-
works (moving in an arbitrary manner relatively to those) give of
the same phenomena a most complicated, intricate and confused
picture.* Suppose that somebody, ignorant of the work of Copernicus,
Galileo and Newton, but otherwise gifted with the highest experi-
mental abilities and mathematical skill (a quite imaginary supposition,
being hardly consistent with the first one), chooses the interior of an
old-fashioned coach, driven along a fairly rough road, as his laboratory
and tries to investigate the laws of motion of bodies enclosed together
with him in the coach say, of a pendulum or of a spinning top and
selects that vehicle as his system of reference. Then his tangible
bodies and his conceptual * material points,' starting from rest or any
given velocity, would describe the most wonderful paths, in incessant
shocks and jerky motions; the axis of his 'free gyroscope' would oscillate
in a most complicated way, never disclosing to him the constancy of
the vector known to us as the 'angular momentum,' i.e. the rotatory
analogue of Newton's first law of motion. Nor would the uniform
translational motion have for him any peculiarly simple or generally
noteworthy properties at all. His mechanical experience being, in a
word, full of surprises, he would soon give up his task of stating any
laws of motion whatever with reference to the coach. Getting out of
it on to firm ground, he will readily find out that the earth is a much
better system of reference. With this framework, smoothness and
simplicity will take the place of hopeless irregularity. Undoubtedly,
this property must have been remarked in a very early stage of man's
history, and the above example will appear to the least trained student
of mechanics of our present times trivial and simply ridiculous. ' Of
course,' he would say, ' the motions of material bodies relatively to
that coach are so very complicated, for that vehicle is itself moving in
a highly complicated way.' He would hardly consider it worth while
to add ' relatively to the earth.' The coach being such a small, insigni-
ficant thing in comparison with the terrestrial globe, it would seem
extravagant to our interlocutor, if somebody insisted rather on saying
that it is the earth which moves in such a complicated way relatively.
* And as to 'absolute motion,' regardless of any system of reference, it is need-
less to mention that it is devoid of meaning in exactly the same way as ' absolute
position.'
-
I read all of this arguing and it just shows how uncertain everything is. The NFL is all about the QB. Winning or losing is all the QBs fault it seems like. Let me start by stating that Im NOT saying Colt is the man by any means, but I'm just so sick of ditching guys and coaches (not that I'm a huge Shurmur fan). It seems like all the guys that are for Colt make valid arguments and while some that are against him do, others have their minds made up, say the same things over and over, and everything goes in one ear and out the other. "NOPE!!" "He's too short, no arm strength, 3rd round pick, good Qbs make the team better" and on and on...Just like many said the similarities between Brees and Mccoy are eerie and Brady was a 6th rounder!! Who all did Brees make look good when he played for the chargers? I mean do any of the top QBs out there not have any big name playmakers? I know that point has been beat to death and the nay sayers cant stand it, but I'll mention it again. Sure you cant only compare Colt to successful QBs without looking at all the failures in the past but like I said, nothing is certain. The only thing that SEEMS certain, is a new QB every few years ISN'T the answer but why? Is Andy Dalton even on the map without AJ Green? Sure RG3 is a great COLLEGE athlete who can run and throw and make a game entertaining when each offense scores on every possession and the final score is 55-60. Could he have done that against Pitt or the ravens defense with our current roster? Ya know guys on both sides could throw comparisons back and forth for hours and still not agree. In interviews Mccoy and Tebow both talked about how much more open guys were in college, and after hearing that I find it kind of silly to get all worked up when comparing apples to oranges like some of the RG3 fans (NO OFFENSE!!!). Does anyone take into account all the top QBs and how high their Olines are ranked? or just that their team won and they have this big name QB and that's why? Does anyone realize how long these top guys have played on the same team and under the same coaches year after year? Like I said I'm in no way shape or form saying Colt is the man, but in our case drafting a new QB every 2 years HASN'T worked, so lets try something difference for once and build the team like say, the steelers did. OR JUST SOMETHING DIFFERENT! It simply amazes me how anyone could've expected this 25 year old KID to just turn the team around in his first year starting with a brand new coach and offense to learn and NO time to practice it due to the lock out. No I'm not making excuses, I'm just SHOCKED that anyone could expect so much from someone in that situation!!! Noone looks at the positive things we did last season considering our circumstances and the tough division we play in. A lot of fans already have their minds made up and wont pay much attention to the obvious holes we need to fill, they want to win and they want it now. Ive been a browns fan for 20 years so I'm used to suffering, but heck, Id like to see what Colt can do with some talent and some MORE TIME playing with the same guys and under one coaching staff. FLAME SUIT ON
. The top draft QB is always a 50/50 gamble of being a bust so I don't understand how some people are so certain RG3 is going to be great? same with Luck? Just because they played good college ball or watched some highlight videos of them against Big 12 or PAC 10 defenses or because the prospectors say so? While RG3 is a GREAT college athlete....I'm not risking it. I am curious to see though, if we do draft RG3 SOMEHOW...How many of his current drooling Cleveland fans will want him thrown out to the wolves in a year or 2 if he doesn't produce.THEORY OF -RELATIVITY instance of motion of a particular body or also of almost any
observable motion of bodies in general, leading to a high degree
of completeness, exactness and simplicity, while other frame-
works (moving in an arbitrary manner relatively to those) give of
the same phenomena a most complicated, intricate and confused
picture.* Suppose that somebody, ignorant of the work of Copernicus,
Galileo and Newton, but otherwise gifted with the highest experi-
mental abilities and mathematical skill (a quite imaginary supposition,
being hardly consistent with the first one), chooses the interior of an
old-fashioned coach, driven along a fairly rough road, as his laboratory
and tries to investigate the laws of motion of bodies enclosed together
with him in the coach say, of a pendulum or of a spinning top and
selects that vehicle as his system of reference. Then his tangible
bodies and his conceptual * material points,' starting from rest or any
given velocity, would describe the most wonderful paths, in incessant
shocks and jerky motions; the axis of his 'free gyroscope' would oscillate
in a most complicated way, never disclosing to him the constancy of
the vector known to us as the 'angular momentum,' i.e. the rotatory
analogue of Newton's first law of motion. Nor would the uniform
translational motion have for him any peculiarly simple or generally
noteworthy properties at all. His mechanical experience being, in a
word, full of surprises, he would soon give up his task of stating any
laws of motion whatever with reference to the coach. Getting out of
it on to firm ground, he will readily find out that the earth is a much
better system of reference. With this framework, smoothness and
simplicity will take the place of hopeless irregularity. Undoubtedly,
this property must have been remarked in a very early stage of man's
history, and the above example will appear to the least trained student
of mechanics of our present times trivial and simply ridiculous. ' Of
course,' he would say, ' the motions of material bodies relatively to
that coach are so very complicated, for that vehicle is itself moving in
a highly complicated way.' He would hardly consider it worth while
to add ' relatively to the earth.' The coach being such a small, insigni-
ficant thing in comparison with the terrestrial globe, it would seem
extravagant to our interlocutor, if somebody insisted rather on saying
that it is the earth which moves in such a complicated way relatively.
* And as to 'absolute motion,' regardless of any system of reference, it is need-
less to mention that it is devoid of meaning in exactly the same way as ' absolute
position.'
THEORY OF -RELATIVITY instance of motion of a particular body or also of almost any
observable motion of bodies in general, leading to a high degree
of completeness, exactness and simplicity, while other frame-
works (moving in an arbitrary manner relatively to those) give of
the same phenomena a most complicated, intricate and confused
picture.* Suppose that somebody, ignorant of the work of Copernicus,
Galileo and Newton, but otherwise gifted with the highest experi-
mental abilities and mathematical skill (a quite imaginary supposition,
being hardly consistent with the first one), chooses the interior of an
old-fashioned coach, driven along a fairly rough road, as his laboratory
and tries to investigate the laws of motion of bodies enclosed together
with him in the coach say, of a pendulum or of a spinning top and
selects that vehicle as his system of reference. Then his tangible
bodies and his conceptual * material points,' starting from rest or any
given velocity, would describe the most wonderful paths, in incessant
shocks and jerky motions; the axis of his 'free gyroscope' would oscillate
in a most complicated way, never disclosing to him the constancy of
the vector known to us as the 'angular momentum,' i.e. the rotatory
analogue of Newton's first law of motion. Nor would the uniform
translational motion have for him any peculiarly simple or generally
noteworthy properties at all. His mechanical experience being, in a
word, full of surprises, he would soon give up his task of stating any
laws of motion whatever with reference to the coach. Getting out of
it on to firm ground, he will readily find out that the earth is a much
better system of reference. With this framework, smoothness and
simplicity will take the place of hopeless irregularity. Undoubtedly,
this property must have been remarked in a very early stage of man's
history, and the above example will appear to the least trained student
of mechanics of our present times trivial and simply ridiculous. ' Of
course,' he would say, ' the motions of material bodies relatively to
that coach are so very complicated, for that vehicle is itself moving in
a highly complicated way.' He would hardly consider it worth while
to add ' relatively to the earth.' The coach being such a small, insigni-
ficant thing in comparison with the terrestrial globe, it would seem
extravagant to our interlocutor, if somebody insisted rather on saying
that it is the earth which moves in such a complicated way relatively.
* And as to 'absolute motion,' regardless of any system of reference, it is need-
less to mention that it is devoid of meaning in exactly the same way as ' absolute
position.'
Oh snap!!!! You just got Newton-ed
-
THEORY OF -RELATIVITY instance of motion of a particular body or also of almost any
observable motion of bodies in general, leading to a high degree
of completeness, exactness and simplicity, while other frame-
works (moving in an arbitrary manner relatively to those) give of
the same phenomena a most complicated, intricate and confused
picture.* Suppose that somebody, ignorant of the work of Copernicus,
Galileo and Newton, but otherwise gifted with the highest experi-
mental abilities and mathematical skill (a quite imaginary supposition,
being hardly consistent with the first one), chooses the interior of an
old-fashioned coach, driven along a fairly rough road, as his laboratory
and tries to investigate the laws of motion of bodies enclosed together
with him in the coach say, of a pendulum or of a spinning top and
selects that vehicle as his system of reference. Then his tangible
bodies and his conceptual * material points,' starting from rest or any
given velocity, would describe the most wonderful paths, in incessant
shocks and jerky motions; the axis of his 'free gyroscope' would oscillate
in a most complicated way, never disclosing to him the constancy of
the vector known to us as the 'angular momentum,' i.e. the rotatory
analogue of Newton's first law of motion. Nor would the uniform
translational motion have for him any peculiarly simple or generally
noteworthy properties at all. His mechanical experience being, in a
word, full of surprises, he would soon give up his task of stating any
laws of motion whatever with reference to the coach. Getting out of
it on to firm ground, he will readily find out that the earth is a much
better system of reference. With this framework, smoothness and
simplicity will take the place of hopeless irregularity. Undoubtedly,
this property must have been remarked in a very early stage of man's
history, and the above example will appear to the least trained student
of mechanics of our present times trivial and simply ridiculous. ' Of
course,' he would say, ' the motions of material bodies relatively to
that coach are so very complicated, for that vehicle is itself moving in
a highly complicated way.' He would hardly consider it worth while
to add ' relatively to the earth.' The coach being such a small, insigni-
ficant thing in comparison with the terrestrial globe, it would seem
extravagant to our interlocutor, if somebody insisted rather on saying
that it is the earth which moves in such a complicated way relatively.
* And as to 'absolute motion,' regardless of any system of reference, it is need-
less to mention that it is devoid of meaning in exactly the same way as ' absolute
position.'
Oh snap!!!! You just got Newton-ed
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 π
Register Login