@ballpeen said:

I am not implying anything. I am saying there are numerous examples of QB's who finally got their chance and had good careers even though their starting point was at a "advanced" age compared to a player who got his shot out of or shortly after college.

Warren Moon and Joe Theisman are a couple more than just popped in to my head.

OK, point made. Also, maybe some of the following were already mentioned: Kurt Warner..Arena League, Roger Staubach..military, Doug Flutie...Canada, Joe Kapp...Canada, Jim Kelly...USFL.

Kelly is in the Top 20 in most passing categories. Had he had his USFL years in the NFL he may well have been hitting close to the top 5 in those categories.

The record keeping agencies, like PFR etc. do count AAFC and AFL records, but not USFL or Canada records.

@the-gipper said:

Do you mean to imply that the PFHOF didn't give Young any credit for his accomplishments with the LA Express? They have certainly given others credit for their non-NFL time. Billy Shaw made the PFHOF without playing a single down as a member of an NFL team.

I am not implying anything. I am saying there are numerous examples of QB's who finally got their chance and had good careers even though their starting point was at a "advanced" age compared to a player who got his shot out of or shortly after college.

Warren Moon and Joe Theisman are a couple more than just popped in to my head.

@the-gipper said:

Do you mean to imply that the PFHOF didn't give Young any credit for his accomplishments with the LA Express? They have certainly given others credit for their non-NFL time. Billy Shaw made the PFHOF without playing a single down as a member of an NFL team.

It's safe to say that Young makes the hall of Fame without his Express or Buccaneer "accomplishments". Took over as the starter in SF at 31.

Zombo

@ballpeen said:

Depends how you look at it. Steve Young sat maybe the first 7 years of his career, so he was old when he finally got his chance. If you look at it that way, you can start to expand the list.

Do you mean to imply that the PFHOF didn't give Young any credit for his accomplishments with the LA Express? They have certainly given others credit for their non-NFL time. Billy Shaw made the PFHOF without playing a single down as a member of an NFL team.

@hoorta said:

Bring back Spurgon Wynn or Paul McDonald.

You've set your sights too low in the quarterback world- sorry. What's wrong with drafting a Brady or Manning for a change that can light it up for 10+ years? The days of Otto Graham were 55 years ago- about time for another, no?

The only oldster qbs I can think of that made good were Roger Staubach and Kurt Warner. Jim Plunkett was a late bloomer too.

Depends how you look at it. Steve Young sat maybe the first 7 years of his career, so he was old when he finally got his chance. If you look at it that way, you can start to expand the list.

@the-gipper said:

I am simply saying that if Brandon Weeden were to last until like age 35-36 his longevity here would be equal to that of any QB in the history of the franchise.

I will take another Brian Sipe or Bernie Kosar over the one year wonders we have had.

Sure, who wouldn't.

I'm simply saying- how many qbs have made the HOF since Otto hung 'em up? Far too many. Just as a Super Bowl appearance, the Browns are way overdue in that regard.

@hoorta said:

Bring back Spurgon Wynn or Paul McDonald.

You've set your sights too low in the quarterback world- sorry. What's wrong with drafting a Brady or Manning for a change that can light it up for 10+ years? The days of Otto Graham were 55 years ago- about time for another, no?

The only oldster qbs I can think of that made good were Roger Staubach and Kurt Warner. Jim Plunkett was a late bloomer too.

I am simply saying that if Brandon Weeden were to last until like age 35-36 his longevity here would be equal to that of any QB in the history of the franchise.

I will take another Brian Sipe or Bernie Kosar over the one year wonders we have had.

@the-gipper said:

The Cleveland Browns have not had a QB serve as their primary starting QB for 10 years since Otto Graham. Plum was 4 years, Ryan 6, Nelsen 4, Phipps 4, Sipe 8, Kosar 7, Couch 4, a few others served 2-3 years (O/Connell, Testaverde, McCoy, Anderson).

If he started for us for 6 years...that would be more than adequate.

.

Bring back Spurgon Wynn or Paul McDonald.

You've set your sights too low in the quarterback world- sorry. What's wrong with drafting a Brady or Manning for a change that can light it up for 10+ years? The days of Otto Graham were 55 years ago- about time for another, no?

The only oldster qbs I can think of that made good were Roger Staubach and Kurt Warner. Jim Plunkett was a late bloomer too.

@hoorta said:

I'll disagree. Yes to a certain extent a running back is as good as his blocking- but I'll stand on what I said- Trent Richardson is no Adrian Peterson, and in all likelihood never will be as good. I won't rehash what was in the other thread about Doug Martin, but usually if a RB is going to be all- World, they'll show it in the first season.

And I will disagree that TR has not show what he is capable of....considering his injuries.

I expect him to be healthy...and all World when he is. Again...way too early.

I said when they drafted Richardson- he had better have an upper echelon HOF career to justify being the #3 pick. Richardson looks to be "serviceable" but go look at the rushing leader board, and try and tell me you can't find "serviceable" backs far lower in the draft.

Too early. He has only played in like 5 games really.

So if you're building for the LONG term, taking a guy who's close to 30 at the most important position is a good idea? The Weeden pick reeked of desperation "win now". In 10 years Andrew Luck will still be winning Super Bowls, and Weeden will be out of football.

The Cleveland Browns have not had a QB serve as their primary starting QB for 10 years since Otto Graham. Plum was 4 years, Ryan 6, Nelsen 4, Phipps 4, Sipe 8, Kosar 7, Couch 4, a few others served 2-3 years (O/Connell, Testaverde, McCoy, Anderson).

If he started for us for 6 years...that would be more than adequate.

Yes, Brandon does look good (other than a propensity to forget he needs passing lanes to throw the ball) but the guy is going to have a real short shelf life in the NFL.

Heckert rolled the dice on a couple injury risks- came up OK on TJ Ward, came up snake eyes on Hardly plays Hardesty. Thought he could get lucky with another Thurman Thomas, and he didn't.

BTW in letting Vickers walk, he wasted several draft picks in the process, picks he could have used to roll the dice on a position of need- Linebackers anyone?

Maybe you think I'm being unreasonably harsh. Overall, I put Heckert's personnel moves in the B- C+ range, not horrible, but far from outstanding.

And I think, really, that 50% of his grade should still be an I for incomplete.

@the-gipper said:

I personally think it is far, far too early to make the kind of assessments you are making overall. I mean, if the major criticism is the Vickers vs. Marecic debate, that is a lame argument. Injuries can occur to people that have no history of them at all. Hello Courtney Brown?

I'll disagree. Yes to a certain extent a running back is as good as his blocking- but I'll stand on what I said- Trent Richardson is no Adrian Peterson, and in all likelihood never will be as good. I won't rehash what was in the other thread about Doug Martin, but usually if a RB is going to be all- World, they'll show it in the first season. I said when they drafted Richardson- he had better have an upper echelon HOF career to justify being the #3 pick. Richardson looks to be "serviceable" but go look at the rushing leader board, and try and tell me you can't find "serviceable" backs far lower in the draft.

So if you're building for the LONG term, taking a guy who's close to 30 at the most important position is a good idea? The Weeden pick reeked of desperation "win now". In 10 years Andrew Luck will still be winning Super Bowls, and Weeden will be out of football. Yes, Brandon does look good (other than a propensity to forget he needs passing lanes to throw the ball) but the guy is going to have a real short shelf life in the NFL.

Heckert rolled the dice on a couple injury risks- came up OK on TJ Ward, came up snake eyes on Hardly plays Hardesty. Thought he could get lucky with another Thurman Thomas, and he didn't.

BTW in letting Vickers walk, he wasted several draft picks in the process, picks he could have used to roll the dice on a position of need- Linebackers anyone?

Maybe you think I'm being unreasonably harsh. Overall, I put Heckert's personnel moves in the B- C+ range, not horrible, but far from outstanding.

@hoorta said:

Sorry Z- there is room for Monday Morning GM-ing here. I agree with the other guys- when you've been smelling turds for 10 years- if one doesn't totally stink, it looks great by comparison.

Well, that's what I said in another thread ... heckert has been OK ... average NFL quality ... which is why our fans like him, we haven't had that in awhile!

As for Weeden and Richardson ... I still think it was the right thing to do. The only flaws in Weeds' game are fixable flaws, he has an incredibly good arm and solid pocket presence, the stuff about him being 28 is irrelevant, if he is a legit franchise QB for any amount of years, it is a good pick. Richardson is the most talented RB we have had in a long, long time, I don't think Shurmmurs offense is ideal for him, but we'll see him break out in the second half of the season.

Zombo

@hoorta said:

Sorry Z- there is room for Monday Morning GM-ing here. I agree with the other guys- when you've been smelling turds for 10 years- if one doesn't totally stink, it looks great by comparison.

1) I just scouted the Scow-boys, and at the top of the list I have to give Heckert serious minus points for letting Vickers walk and drafting Mari-suck. Vickers is a Pro-Bowl level FB (proved it yesterday) Mari-suck- well- sucks. He'd be cut on any other team.

2) Sure- take Hardesty in the second round- but give up picks for a known injury risk?

3) Sorry I'll take Tannehill and Martin over Richardson and Weeden. Let's rebuild around another (relatively) short term band-aid fix. Smart teams don't draft a RB with the 3rd overall pick- and give away picks on top of it. Richardson isn't showing me any Adrian Peterson style points yet either. Richardson can dance, but he doesn't have AP's breakaway gear.

I personally think it is far, far too early to make the kind of assessments you are making overall. I mean, if the major criticism is the Vickers vs. Marecic debate, that is a lame argument. Injuries can occur to people that have no history of them at all. Hello Courtney Brown?

@poppa said:

Nine starters my ass. Just b/c they start for the Browns doesn't make them NFL starters. Of Heckert's first draft only Haden could start for any team. And he was a top ten pick (7th). Ward would be a backup. McCoy 3rd string, maybe. Lauvao's a backup.

Second draft, he WAY overpaid for Taylor. On any other team he'd be in the rotation. But when you spend a #1 and a high #3 on a guy he HAS to be dominant. Taylor isn't. Little would be a role player, not a starter. Cameron a PS player and Marecic would be unemployed.

This last draft the fool traded up again for another injured RB. Then uses the 22nd overall pick on a 28y.o. rookie QB. Brilliant.

The word to best discribe Heckert as a GM is JAG. Just A Guy. Anybody, and I do mean ANYBODY could have done as well as he has over the last 3 drafts. Top ten picks in every draft and NO pro bowlers in the lot.

Clearly he's part of the problem, not the solution.

The good news is, he's gone after 7 more games.

Its probably a great view of your own ego you have there with your head up your ass.

@hoorta said:

Sorry Z- there is room for Monday Morning GM-ing here. I agree with the other guys- when you've been smelling turds for 10 years- if one doesn't totally stink, it looks great by comparison.

1) I just scouted the Scow-boys, and at the top of the list I have to give Heckert serious minus points for letting Vickers walk and drafting Mari-suck. Vickers is a Pro-Bowl level FB (proved it yesterday) Mari-suck- well- sucks. He'd be cut on any other team.

2) Sure- take Hardesty in the second round- but give up picks for a known injury risk?

3) Sorry I'll take Tannehill and Martin over Richardson and Weeden. Let's rebuild around another (relatively) short term band-aid fix. Smart teams don't draft a RB with the 3rd overall pick- and give away picks on top of it. Richardson isn't showing me any Adrian Peterson style points yet either. Richardson can dance, but he doesn't have AP's breakaway gear.

and then took another FB this year in Smelley to make TRich happy.. last i checked he didnt make the team, I know he was a 7th round pick but thats when the good GMs earn their money.

Zombo said:

Wow, way to go back to a post I made in January. Let's see if maybe you liked the latest draft better:

Clearly you should have been in charge of the last draft, then we wouldn't be saddled with Richardson and Weeden.

We'll check back with you on them once their rookie seasons are over.

Zombo

Sorry Z- there is room for Monday Morning GM-ing here. I agree with the other guys- when you've been smelling turds for 10 years- if one doesn't totally stink, it looks great by comparison.

1) I just scouted the Scow-boys, and at the top of the list I have to give Heckert serious minus points for letting Vickers walk and drafting Mari-suck. Vickers is a Pro-Bowl level FB (proved it yesterday) Mari-suck- well- sucks. He'd be cut on any other team.

2) Sure- take Hardesty in the second round- but give up picks for a known injury risk?

3) Sorry I'll take Tannehill and Martin over Richardson and Weeden. Let's rebuild around another (relatively) short term band-aid fix. Smart teams don't draft a RB with the 3rd overall pick- and give away picks on top of it. Richardson isn't showing me any Adrian Peterson style points yet either. Richardson can dance, but he doesn't have AP's breakaway gear.

@poppa said:

Nine starters my ass.

Wow, way to go back to a post I made in January. Let's see if maybe you liked the latest draft better:

This last draft the fool traded up again for another injured RB. Then uses the 22nd overall pick on a 28y.o. rookie QB. Brilliant.

Clearly you should have been in charge of the last draft, then we wouldn't be saddled with Richardson and Weeden.

We'll check back with you on them once their rookie seasons are over.

Zombo

Zombo said:

Nine starters through the draft in two years. Cameron and Hagg could be starting next year as well if they develop, they haven't had an off-season yet.

Zombo

Nine starters my ass. Just b/c they start for the Browns doesn't make them NFL starters. Of Heckert's first draft only Haden could start for any team. And he was a top ten pick (7th). Ward would be a backup. McCoy 3rd string, maybe. Lauvao's a backup.

Second draft, he WAY overpaid for Taylor. On any other team he'd be in the rotation. But when you spend a #1 and a high #3 on a guy he HAS to be dominant. Taylor isn't. Little would be a role player, not a starter. Cameron a PS player and Marecic would be unemployed.

This last draft the fool traded up again for another injured RB. Then uses the 22nd overall pick on a 28y.o. rookie QB. Brilliant.

The word to best discribe Heckert as a GM is JAG. Just A Guy. Anybody, and I do mean ANYBODY could have done as well as he has over the last 3 drafts. Top ten picks in every draft and NO pro bowlers in the lot.

Clearly he's part of the problem, not the solution.

The good news is, he's gone after 7 more games.

Add in the young guys on O, Weeden, Richardson, Little, Gordon, Cameron, Benjamin and that's a nice core.

The biggest holes are in the back-7 of the D. He's done well by bringing in Ward and Haden, and re-signing D Jackson. But really, as far as NFL quality, that's all we got back there. We need 2 OLBs, a CB, and a FS still which could be done in one draft (considering Gocong / Robertson / Maiava may fill-in as one of the OLBs).

I would like to see Heckert reach into FA and find us a more consistent run-blocking OG, and a veteran WR on offense. Also, to fill in one of the above holes on D.

We can address OLB or CB in the 1st round. Add the other and/or a DE in the 3rd. Pick up a FS at some point (this will actually be a deep draft at that position).

I'm just worried a new GM would mean a whole new vision, and a breakup of the core of talent this team has. In my opinion, coaching and inexperience has been the biggest weaknesses so far this year... not lack of talent.

We are drafting like a normal NFL team now.

I'm looking forward to seeing all four of our DTs healthy with the rookies in the mix.

Zombo

@tampadawgs said:

LOL 6th hardest Schedule in the NFL...FACT, know your facts before you bash a top 10 defense

Bengals- 9-7 playoffs

Colts- 2-14

Dolphins-6-10

Titans- 9-7

Raiders 8-8

Hawks- 7-9

49ers- 13-3 could go play for Super Bowl

Texans- 10-6 Playoffs

Rams- 3-13

Jags- 5-11

Bengals- uhh playoffs

Ravens-12-4 could go to the Super Bowl,playoffs

Steelers- 12-4 playoffs

Cards- 8-8

Ravens- Second best record in the AFC

Steelers- Second best record in the AFC

So we played 8 out of 16 games against teams that went to the playoffs, and we played 2 out of the 4 teams remaining with a chance to go to the Super Bowl

10 out of 16 with a .500 record or better

14 out of 16 against teams with a better record than us

131-99

Yea thats a eay Schedule

As I said most Browns fans are Morons

I posted something similar in this thread. You just have to realize that all facts and reason are lost on Ghoolie and Rich..