Skip to content

Interesting idea that will never happen

The Browns Board
36 14 1.7k
  • @mudfly said:

    agreed......would say the Browns have comparable man for man offensive talent to the Hawks.....and the system being put in place is designed to diminish the requirements on the QB.....whomever it may be....sooooo.....

    dont really see it as a drop off for him....

    Except Lynch, and now Graham.

    @gftchris said:

    Except Lynch, and now Graham.

    right....we have better players in some areas and they have better players in some areas......though Im not counting Graham, as he hasn't played with them yet, so he cant really be factored into Wilson(or Seattles) past performance....

  • @gftchris said:

    Except Lynch, and now Graham.

    right....we have better players in some areas and they have better players in some areas......though Im not counting Graham, as he hasn't played with them yet, so he cant really be factored into Wilson(or Seattles) past performance....

    @mudfly said:

    right....we have better players in some areas and they have better players in some areas......though Im not counting Graham, as he hasn't played with them yet, so he cant really be factored into Wilson(or Seattles) past performance....

    hence the 'now' part. I don't disagree that we're probably better in some areas than they, and vice versa, and overall roughly the same - just with the 'man for man' part, because that's just not the case, as you've just said.

  • @mudfly said:

    right....we have better players in some areas and they have better players in some areas......though Im not counting Graham, as he hasn't played with them yet, so he cant really be factored into Wilson(or Seattles) past performance....

    hence the 'now' part. I don't disagree that we're probably better in some areas than they, and vice versa, and overall roughly the same - just with the 'man for man' part, because that's just not the case, as you've just said.

    @gftchris said:

    we're probably better in some areas than they, and vice versa, and overall roughly the same

    exactly.....thats pretty much what I was trying to say.....

  • Agree... need to see Graham there.

    Granted we don't have one RB to match Lynch's contribution, but we don't need one... Yardage-wise we got close with two rookies while Seattle's only other significant rusher was Wilson who ran for 2/3's of Lynch's total. Tougher to match Lynch's TDs and power, red-zone running, but we'll see what 2015 brings.

  • ... and this year should show that. If McCown has a good year, then would there be any doubt that Wilson would?

    Wilson may be the ultimate game manager in the league and is perfectly content in that role. But he has the upside of being able to put a team on his back every once in a while and carry them to victory.

    @tour2ma said:

    ... and this year should show that. If McCown has a good year, then would there be any doubt that Wilson would?

    Wilson may be the ultimate game manager in the league and is perfectly content in that role. But he has the upside of being able to put a team on his back every once in a while and carry them to victory.

    The ultimate scenario would be Manziel assuming a Wilson-esque role here.

    The small stature and maneuvarability behind the line similarities are there...everything else, though, needs to be refined.

    Including fielding shotgun snaps.

  • Too bad the only way in this days NFL to get a good QB is to draft him......

  • Too bad the only way in this days NFL to get a good QB is to draft him......

    @comeonman said:

    Too bad the only way in this days NFL to get a good QB is to draft him......

    Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

    Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

  • Manning is a good example. Smith I would argue with. The rest were almost 10 years ago. The trends in the league are ever evolving and for now, good pro quarterbacks are getting more scarce as the spread becomes more common in college, so people won't be nearly as willing to give them up as they have been in the past.

  • Manning is a good example. Smith I would argue with. The rest were almost 10 years ago. The trends in the league are ever evolving and for now, good pro quarterbacks are getting more scarce as the spread becomes more common in college, so people won't be nearly as willing to give them up as they have been in the past.

    @wargograw said:

    Manning is a good example. Smith I would argue with. The rest were almost 10 years ago. The trends in the league are ever evolving and for now, good pro quarterbacks are getting more scarce as the spread becomes more common in college, so people won't be nearly as willing to give them up as they have been in the past.

    Alternatively, might we see pro-offences running more of the spread, to get more out of the college QBs?

  • Also, the Browns are basically modelled on the Seahawks. Not saying Crowell/West are Lynch, but we have a similarly built D, strong OL and rushing attack. He would do fine.

    @gftchris said:

    Also, the Browns are basically modelled on the Seahawks. Not saying Crowell/West are Lynch, but we have a similarly built D, strong OL and rushing attack. He would do fine.

    "similarly built D" ?

    Except for that RUN D thing. Maybe Shelton will help with that.

  • Seattle D is a Hit and Stick defense that don't miss a tackle. Browns D must improve on Hit and Fall Off Tackling. Truth Hurts.

  • @comeonman said:

    Too bad the only way in this days NFL to get a good QB is to draft him......

    Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

    Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

    Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

    All except smith at the tail end of career. Yes, it does occasionally happen, but we're talking about a QB in his rookie contract. 99 % of the time a team has to draft their QB, teams don't just give up the most important position on the field
  • @comeonman said:

    Too bad the only way in this days NFL to get a good QB is to draft him......

    Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

    Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

    Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

    which means they were drafted.

  • Seattle D is a Hit and Stick defense that don't miss a tackle. Browns D must improve on Hit and Fall Off Tackling. Truth Hurts.

    @gumby73 said:

    Seattle D is a Hit and Stick defense that don't miss a tackle. Browns D must improve on Hit and Fall Off Tackling. Truth Hurts.

    Sorry, gum... but this drives me crazy.

    While "bad tackling" does exists, e.g., the infamous "roll-block" tackle often favored by DBs, more missed tackles are a result of never getting in position to make the tackle than not making an effort to execute the tackle.

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    Tell that to Denver, KC, GB, Oakland, Arizona, New Orleans.

    Manning, Smith, Favre, Gannon, Warner and Brees are, or were, all pretty solid free agency or trade acquisitions.

    which means they were drafted.

    @miktoxic said:

    which means they were drafted.

    I mean, was the the original argument? That there's never been a good UDFA QB?

    I read it as "the only way to get one on your team is to draft him".