From an 'At the Game' Perspective
-
What's the point here?
Is it that Anderson is -- right now, today -- better than Quinn? Of course he is. He's played almost SIX TIMES more games than Quinn. He damn well better be better than Quinn.
The real issue is that in going on 34 starts, Anderson IS THE EXACT SAME GUY.
If you like that guy, great. Glad he looked good to you on Sunday.
What was the end result again?
What's the point here?
Is it that Anderson is -- right now, today -- better than Quinn? Of course he is. He's played almost SIX TIMES more games than Quinn. He damn well better be better than Quinn.
The real issue is that in going on 30 starts, Anderson IS THE EXACT SAME GUY.
If you like that guy, great. Glad he looked good to you on Sunday.
What was the end result again?
A loss no doubt....is there a point??
-
Um...yes.
That we lost, despite this "good looking" QB.
Who did what we knew he'd do.
Which is.
Play like an average QB.
And.
Lose.
-
Um...yes.
That we lost, despite this "good looking" QB.
Who did what we knew he'd do.
Which is.
Play like an average QB.
And.
Lose.
-
What's the point here?
Is it that Anderson is -- right now, today -- better than Quinn? Of course he is. He's played almost SIX TIMES more games than Quinn. He damn well better be better than Quinn.
The real issue is that in going on 34 starts, Anderson IS THE EXACT SAME GUY.
If you like that guy, great. Glad he looked good to you on Sunday.
What was the end result again?
What's the point here?
Is it that Anderson is -- right now, today -- better than Quinn? Of course he is. He's played almost SIX TIMES more games than Quinn. He damn well better be better than Quinn.
The real issue is that in going on 34 starts, Anderson IS THE EXACT SAME GUY.
If you like that guy, great. Glad he looked good to you on Sunday.
What was the end result again?
The exact same guy? You don't think he has worked hard on touch on his short passes? Last year that is all we heard about the guy, today it seems put to bed.
He has made the players around him play better. He did it in 2007 and he did it again yesterday.
The team seems more supportive to have him in, the offense clicks better, he's had SIX TIMES more experience and is only 16 months older.
He's our guy, if you can't handle it, stay home.
-
Um...yes.
That we lost, despite this "good looking" QB.
Who did what we knew he'd do.
Which is.
Play like an average QB.
And.
Lose.
Um...yes.
That we lost, despite this "good looking" QB.
Who did what we knew he'd do.
Which is.
Play like an average QB.
And.
Lose.
Yeah, we knew he'd put the defense on their heels, which minimized them pinning their ears back and sacking our QB ten times in two games, We knew that our O-line wasn't as bad as they looked when the opposing defense had no respect for our QB's game. We knew it would put the opposing defense on their heels which would open the Running game and allow Jamal Lewis Jerome Harrison a 100+ yard game. He knew he'd take a rookie receiver in his first full start at the #2 position and churn out production to the tune of 10 catches for 140 yards. We knew he'd stand toe-to-toe with Carson Palmer (again), we knew he'd give us a chance to win.
Why on earth would you post negative about this improvement at this position?
A loss is a loss for sure, but when we had several young kids have the game of their career, is that a loss too? Is that really a negative to dwell on?
-
@planet-0range said:
YES!(Losers)Why do you think Harrison sucks?
I thought he did pretty good. Harrison might have lost the game for us with that fumble-6, but I wouldn't bench him yet, he showed with some added carries that he could produce in helping sustain drives.
He did 'something'.
Same with Mohamed Massaquoi, I disagree with you that he sucks and is a bust. I watched the kid run decent patterns in week #1, I believe I posted about it here. I liked what I saw from this kid in camp, presseason and with & without the ball in the first few weeks. It was so good that we finally had someone throw his way and feed an obvious hot hand. Please give the kid another chance before saying he's a loser.
Again he did 'something' and deserves to play.
-
Holy cow! This has probably been posted already, but i'm not reading through 100 posts on this thread......
Anderson needs to stop hitting his recievers in the facemask.
BTW, one of the things i like to do during those dreadful TV timeouts is watch what is going on at both sidelines. Brady spent a good portion of the game at the end of the player line talking to #74. Who is that guy?
-
There were two instances where Mangini made very RAC-like conservative calls that may have burned the team.
1) kicking the FG with 4th and inches on the 10 and an opportunity to seal the deal. Go for it. Who gives a shit if you're up by 3 or by 6? Go for the TD. Play to win.
2) punting with 19 seconds left in regulation on the Bengals 40 yd line. Go for it or try the 57 yarder. Again, play to win.
There were two instances where Mangini made very RAC-like conservative calls that may have burned the team.
2) punting with 19 seconds left in regulation on the Bengals 40 yd line. Go for it or try the 57 yarder. Again, play to win.
They talked about this on the radio today and I really didn't think anybody was buying into it. I was wrong.
The wind was in our face, Cundiff is a free agent scrap heap kicker, the longest FG in history is only 6 yards farther than that, WHEN we miss it the Bengals are two throws away from a FG, and our defense was good enough to kick it away. that was a no brainer decision. It didn't even cross my mind that that would be an option.
-
Um...yes.
That we lost, despite this "good looking" QB.
Who did what we knew he'd do.
Which is.
Play like an average QB.
And.
Lose.
Yeah, we knew he'd put the defense on their heels, which minimized them pinning their ears back and sacking our QB ten times in two games, We knew that our O-line wasn't as bad as they looked when the opposing defense had no respect for our QB's game. We knew it would put the opposing defense on their heels which would open the Running game and allow Jamal Lewis Jerome Harrison a 100+ yard game. He knew he'd take a rookie receiver in his first full start at the #2 position and churn out production to the tune of 10 catches for 140 yards. We knew he'd stand toe-to-toe with Carson Palmer (again), we knew he'd give us a chance to win.
Why on earth would you post negative about this improvement at this position?
A loss is a loss for sure, but when we had several young kids have the game of their career, is that a loss too? Is that really a negative to dwell on?
Why on earth would you post negative about this improvement at this position?
Because, its no longer about who's better or who helps the team. Its about which forum member is right.
5-11
Come on .mz the pussy yell at me for it.
-
-
Stan, was that Lum being right that starting DA equals a loss in a football game? If so, yup he nailed it.
Masters said:
Stan, was that Lum being right that starting DA equals a loss in a football game? If so, yup he nailed it.No, that Quinn was a major loss ... he nailed it x3.
That's the opposite as GOD, for those scoring at home.
-
Masters said:
Stan, was that Lum being right that starting DA equals a loss in a football game? If so, yup he nailed it.No, that Quinn was a major loss ... he nailed it x3.
That's the opposite as GOD, for those scoring at home.
No, that Quinn was a major loss ... he nailed it x3.
That's the opposite as GOD, for those scoring at home.
That's fantastic. I'll be sure to remember this one in 2 weeks when that x3 is still the same.
By the way, you are EMAL, for those scoring at home
-
Masters said:
That's fantastic. I'll be sure to remember this one in 2 weeks when that x3 is still the same.By the way, you are EMAL, for those scoring at home
Thanks for the vote of confidence for our my Browns. Regardless who was under center, I was still guaranteeing games and looking forward to progress.
You haven't been accussing Lums of only being here for one player and not the Browns have you?
Must be fun to hope the Browns lose ... who's your favorite team?
-
Masters said:
That's fantastic. I'll be sure to remember this one in 2 weeks when that x3 is still the same.By the way, you are EMAL, for those scoring at home
Thanks for the vote of confidence for our my Browns. Regardless who was under center, I was still guaranteeing games and looking forward to progress.
You haven't been accussing Lums of only being here for one player and not the Browns have you?
Must be fun to hope the Browns lose ... who's your favorite team?
Thanks for the vote of confidence for our my Browns. Regardless who was under center, I was still guaranteeing games and looking forward to progress.
You haven't been accussing Lums of only being here for one player and not the Browns have you?
Must be fun to hope the Browns lose ... who's your favorite team?
LMFAO......
I am sorry, I didn't realize to be a card carrying Browns fan I had to blindly guaratee wins for them.
And should you really say any of that with half the garbage you have spewed over the last 3 weeks.
There is hope, and there are realistic expectations. Maybe if you weren't so "gay", you'd understand that.
-
Naa dude, you just declared that you'd be here to gloat when the Browns lose their next two. Don't try to pull up words like "gay" and point this one back on me ... this is on you pup.
-
Naa dude, you just declared that you'd be here to gloat when the Browns lose their next two. Don't try to pull up words like "gay" and point this one back on me ... this is on you pup.
Naa dude, you just declared that you'd be here to gloat when the Browns lose their next two. Don't try to pull up words like "gay" and point this one back on me ... this is on you pup.
I'd go point out the posts where Lums, who you were proping and which my response was aimed at (and you know it.) did the same thing.
But you carry on trying to twist and turn the meaning. Trust me, you didn't miss a calling in politics or in law.
-
What's the point here?
Is it that Anderson is -- right now, today -- better than Quinn? Of course he is. He's played almost SIX TIMES more games than Quinn. He damn well better be better than Quinn.
The real issue is that in going on 34 starts, Anderson IS THE EXACT SAME GUY.
If you like that guy, great. Glad he looked good to you on Sunday.
What was the end result again?
The exact same guy? You don't think he has worked hard on touch on his short passes? Last year that is all we heard about the guy, today it seems put to bed.
He has made the players around him play better. He did it in 2007 and he did it again yesterday.
The team seems more supportive to have him in, the offense clicks better, he's had SIX TIMES more experience and is only 16 months older.
He's our guy, if you can't handle it, stay home.
The exact same guy? You don't think he has worked hard on touch on his short passes? Last year that is all we heard about the guy, today it seems put to bed.
He has made the players around him play better. He did it in 2007 and he did it again yesterday.
The team seems more supportive to have him in, the offense clicks better, he's had SIX TIMES more experience and is only 16 months older.
He's our guy, if you can't handle it, stay home.
Stan, I think you're mostly just chicken-shitting, but I'll play along for fun.
DA is most certainly not "our guy" if by "our guy" you mean "the Browns guy". If he was, he'd have beaten Quinn out in preseason, he'd have started the season, he'd have showed more interest and passion for the job when it was on the line.
He didn't, he didn't and he didn't.
Once again, there is NO ARGUING he is the best QB on our roster RIGHT NOW.
That's NOT THE POINT. The point is -- and always has been -- about finding a LONG-TERM answer at QB.
IF you are going to say "We did that! It's DA!" then I'm going to ask "Why have two different coaching staffs given him the job BY DEFAULT?"
Is that "our guy"? The default guy? The other guy? The not-as-bad guy?
Because that's what DA is. That doesn't make him a bad guy, or a bad player, or a bad QB.
It just makes him what he has SHOWN himself to be: a totally average NFL QB.
So, sure, a totally average veteran starter is better than a rookie starter. Okay. Great.
I'm not getting excited about going 4-12 with a totally average veteran starter instead of 3-13 with the rookie starter.
Sorry. You can keep extolling DA's "growth" all you want, but it still doesn't make sense to play the guy this year unless you're CONVINCED he is your franchise guy.
Which I just can't imagine is the case.
Finally, will I be upset if I'm wrong? Hell no! I'll be incredibly excited to be wrong.
I'm just not expecting it and I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to happen like you seem to be.
-
-
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login