Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Houston Astros...food for thought perhaps

Houston Astros...food for thought perhaps

The Browns Board
73 16 1.3k
  • Canton DawgC Canton Dawg

    @wargograw said:

    So instead, we can just pat ourselves on the back because we win 4 games/year. Sweet!

    4 games a year? When will be that good again?

    Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on
    #38

    @canton-dawg said:

    4 games a year? When will be that good again?

    At the pace the current regime is going, it would take six full seasons to win four games. 😆

    Canton DawgC 1 Reply
    😂
  • DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on
    #39

    Like comparing apples and onions.

    "You planning on having a long relationship with that glass or are you going to drink it? Drink up, man. Maybe we can get another.” - Janis Joplin, 1970.
  • W wargograw

    @the-gipper said:

    And who did they say would be the 2017 WS champs back there in 2014?

    Houston....

    @mark-o said:

    How am I not right?  The team is 0-8.   That's not an improvement over last years 0-8 at the same point. 

    So because they’re 0-8 now they won’t do anything in 2020? You really think that’s a logical case?

    DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on
    #40

    @wargograw said:

    Houston....

    So because they’re 0-8 now they won’t do anything in 2020? You really think that’s a logical case?

    Austin, the fag capital of Tx.

    "You planning on having a long relationship with that glass or are you going to drink it? Drink up, man. Maybe we can get another.” - Janis Joplin, 1970.
    Dutch OvenD The GipperT 2 Replies
  • Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven

    @canton-dawg said:

    4 games a year? When will be that good again?

    At the pace the current regime is going, it would take six full seasons to win four games. 😆

    Canton DawgC Canton Dawg wrote on
    #41

    @dutch-oven said:

    At the pace the current regime is going, it would take six full seasons to win four games. 😆

    Just think, I used to Bitch about only winning 4 games a year. ?

    Two things that will define you: Your determination when you have nothing. Your attitude when you have everything. - Mike McCartney
  • flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on
    #42

    I held my tongue through the Indians 35 year process. Not again

  • DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan

    @wargograw said:

    Houston....

    So because they’re 0-8 now they won’t do anything in 2020? You really think that’s a logical case?

    Austin, the fag capital of Tx.

    Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on
    #43

    Speaking of incompetent people in positions they have no business being in...

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    Austin, the fag capital of Tx.

    It's the Parma of Texas?

  • L LondonBrown

    @mark-o said:

    0-8 is the only analysis that matters.   

    The Houston Astros completely disagree with you. 

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on
    #44

    @londonbrown said:

    The Houston Astros completely disagree with you. 

    I'm sure they do.    The process worked for them.  That's great in baseball.  Worked for the Cubs last year as well but in case you havent' figured out....that's a different sport.   The guys you're trusting to pick the players and make this process work,  haven't shown a lot of success in picking players to this point but we're supposed to just blindly trust them no matter what?   Bring everyone back....coaches, front office...everyone.  No changes...even if they go 0-16 or 1-15?  Really?  Nothing should change at all?  An unprecedented level of suckage for an organization and that doesn't warrant any changes at all? 

  • Mark OM Mark O

    @londonbrown said:

    The Houston Astros completely disagree with you. 

    I'm sure they do.    The process worked for them.  That's great in baseball.  Worked for the Cubs last year as well but in case you havent' figured out....that's a different sport.   The guys you're trusting to pick the players and make this process work,  haven't shown a lot of success in picking players to this point but we're supposed to just blindly trust them no matter what?   Bring everyone back....coaches, front office...everyone.  No changes...even if they go 0-16 or 1-15?  Really?  Nothing should change at all?  An unprecedented level of suckage for an organization and that doesn't warrant any changes at all? 

    L LondonBrown wrote on
    #45

    @mark-o said:

    The guys you're trusting to pick the players and make this process work,  haven't shown a lot of success in picking players to this point but we're supposed to just blindly trust them no matter what?

    No I am saying they cant be judged yet becuase it's been 1.5 years, there is a big difference. Mark do you really think it's practical to judge the 2017 draft picks already, after eight games? That is just crazy surely

    👍
  • L LondonBrown

    @mark-o said:

    The guys you're trusting to pick the players and make this process work,  haven't shown a lot of success in picking players to this point but we're supposed to just blindly trust them no matter what?

    No I am saying they cant be judged yet becuase it's been 1.5 years, there is a big difference. Mark do you really think it's practical to judge the 2017 draft picks already, after eight games? That is just crazy surely

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on
    #46

    @londonbrown said:

    No I am saying they cant be judged yet becuase it's been 1.5 years, there is a big difference. Mark do you really think it's practical to judge the 2017 draft picks already, after eight games? That is just crazy surely

    I think 8 games can give you a pretty good indication of what you have.   We are pretty sure that Kizer ain't the guy.   Njoku is fine...hardly first round talent to this point (kizer is partially to blame here as well), Peppers either isn't that good or is being used horribly by St. Greg Williams since I haven't seen him do anything other than be a return man.

    Last years picks...Coleman?  Certainly seems like a bust.    They are missing more than they are hitting and they seem to be more interested in just passing off picking until the future rather than taking talented players.  I'm not one who would say they should've taken Wentz (that's easy to do now), I thought there were serious questions about him and his level of competition in college.   I have a hard time with a team that is likely to be 2-30 over a 2 year period (or worse) and saying we shouldn't change anything.  That's a record level of suckage.  Something needs to change.  Whether its a new head coach...or just a new guy who is in charge of the draft room, but something has to be done.

  • Mark OM Mark O

    @londonbrown said:

    No I am saying they cant be judged yet becuase it's been 1.5 years, there is a big difference. Mark do you really think it's practical to judge the 2017 draft picks already, after eight games? That is just crazy surely

    I think 8 games can give you a pretty good indication of what you have.   We are pretty sure that Kizer ain't the guy.   Njoku is fine...hardly first round talent to this point (kizer is partially to blame here as well), Peppers either isn't that good or is being used horribly by St. Greg Williams since I haven't seen him do anything other than be a return man.

    Last years picks...Coleman?  Certainly seems like a bust.    They are missing more than they are hitting and they seem to be more interested in just passing off picking until the future rather than taking talented players.  I'm not one who would say they should've taken Wentz (that's easy to do now), I thought there were serious questions about him and his level of competition in college.   I have a hard time with a team that is likely to be 2-30 over a 2 year period (or worse) and saying we shouldn't change anything.  That's a record level of suckage.  Something needs to change.  Whether its a new head coach...or just a new guy who is in charge of the draft room, but something has to be done.

    L LondonBrown wrote on
    #47

    @mark-o said:

    I think 8 games can give you a pretty good indication of what you have.   We are pretty sure that Kizer ain't the guy.   Njoku is fine...hardly first round talent to this point (kizer is partially to blame here as well), Peppers either isn't that good or is being used horribly by St. Greg Williams since I haven't seen him do anything other than be a return man.

    Last years picks...Coleman?  Certainly seems like a bust.    They are missing more than they are hitting and they seem to be more interested in just passing off picking until the future rather than taking talented players.  I'm not one who would say they should've taken Wentz (that's easy to do now), I thought there were serious questions about him and his level of competition in college.   I have a hard time with a team that is likely to be 2-30 over a 2 year period (or worse) and saying we shouldn't change anything.  That's a record level of suckage.  Something needs to change.  Whether its a new head coach...or just a new guy who is in charge of the draft room, but something has to be done.

    I hear you Mark. I think Hue should go as he picked RG3, Kizer and nearly AJ McCarron and it's the offense that's crippling this team. He refuses to get help calling offensice plays. That's his baby and he should pay the price more than anyone.....IMO

  • L LondonBrown

    @mark-o said:

    I think 8 games can give you a pretty good indication of what you have.   We are pretty sure that Kizer ain't the guy.   Njoku is fine...hardly first round talent to this point (kizer is partially to blame here as well), Peppers either isn't that good or is being used horribly by St. Greg Williams since I haven't seen him do anything other than be a return man.

    Last years picks...Coleman?  Certainly seems like a bust.    They are missing more than they are hitting and they seem to be more interested in just passing off picking until the future rather than taking talented players.  I'm not one who would say they should've taken Wentz (that's easy to do now), I thought there were serious questions about him and his level of competition in college.   I have a hard time with a team that is likely to be 2-30 over a 2 year period (or worse) and saying we shouldn't change anything.  That's a record level of suckage.  Something needs to change.  Whether its a new head coach...or just a new guy who is in charge of the draft room, but something has to be done.

    I hear you Mark. I think Hue should go as he picked RG3, Kizer and nearly AJ McCarron and it's the offense that's crippling this team. He refuses to get help calling offensice plays. That's his baby and he should pay the price more than anyone.....IMO

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on
    #48

    @londonbrown said:

    I hear you Mark. I think Hue should go as he picked RG3, Kizer and nearly AJ McCarron and it's the offense that's crippling this team. He refuses to get help calling offensice plays. That's his baby and he should pay the price more than anyone.....IMO

    I think RGIII was an ok choice...he was a low cost, high upside potential and we moved on quickly from him.    McCown was a mistake to let go especially with a rookie like Kizer.   If the FO decides that Hue is the problem and moves on from him,  I won't lose any sleep over it.  

  • Mark OM Mark O

    @londonbrown said:

    I hear you Mark. I think Hue should go as he picked RG3, Kizer and nearly AJ McCarron and it's the offense that's crippling this team. He refuses to get help calling offensice plays. That's his baby and he should pay the price more than anyone.....IMO

    I think RGIII was an ok choice...he was a low cost, high upside potential and we moved on quickly from him.    McCown was a mistake to let go especially with a rookie like Kizer.   If the FO decides that Hue is the problem and moves on from him,  I won't lose any sleep over it.  

    Canton DawgC Canton Dawg wrote on
    #49

    @mark-o said:

    I think RGIII was an ok choice...he was a low cost, high upside potential and we moved on quickly from him.    McCown was a mistake to let go especially with a rookie like Kizer.   If the FO decides that Hue is the problem and moves on from him,  I won't lose any sleep over it.  

    I don’t understand the reasoning of not having a veteran QB on the roster mentor the young’uns.

    Two things that will define you: Your determination when you have nothing. Your attitude when you have everything. - Mike McCartney
  • Canton DawgC Canton Dawg

    @mark-o said:

    I think RGIII was an ok choice...he was a low cost, high upside potential and we moved on quickly from him.    McCown was a mistake to let go especially with a rookie like Kizer.   If the FO decides that Hue is the problem and moves on from him,  I won't lose any sleep over it.  

    I don’t understand the reasoning of not having a veteran QB on the roster mentor the young’uns.

    L LondonBrown wrote on
    #50

    @canton-dawg said:

    I don’t understand the reasoning of not having a veteran QB on the roster mentor the young’uns.

    Isnt that Hue's job?

    Mark OM Canton DawgC 2 Replies
  • L LondonBrown

    @canton-dawg said:

    I don’t understand the reasoning of not having a veteran QB on the roster mentor the young’uns.

    Isnt that Hue's job?

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on
    #51

    @londonbrown said:

    Isnt that Hue's job?

    Depends on who is in control over the roster, Hue or the Harvard nerds?

    L Canton DawgC 2 Replies
  • Mark OM Mark O

    @londonbrown said:

    Isnt that Hue's job?

    Depends on who is in control over the roster, Hue or the Harvard nerds?

    L LondonBrown wrote on
    #52

    @mark-o said:

    Depends on who is in control over the roster, Hue or the Harvard nerds?

    With QBs I am sure it's been Hue, all the evidence points that way 

  • L LondonBrown

    @mark-o said:

    Depends on who is in control over the roster, Hue or the Harvard nerds?

    With QBs I am sure it's been Hue, all the evidence points that way 

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on
    #53

    @londonbrown said:

    With QBs I am sure it's been Hue, all the evidence points that way 

    Sure but then it seems like Hue wanted Watson and that didn't happen.   Until someone is fired either out of the front office or someone like Hue, we will never know for sure who anyone really wanted or picked.  

  • L LondonBrown wrote on
    #54

    Hue wanted Pat Mahomes, all the local media were saying that up to and after the draft

  • L LondonBrown

    Hue wanted Pat Mahomes, all the local media were saying that up to and after the draft

    Mark OM Mark O wrote on
    #55

    @londonbrown said:

    Hue wanted Pat Mahomes

    Well..once he starts playing, we will know if we should've just picked him at 12 instead of trading down. 

  • L LondonBrown wrote on
    #56

    But even so, Hue is the HC, he signed up knowing Sashi had final say on roster. It is Hue's job to bring our QBs on, it is his job to bring all the players on, I dont have much sympathy for him. He isn't coaching what he has well and seems to be instead blaming everybody else

    Mark OM 1 Reply
  • RichiswhereR Richiswhere wrote on
    #57

    You stupid mutherfu*kers and your god damn moneyball  bullshlt ...when you have 3 of the top pitchers in baseball you can call it whatever the f*ck you want.

    "You see the Rams are still thinking that they are playing Tony Dorsett" -Jim Brown 1978
    👍
Log in to reply