<![CDATA[Oh no, we don't have a superstar]]>This is a great read...and it exemplifies what NE did in the past and what I like about the direction the Browns are going...

Cleveland Browns' receiving corps is without a star -- and they like it

Friday, October 09, 2009

Tony Grossi

Plain Dealer Reporter

Now that Braylon Edwards has been shipped down the Eric Mangini Pipeline to the New York Jets, the question is: Who's No. 1?

Who picks up the slack as the Browns' go-to guy in the passing game? Who's the playmaker, the touchdown scorer?

Along with the baggage, the attitude, and, of course, the drops, gone with Edwards are his 28 career touchdowns.

Those scoring plays don't carry over into the Browns' next game against Buffalo, of course. But the Browns have scored three offensive touchdowns in their past 10 games and 115 offensive possessions. Removing Edwards' playmaking threat from that equation wouldn't seem to help the cause.

"We don't have maybe the superstar that everybody's looking for, but we have quality guys that are out there who want to play and make plays and are looking forward to start gelling," Mike Furrey said.

Here's the state of things on the Browns' receiving corps: Furrey is the team's leading career receiver with 211 catches and seven touchdowns. And he's heading toward a dual role as a safety on special defenses.

Next best in career catches is Chansi Stuckey, who is not the leading striker on Randy Lerner's Aston Villa Football Club but the newest ex-Jet to join the Browns (via the Edwards trade). Stuckey has 43 career receptions -- 11 this season -- and four touchdowns.

Following Stuckey is Josh Cribbs, the former Kent State quarterback and special teams player extraordinaire. Cribbs has 25 catches for 192 yards and one touchdown.

Then come the second-round rookies, Mohamed Massaquoi -- 10 for 179, including eight for 148 in the Cincinnati game -- and Brian Robiskie, who is looking for his first catch.

Not a diva in the group.

"You saw New England [win without a star receiver] for a long time," Furrey said. "Guys just go out there, do what they're supposed to do and keep their mouth shut and make plays and win games.

"That's what it's about. It's great to have big names in the paper, big names around the public, but it's about winning ballgames. That's what we're going to try to do."

Based on his breakout game against Cincinnati, Massaquoi figures to inherit the No. 1 role. But nobody is willing to put that pressure on him right now.

"What I'm looking for is a group of receivers that get open and catch the ball, whether it's the 1, the 2, the 3," Mangini said. "Same thing with the quarterback's reads. I think Tom [brady] used to say that the receiver I like the best is the open one.

"Just be able to run the routes, be able to have the spacing in the routes, being able to provide the quarterback options. It's not always necessarily going to be one guy. I want them all to be able to do that."

Massaquoi is unwilling to declare himself the No. 1 receiver. Pressed to make his case for the job, he said: "I'm still working hard to get better every game. Everybody here can play. Everybody has to wait for opportunity. We're all going to try to capitalize on it."

Perhaps with Massaquoi's Cincinnati game in mind, Mangini said this week he is looking forward to seeing what Robiskie makes of his new opportunity. It's possible the Browns will put both rookies on the field together for the first time against Buffalo, with Furrey in the slot in three-receiver formations.

"We just have to grow up and mature fast," Massaquoi said. "If we're going to be called on to make a couple plays, then we have to be ready when that time comes."

Robiskie and Massaquoi not only play the same position and were drafted in the same round, they talk the same language - one that coaches like to hear.

"I don't know exactly what their plans are, but for me, I know I'm going to have an opportunity this week to come out in practice and get better and hopefully help the team," Robiskie said.

One thing's for certain. You're not likely to see either Massaquoi or Robiskie do a Braylon-like air guitar routine to celebrate a touchdown catch.

"If I'm fortunate enough to score, I'll probably do what I've done and hand the ball to the ref and celebrate with my teammates," Robiskie said.

Massaquoi said he has nothing planned to mark his first touchdown, either. And even if he warms to the No. 1 role, he won't change his personality to fit the prima donna stereotype of an NFL "star" receiver.

"No, I've been the same guy since I was a little kid," he said.

"You don't have to take on a different personality or change the way you approach things just to want to be a guy that's called on to make plays. Your persona or aura don't have to change. There's a lot of guys that are laid back and just go about their own business. Hopefully, I can be one of those guys that continues to make plays and it doesn't come with all the extra stuff."

I have always hated the "look at me" celebrations. If you are a WR and you make a catch...that is your JOB. If you are a LB and you make a tackle...that is your JOB. So what are you celebrating about?

(Maybe next time I DO MY JOB I should get up on my desk and play the air guitar!!!)

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/7611/oh-no-we-don-t-have-a-superstarRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 13:29:44 GMTFri, 09 Oct 2009 14:19:26 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:44:32 GMT]]>Im looking forward to our rookies finally taking to the field...the new era is finally dawning and hopefully a superstar or two will emerge over time..the only regrets at this time are i wish we had a promising rookie under center instead of mr.anderception,brady whenn and ratface the horrid...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122576https://brownsboard.com/post/122576Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:44:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:20:17 GMT]]>

@jadbf said:

And your acting like because mangini is developing his team in a way similar to the way he's been most experinaced with, that it's doomed for failure.

Why is it so shocking that coaches tend to coach the way the coaches that were their mentors coached?

These snippet about the BB coaching tree for a ESPN the magazine article is what concerns me about Mangini and other guys from the BB tree

"So why hasn't Belichick's gang replicated the boss's success? There are theories. One is that there's an inherent learning curve to running a team. Many fail the first time around, including Belichick. "It's hard," he says. "You're doing a lot of things and it's hard to understand all of them, put them together, keep everything straight and make things more efficient, not just a big mess." Mangini had a winning record two of his three years in New York, but admits to being surprised by the amount of organization required. Weis and Crennel both struggled to re-create the same chemistry they found on Belichick's staff. "You just don't get a feel for that type of thing as an assistant," says Weis.

Second, only a few people know what's going on inside the Patriots organization: Belichick, his longtime friend and assistant Ernie Adams, owner Bob Kraft and team president Jonathan Kraft. "We learned about the team online," says one former staffer. Belichick doesn't allow his assistants in on the rationale behind all of his personnel decisions, making it harder for them to navigate key choices on the draft, salary cap and free agency once they're on their own. Belichick develops his guys, "but they're not true head coaches," says Savage

As head coaches, his protégés have all been accused of acting like him, as Belichick was accused of mimicking Bill Parcells. The Mangini former Pats colleagues now see with a whistle -- so serious he's Belichick to an extreme -- isn't the self-effacing guy they used to know. When McDaniels did exactly what Belichick would do in disposing of a quarterback he was unsure of (ask Bernie Kosar and Drew Bledsoe), he was accused of replicating his former boss's arrogance, not his keen eye for personnel. The move might prove prophetic -- it did in New England -- but if Denver loses early, it could backfire. "We're trying like hell to make the New England system work," he says.

But if Belichick's former charges are trying to replicate him, they're actually not doing what he would do. They're not thinking for themselves. After all, Belichick's football thinking is a direct reflection of his life. His work ethic came from a brutal year at Phillips Academy, where he realized he wasn't as smart as he thought. He has picked up wisdom from people he's met in every phase of his career. As an assistant in Denver, Belichick learned how to teach succinctly from then-Broncos DB coach Richie McCabe. Ted Marchibroda in Baltimore taught him to be flexible. He learned how to evaluate talent from his personnel guy in Cleveland, Mike Lombardi; learned the salary cap from NBA legend Jerry West; learned management from reading Jack Welch & the GE Way. He had to be fired by the Browns and wait five seasons for another chance. To stand with the game's greatest coaches, he has had to summon his 34 years of NFL experience, come off like a jerk at times, endure disputes with star players, pay a $500,000 fine for Spygate and win the lottery with a sixth-round Hall of Fame quarterback. It's as imperfect a path as there has ever been in coaching.

That's why, as they depart, Belichick advises his coaches to learn from their time with him, from his experience. Because there's no way to copy it."

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122306https://brownsboard.com/post/122306Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:20:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:13:14 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

Leigh Bodden could not start for a winless Detroit Lions team and now he is the number 1 cornerback for the Patriots, what does that tell you

That there are some cracks and holes in NE D....lol

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122294https://brownsboard.com/post/122294Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:13:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:11:11 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

Nobody has seen Robiske play in the NFL yet because the coaching staff has decided he is not yet good enough to see the field

Now I am no NFL talent evaluator but I saw enough of Robiske in training camp to tell you he had trouble getting separation again the DB's of the Browns and its not like the Browns DB's are the most talented in the league, so I say how is he going to consistantly get separation against good NFL corners?

I believe one of the reasons Quinn struggled was because Braylon was the only receiver he had who was getting open or running crisp routes

I was just saying, since you were using that like about seeing the guy play in the NFL. It goes both ways

Or good enough yet. This same staff did have Cribbs starting at the #2 WR and MoMass as the 4th WR just a couple of weeks ago.

I don't doubt Robiskie may have trouble getting seperation in the NFL. We may find out this Sunday.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122291https://brownsboard.com/post/122291Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:11:11 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:10:35 GMT]]>

@jadbf said:

Actually what the patriots did was build a foundation of a TEAM that can survive with out it's star players, and make very sure they understand that. See all the "star veterans" they cut when they decide they have gotten too old or too expensive. and it wasn't til AFTER that foundation was built that they felt able to bring in some more volitile talent. It started with Corey Dillon and continued with Moss. BUt can you tell me their records would have been all that much diferent without those two guys? I don't think it would.

You act as though the Patriots did not have any talent and they won with a bunch of journeyman and that was not the case and add in you have the best coach in the NFL.

The Browns need to stop trying to be like the Patriots and get there own identity, there is only (1) Bill Belichek, what Belichek and Pioli did in New England won't be duplicated by anyone.

What has Romeo Crennel, Charlie Weiss and Eric Mangini done since they left New England?

Leigh Bodden could not start for a winless Detroit Lions team and now he is the number 1 cornerback for the Patriots, what does that tell you

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122289https://brownsboard.com/post/122289Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:10:35 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:05:08 GMT]]>

Masters said:

In fairness, that question can be posed right back to you.

Nobody has seen Robiske play in the NFL yet because the coaching staff has decided he is not yet good enough to see the field

Now I am no NFL talent evaluator but I saw enough of Robiske in training camp to tell you he had trouble getting separation again the DB's of the Browns and its not like the Browns DB's are the most talented in the league, so I say how is he going to consistantly get separation against good NFL corners?

I believe one of the reasons Quinn struggled was because Braylon was the only receiver he had who was getting open or running crisp routes

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122279https://brownsboard.com/post/122279Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:05:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:00:44 GMT]]>

Masters said:

That was all well and good and I don't disagree with most of it (except possibly the household name part. if you survey'd people on the street, and even some fans of PIT, I bet most would be hard pressed to name anyone on the OL, DL, CBs, or all 4 LBds).

Most guys PIT or NE let go are generally on the decline. NE also brings in vets that already made a name for themselves before coming there, such as Moss, Seau, Harrison, Welker.

None of this still points out a team in the last 10 years where following the blue print of what BB did in NE 10 years agao and has had success.

And of course if you get the players to do their job on every play you will win more than you lose. That isn't exactly a new notion in football, or any sport for that matter. As to playing w/ anyone on any Sunday w/ no stars (maybe a Sunday here and there), you'd be hard pressed to find a single example team that has done that in the last 20+ years.

Masters, you are 100% correct......You need star players to win in the NFL today, its all about talent, the most talented teams win on Sunday, you can have a bunch of average NFL players and they may go 8-8 but its the star players with talent that make the big plays each week that separate the good teams from the very good teams.

The Browns played a game where they won TOP, turnovers, yards gained and still lost to the Bengals because the Bengals Carson Palmer and Chad Ochinko made big plays at the end of the game when they needed to, two guys that are more talented than most guys on the Browns sideline last week.

The Patriot way of 10 years ago will not work today and thats why the Patriots got away from that.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122272https://brownsboard.com/post/122272Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:00:44 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:59:07 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

Have you seen Robiske play in the NFL?

In fairness, that question can be posed right back to you.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122267https://brownsboard.com/post/122267Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:59:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:54:31 GMT]]>

AdaM said:

Don't be a moron. We have no idea of Robo's potential yet.

I'm willing to be you're dead wrong.

What are you willing to bet?

Why is Robiske not playing if he was so good?

What have you seen of Brain robiske to make you feel like he would/will be good....please explain

Have you seen Robiske play in the NFL?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122261https://brownsboard.com/post/122261Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:54:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:54:06 GMT]]>

@mopaji said:

The two NFL dynasties, NE and PITT. I actually texted this EXACT same point to Reghi yesterday but I don't think he read it. Or maybe he did? Grossi does tend to steal emailers' takes and publish them the next day. (thanks for the cred Grossi)

My point was that the system creates the stars. If you name all of the superstars in the league that have been popular from the day they came into the league like McNabb, TO, Moss, Pederson, Cutler, Palmer, V. Young just to name a few, they have no rings between all of them combined. Now, look at the Patriots and Steelers. Every name on those teams (save for Polamaulu) is a household name now because of the rings they won when nobody knew their names. Even Cassel had an excellent year in that system last year and is now, as I stated months ago, doing an excellent Scott Mitchell impression. Also, look at the players that these two dynasties let go, they rarely amount to squat anywhere else in the league.

I'm not saying talent doesn't help but nomatter who is on the field, if the coach can get them to do their job on every play, you win WAAAAAAAAAY more than you lose. And you can play with anybody in the league. on any Sunday.

The system creates the superstar.

That was all well and good and I don't disagree with most of it (except possibly the household name part. if you survey'd people on the street, and even some fans of PIT, I bet most would be hard pressed to name anyone on the OL, DL, CBs, or all 4 LBds).

Most guys PIT or NE let go are generally on the decline. NE also brings in vets that already made a name for themselves before coming there, such as Moss, Seau, Harrison, Welker.

None of this still points out a team in the last 10 years where following the blue print of what BB did in NE 10 years agao and has had success.

And of course if you get the players to do their job on every play you will win more than you lose. That isn't exactly a new notion in football, or any sport for that matter. As to playing w/ anyone on any Sunday w/ no stars (maybe a Sunday here and there), you'd be hard pressed to find a single example team that has done that in the last 20+ years.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122259https://brownsboard.com/post/122259Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:54:06 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:50:22 GMT]]>

@mopaji said:

The two NFL dynasties, NE and PITT. I actually texted this EXACT same point to Reghi yesterday but I don't think he read it. Or maybe he did? Grossi does tend to steal emailers' takes and publish them the next day. (thanks for the cred Grossi)

My point was that the system creates the stars. If you name all of the superstars in the league that have been popular from the day they came into the league like McNabb, TO, Moss, Pederson, Cutler, Palmer, V. Young just to name a few, they have no rings between all of them combined. Now, look at the Patriots and Steelers. Every name on those teams (save for Polamaulu) is a household name now because of the rings they won when nobody knew their names. Even Cassel had an excellent year in that system last year and is now, as I stated months ago, doing an excellent Scott Mitchell impression. Also, look at the players that these two dynasties let go, they rarely amount to squat anywhere else in the league.

I'm not saying talent doesn't help but nomatter who is on the field, if the coach can get them to do their job on every play, you win WAAAAAAAAAY more than you lose. And you can play with anybody in the league. on any Sunday.

The system creates the superstar.

Man you have nailed it 100%

Have you noticed that every linebacker that the Steelers add to there lineup steps in and never misses a beat and yet every Steeler linebacker who leaves the Steelers with the exception of Joey Porter when they leave they never have the same productivity they had with the Steelers, its all about the system.

Some coaches put in a system based on the players they have and you have other coaches who insist on playing there system even if you don't have the players for there system.

Example, The Browns don't have the players to run a attacking 3-4 defense yet they insist on playing a 3-4 because thats Mangini's system, we don't have the linebackers for the 3-4 inside or outside linebackers and Shaun Rogers would be more effective playing a one gap defensive tackle position, Eric Wright would be a better cornerback playing press coverage than zone we have the wrong players trying to play a system that Mangini wants

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122251https://brownsboard.com/post/122251Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:50:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:43:59 GMT]]>

@lemosley01 said:

You didn't address my point, did you?

How can Robiskie be a product of 'over hyping' by this board. Are you suggesting that coaches are getting their drafting advice from fan boards?

We'll never know he sucks until he plays, will we?

Frankly, I'm not expecting him to be that good as it takes most receivers a couple of years to get it together and become really productive.

But, this being CLE Browns fans, if he doesn't go out and put up Moss like numbers, he'll be a 'bust'. Same thing with Massaquoi. When he has a bad game, people will be declaring him a bust just like they declare him the 'savior' now.

No I am not saying that the Browns draft players based on what this board says, what I am saying is that the hype at draft time was that Robiske was the most NFL ready receiver the same thing which was said about Brady Quinn and we see how that has turned out.

I have seen enough of robiske in practice and I'm sure the coaches saw the exact things I did that Robiske has a problem geting separation which is why he is not seeing the field and why I made the statement that Robiske may be as good as he will ever be, Robiske has been play receiver I'm sure since high school and he can't beat out a ex college QB now NFL specials teamer and a journeyman receiver in Fuerry, what does that tell you? It tells me that Robiske is not very good and we wasted another draft selection, and looking at this years draft by Mangini I'm not sure we did all that well.

The guy was a 2nd round pick and should be contributing, everyone said MoMass was a project and would take a year to maybe develop and yet he looks far more polished as a NFL receiver than Robiske does, I hope I am wrong but there was nothing my eyes saw in training camp from Robiske that has me thinking we have something special.

Stan and a few other people attended training camp maybe you can get there opinion of Robiske and what they saw.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122245https://brownsboard.com/post/122245Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:43:59 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:00:56 GMT]]>

Masters said:

I think the notion is all well and good, but outside of NE, who else has had success w/ that plan (note NE has also gone away from that plan).

The two NFL dynasties, NE and PITT. I actually texted this EXACT same point to Reghi yesterday but I don't think he read it. Or maybe he did? Grossi does tend to steal emailers' takes and publish them the next day. (thanks for the cred Grossi)

My point was that the system creates the stars. If you name all of the superstars in the league that have been popular from the day they came into the league like McNabb, TO, Moss, Pederson, Cutler, Palmer, V. Young just to name a few, they have no rings between all of them combined. Now, look at the Patriots and Steelers. Every name on those teams (save for Polamaulu) is a household name now because of the rings they won when nobody knew their names. Even Cassel had an excellent year in that system last year and is now, as I stated months ago, doing an excellent Scott Mitchell impression. Also, look at the players that these two dynasties let go, they rarely amount to squat anywhere else in the league.

I'm not saying talent doesn't help but nomatter who is on the field, if the coach can get them to do their job on every play, you win WAAAAAAAAAY more than you lose. And you can play with anybody in the league. on any Sunday.

The system creates the superstar.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122193https://brownsboard.com/post/122193Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:00:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:31:15 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

Robiske SUCKS and you will soon find out when he gets on the field

Guy was not dominant at Ohio State and now you think he will become a good NFL player

Most NFL ready receiver scouting reports said.....How did that turn out for you...ha ha ha

You didn't address my point, did you?

How can Robiskie be a product of 'over hyping' by this board. Are you suggesting that coaches are getting their drafting advice from fan boards?

We'll never know he sucks until he plays, will we?

Frankly, I'm not expecting him to be that good as it takes most receivers a couple of years to get it together and become really productive.

But, this being CLE Browns fans, if he doesn't go out and put up Moss like numbers, he'll be a 'bust'. Same thing with Massaquoi. When he has a bad game, people will be declaring him a bust just like they declare him the 'savior' now.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122163https://brownsboard.com/post/122163Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:31:15 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:27:32 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

Guy was not dominant at Ohio State and now you think he will become a good NFL player

To be fair, it's a bit hard to be dominate at WR when you have Boeckman and Pryor throwing passes to you for the 2 years you were a starter.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122155https://brownsboard.com/post/122155Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:27:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:27:20 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

Robiske SUCKS and you will soon find out when he gets on the field

Guy was not dominant at Ohio State and now you think he will become a good NFL player

Most NFL ready receiver scouting reports said.....How did that turn out for you...ha ha ha

Don't be a moron. We have no idea of Robo's potential yet.

I'm willing to be you're dead wrong.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122154https://brownsboard.com/post/122154Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:27:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:25:57 GMT]]>

@pumpkin-eater said:

Jerry Rice didn't have very good 40 YD times.

Neither did Steve Largent. 🙂

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122152https://brownsboard.com/post/122152Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:25:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:24:29 GMT]]>

@lemosley01 said:

So...Mangini is listening to this board (and other OSU homer boards) to make draft decisions?

Remember, Robiskie was drafted at #36. It seems SOMEONE thinks he is

A ) Pretty good now

B ) Shows that he can improve

Teams won't draft someone at #36 who they think is as good as he'll ever be. He hasn't even hit his physcial peak yet.

Robiske SUCKS and you will soon find out when he gets on the field

Guy was not dominant at Ohio State and now you think he will become a good NFL player

Most NFL ready receiver scouting reports said.....How did that turn out for you...ha ha ha

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122149https://brownsboard.com/post/122149Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:24:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:18:10 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

Dude, Robiske is as good as he will ever be and he was not a dominant receiver at Ohio State another product of people on this board overrating Ohio State players, where is Antione Pittman now? out of the league and we had posters who wanted the Browns to draft this guy

Robiske can't get separation against NFL corners thats why he is not playing, I attended practice many days and saw this with my own eyes not reading a newspaper

So...Mangini is listening to this board (and other OSU homer boards) to make draft decisions?

Remember, Robiskie was drafted at #36. It seems SOMEONE thinks he is

A ) Pretty good now

B ) Shows that he can improve

Teams won't draft someone at #36 who they think is as good as he'll ever be. He hasn't even hit his physcial peak yet.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122145https://brownsboard.com/post/122145Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:18:10 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:11:36 GMT]]>

@sony-reed said:

John, we have tried the Patriot way with RAC and it did not work and now we are trying it again and its not going to work because there is only 1 Billy B and Eric Mangini or none of the other Belichek former assistants is making anybody think they are the next Belichek.

The Pittsburgh Steelers hae been as successful as the Patriots yet I don't see anyone trying to be like the Steelers which amazes me

Tell me why nobody wants to be like the Colts, Titans, Giants or Eagles who like the Steelers I would be trying to copy

No, we didn't really...because RAC was saddled with Savage who didn't necessarily give him the players he wanted. The overall dysfunction between Savage and RAC easily overwhelmed any attempt by RAC to do the NE way. Just look at some of the draft picks made by Savage and ask yourself if NE would ever have done that.

BQ is prime example. NE would NEVER have given up a 1st the next year to get a player. NEVER!!!

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122140https://brownsboard.com/post/122140Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:11:36 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:10:36 GMT]]>

@wpb-dawg-fan said:

Sony...come on. We have known all along that Mangini's style is patterned after his mentor (duh). So, if we mimic their path to success, what does it matter as long as it works.

I, for one, love the 'no superstar' approach. It went 14-0 for the Dolphins (remember, no name defense, not a single HOF player on it) and it worked pretty good for NE on offense for years (looking at what happened last year I am even MORE convinced Tom Brady is a product of a system).

So, if you want to call it copy cat...go ahead...but this IS a copy cat league.

IF that line about Brady is true, BB would be really wise to trade him for a few first rounders here soon and get some pieces for the future.

It would be the Gretzky deal of our time.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122138https://brownsboard.com/post/122138Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:10:36 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:02:13 GMT]]>

@playgroundlegend said:

Thats exactly my point, Robiskie could be the best wideout we have.

Im not even an OSU fan, but im sick of people calling him slow, and the fact that he wont stretch the field. Both of which are very untrue.

People are saying MM will stretch the field and Robiskie wont, yet he's slower and not as big as Robiskie, doesnt make sense

thats all im trying to point out

(plus im an Anquan Boldin fan and he ran a 4.72)

Dude, Robiske is as good as he will ever be and he was not a dominant receiver at Ohio State another product of people on this board overrating Ohio State players, where is Antione Pittman now? out of the league and we had posters who wanted the Browns to draft this guy

Robiske can't get separation against NFL corners thats why he is not playing, I attended practice many days and saw this with my own eyes not reading a newspaper

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122135https://brownsboard.com/post/122135Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:02:13 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:59:05 GMT]]>

@wpb-dawg-fan said:

Sony...come on. We have known all along that Mangini's style is patterned after his mentor (duh). So, if we mimic their path to success, what does it matter as long as it works.

I, for one, love the 'no superstar' approach. It went 14-0 for the Dolphins (remember, no name defense, not a single HOF player on it) and it worked pretty good for NE on offense for years (looking at what happened last year I am even MORE convinced Tom Brady is a product of a system).

So, if you want to call it copy cat...go ahead...but this IS a copy cat league.

John, we have tried the Patriot way with RAC and it did not work and now we are trying it again and its not going to work because there is only 1 Billy B and Eric Mangini or none of the other Belichek former assistants is making anybody think they are the next Belichek.

The Pittsburgh Steelers hae been as successful as the Patriots yet I don't see anyone trying to be like the Steelers which amazes me

Tell me why nobody wants to be like the Colts, Titans, Giants or Eagles who like the Steelers I would be trying to copy

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122131https://brownsboard.com/post/122131Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:59:05 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Oh no, we don't have a superstar on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:58:17 GMT]]>

@playgroundlegend said:

Thats exactly my point, Robiskie could be the best wideout we have.

Im not even an OSU fan, but im sick of people calling him slow, and the fact that he wont stretch the field. Both of which are very untrue.

People are saying MM will stretch the field and Robiskie wont, yet he's slower and not as big as Robiskie, doesnt make sense

thats all im trying to point out

(plus im an Anquan Boldin fan and he ran a 4.72)

Keep in mind, there is 40 times on a track in shorts, and there is football speed in pads.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/122130https://brownsboard.com/post/122130Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:58:17 GMT