So, I'm back to take back my once short lived job of posting power rankings that I held last year. Chris gave me a second shot, so I'm jumping right back on to list Offseason Power Rankings before our first game.
This is basically a "at least for this game, you were wrong," kind of thing. Because they all kind of were and it's fun to look back and taunt. Too bad that they didn't see what we knew, as these are all well... dreary. Sorry Chris, we'll have to wait till the season starts to get us up the charts, I think.
ESPN: 28/32
The first year of the Mike Holmgren era could be rough. This team lacks talent across the board.
We all know about ESPN so, I'll leave it at that...
S.I.: 29/32
Still can't believe the Browns could end up paying Jake Delhomme $7 million to play quarterback this year. For a team I rank so low, there's a lot about Cleveland I like, though the passing game is not one of those things.
It's starting to seem like Delhomme could be worth that $7mil and it's a uncapped year so, who cares? I like our TEs in the passing game, that alone makes our passing game KIND OF a threat.
U.S.A. Today: 29/32
In the long term, having Mike Holmgren running the team is positive. In the short term, having Jake Delhomme at QB is not.
Yes, and possibly no/ yes. Jury is still out on this one.
Bleacher Report: 26/32
I might be one of the few who believe that Eric Mangini and Mike Holmgren can form a successful long-term partnership. But in the short-term, Jake Delhomme is their staring quarterback.
There is enough good stuff here, that I won't disagree.
Pickings were slim for Preseason Rankings. I hope low 20's won't be a reoccurring trend through the season. I'll put ESPN up, but don't really ever listen to it; much like Mike Lombardi. Hope this small segment will create some good discussion throughout the season. I'll try to do the best I can. LET'S GO BROWNS!
0 recs | 296 comments
Considering it’s pre-season, and before our first game, they seem mostly reasonable, but I’m still forced to vote no, because well, it’s pre-season and their power rankings.
Simmsinns - August 16, 2010
And it’s compiled of ESPN and newspaper rankings, ew. We are just more in depth with our offseason than these overall media outlets would ever be. They just know the surface, we know the inside or the underwater side of the iceberg.
SpecialBrownie - August 16, 2010
ESPN is really slanted against the Browns. The team lacks depth? I dont buy it. We have good secondary, running back, DL, fullback, and even QB depth. Our LB and right side O-Line are suspect and our O-line depth is dreadful but over all from what I can see, there is no reason to think this team will be awful this year.
The GB announcers said it best….“The Browns are going to be a team that suprises a few people this year.” IE> Kick someone who thought we were an easy win in the junk type surprise.
LiveandDiefortheDawgPound - August 16, 2010
And another thing, while Im in the rant mood. What is with the Delhoome bashing by the media? Yes he had one bad year, but then again alot of pro Quarterback had bad years. I think its right to be a little worried but he has a very good track record thoughout his career.
I have always been a fan of his because he seems like a humble hard working guy who really enjoys being in the NFL.
LiveandDiefortheDawgPound - August 16, 2010
He’s also a SB QB. This is rarely fluked. Only fluke I remember that we even took a flyer on was Dilfer and he’s a dick.
SpecialBrownie - August 16, 2010
I wonder if he would be getting less bashing had he gone somewhere other than Cleveland?
Villeslgr - August 16, 2010
I doubt it. He had an awful game in the playoffs in ‘09 and followed that up with a terrible year last season. Most people think he’s done, and it has nothing to do with playing in Cleveland.
Why would he get bashed just because he’s with the Browns? Do you really think there is some national hatred of Cleveland that is causing these views?
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
Hatred might be a bit harsh. I think the media has an “East Coast” bias against the Clevelands of the league. It carries through to these rankings. Really, every writer is trashing on the Browns for signing Delhomme. I can’t find any writer that finds any value in bringing an experienced and successful QB in to this team. You would think at least some would give credit… Come to think of it, most praise Holmgren in the first statement and then (basically) rip him for Delhomme.
Doesn’t any of the media remember John Fox’s tearful pressed when he released Delhomme? Delhomme has something special – and the experience – to deserve a little credit for being a valuable piece to this team.
In the end, no matter if the comments are positive or negative; the national media doesn’t get it.
Spidey - August 17, 2010 via mobile
Well, if he likes him so much then why did he release him? Maybe because he isn’t good any more.
Again, every fan thinks the naional media doesn’t “get” their team. They think the media underrates them and doesn’t give them respect and all that stuff. It gets old hearing the same whining from fans all the time.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
delhomme was released because the panthers owner (Jerry Richardson) is convinced that there will be a lockout in 2011. if you look at their roster they dumped a massive amount of salary for this year. delhomme is still getting 13 mil from the panthers this year but they got rid of his futures salary. there are lots of good players that were panthers who were sent packing (safety chris harris for instance) With Fox (and the entire staff) in their contract years themselves, in the event of a lockout he wouldnt have to pay a coaching staff, roster, front office would likely be reduced. he’d still have stadium overhead but he’d have a great chance to use the tv revenue to pull the franchise out of debt.
there is a very realistic chance that if the browns struggle in 2010 that Fox & his entire staff (many are former browns coaches) could replace them if there is football in 2011.
sleepy042 - August 17, 2010
Good points. Getting rid of Delhomme was not due to purely his poor performance in 2009. Contract and team direction had a lot to do with it. And the decision came from above John Fox.
Spidey - August 17, 2010 via mobile
Jake Delhomme was released because he was terrible and they had a better QB on their roster.
You realize that Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn combined to throw 117 more passes than Delhomme last year and had 1 FEWER INT?
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
Yes. I can’t believe these fans who are surprised that people across the country expect Delhomme to struggle this year. I mean, I’m all for being optimistic, but you can’t be so biased that you ignore his terrible stats last year.
Here’s the thing — if Delhomme was signed by any other team then I’m sure these same people here would be saying that he sucks and he’s finished, but because he’s on the Browns now they’re making excuses for him. That’s just letting their fandom cloud their views.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
Delhomme is worse than Quinn and Anderson? You’d rather have Quinn and Anderson starting ? Really??? (Yes, I can exaggerate your position just as you have mine :-)…
Look, we are fans are happy to have a competently smart QB leading the offense. We are happy that this guy is not some jerk like Dilfer or Garcia, and has led his team to a Super Bowl and NFC Championship. Is he going to the Pro Bowl? No. Is he taking this team to the playoffs? Not likely. But, is he a step in the right direction? Definitely.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
How am I exaggerating your opinion?
And how is getting an old quarterback who is on the decline and coming off a terrible year considered “a step in the right direction”? Why, because he’s better than Quinn or Anderson? That doesn’t mean he still won’t be a hinderance to our offense and a reason to be skeptical about our team this year.
Of course, I hope he plays well, but there really isn’t much of a reason to think that he will. If he could just be below average than I’d be happy. But you really can’t fault any national writers for expressing doubt that Delhomme will help the Browns this year, and it has NOTHING to do with any Cleveland bias or whatever excuses you want to give.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
You think Jake will hinder the offense?
This seems to be a point where we disagree – I don’t think he will hinder the offense. I think he will be an average QB who will help the rest of the team feel confident in his competence. I don’t think my opinion of bringing an experienced veteran to work with the offense reflects “homerism” – but why does that matter? This is a Cleveland Browns discussion board. You will find these ideas everywhere. But, why can writers say one aging start (LT) will have a positive impact for the Jets, while another will not for the Browns?
As for the national writers, the point I’m raising is the inconsistency in praising Holmgren on the one hand and then dismissing his decision to bring Jake in to play QB on the other. Contrary to what others say – the Browns made one of the biggest splashes this off-season by hiring Holmgren. He’s a smart guy, and everyone should give him a “little” benefit of the doubt on this decision.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
If he plays like he did last year, then absolutely.
Delhomme crippled an offense with two 1,000 yard rushers and Steve Smith in a poor defensive division.
You drop him into this division with this supporting cast and expect him to do well? I hope you are correct, but I’m not buying. He needs to protect the football, and that is just something that he just doesn’t do anymore.
When 31 NFL franchises won’t touch a player with a ten foot pole, yet one offers them 7 million, that is usually a good indicator that the one team is making a mistake.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
The Saints legitimately wanted Delhomme to win their Super Bowl if Brees went down, so I don’t think it is accurate to say no other team would touch him with a 10 foot pole.
I still think people in the national media are trashing our signing of Delhomme far too much. It isn’t like we expect him to be our savior, it isn’t like we signed some never-was, this is an experienced guy who has had some success in the league.
Sure, it is doubtful that he regains his pro bowl, super bowl contending form. But I think—and I think Holmgren thinks—that last year was an anomaly for Delhomme and he can and will do better here. And the (very) early results support that.
Some pundits are acting like we just signed Ryan Leaf in free agency, you have to admit we have a good shot to be better than that.
rufio - August 17, 2010
This…This summarizes exactly what I think about this.
bross09 - August 17, 2010
Same here. Plus I’ll attribute part of the negativity shown toward signing Delhomme to the fact that there was the possibility of trading for McNabb. The only concerns with McNabb are his age (like Delhomme) and history of getting injured (which he always plays through).
Neither of those two are long term solutions. McNabb might or might not go 4-5 more years. But signing Delhomme only costs the Browns money. A trade for McNabb would’ve cost draft picks and talent they couldn’t afford to give up.
It all comes down to how effective are Holmgren and Heckert at talent evaluation and what their short and long term strategies are for improving the team. They felt Delhomme was the best option. So far, I think they’re right.
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
I personally wouldn’t have given up an early 2nd for him (TJ Ward). He was for a while demanding a first and for what the browns would get and achieve with him for 2-3 years, I probably wouldn’t even given up our 2nd for him. The fallacy in logic here is that McNabb was not ‘free’ like Delhomme was (technically, we would pay both, but ‘free agent’). We would have had to mortgage a key piece in building our future to get him, whereas there was nothing we had to give up for Jake.
bross09 - August 18, 2010
THIS.
emily522 - August 17, 2010
A lot of of think this way. He’s our best QB since ’99.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
what about Kelly Holcomb? that one year you guys went to the Playoffs
PCISteeler - August 18, 2010
are you just trolling for lols? Kelly Holcomb had ONE good GAME. Seneca Wallace I believe had one good game once. Is he better than Hasselbeck?
bross09 - August 18, 2010
Yeah and Couch played just as much as Holcomb that year.
North Coast Flea - August 18, 2010
I think of it like this. Mike Holmgren knows a whole lot more and is a whole lot smart than you, me, the guy down the street, or some beat writer or talking head.
Delhommes’ good enough for him, he’s good enough for me.
troy145 - August 18, 2010
I agree that Holmgren knows more about QB’s than any of us and anyone in the media, but that doesn’t mean that people can’t criticize a move he makes. He’s not infallible.
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
thanks for putting words in everyone’s mouths.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
Are you comparing Brady Quinn & Derek Anderson with Jake Delhomme?
Yes, Jake had a bad season last year, but the Panthers cutting him was due in larger part to his contract. They could have kept him as a number 2, but his contract was too high and the team was cleaning house of older players with big contracts.
March 4, Charlotte Observer… Carolina Panthers release Jake Delhomme
The reference to “being any good” or being “terrible” must be considered in the context of contract. I think we can all agree that he is not worth $13 million/year, but to argue that he is worse than Brady Quinn??? I think you might be going too far in that statement.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
Contracts must be a part of the equation. On an equal playing field, Delhomme > Quinn.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
If we are talking about horrendous QB play, then yes I am.
Sure, but if he looked anything like a NFL QB, they wouldn’t have. He sucked, Matt Moore was better, so they cut him. If it was just about the money they wouldn’t have paid him 12 million dollars to go away.
As for the other quotes, what do you want the Panthers to say? “He was horrible? He absolutely killed us last year?!” It was a farewell press conference for him. Of course they weren’t going to do that.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
if you’re only talking about last year it’s a valid comparison. But comparing Jose Bautista to Albert Pujols makes sense right now.
The point is, you can’t use one year to evaluate a player. I’m under no illusion that Jake Delhomme will play above average or even average. I do not think, however, he will play anywhere close to as terrible as last year.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
Jake Delhomme is coming to a tougher division and a weaker supporting cast, and we really expect him to be better?
I really want to believe that he is going to be decent for the Browns, but what makes you think that? Because he was mediocre two seasons ago?
All signs point to this ending really poorly.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
He is another full year removed from Tommy John, and away from a situation in which something was clearly wrong mentally/psychologically with him. He has played better in the past. The NFL features many QBs over 30 that are still playing at a high level.
He has a much better LT, and a better C. He will have better protection on his blind side. I expect that his backs will be pretty solid. Carolina has no above average WRs except for Smith, and they don’t have TEs who can catch the ball either. Right now, it looks like we have at least two decent WRs and two TEs who can catch the ball. And we have a player who is capable of breaking one every time he touches the ball in space. We have several packages defenses must account for in addition to our “normal” offense.
How is it so crazy to expect a modest rebound from him?
rufio - August 18, 2010
My reasoning is simple;
1. Much tougher division and conference. He traded 6 games against New Orleans, Atlanta and Tampa for 6 against Baltimore, Cincy, and Pittsburgh, all three are top 5 defenses. Last year he played 3 AFC teams (Buffalo, Jets, Miami) and posted QB ratings of 55.6, 12.7, and 60.3 with a 1-8 TD/INT ratio.
2. Like you said, I think Jake’s issues are in his head. Just like Edwards, I didn’t buy it when people said that getting out of Cleveland would solve his drops, so I don’t buy getting out of Carolina will solve Jake’s issues either.
I am by no means saying that it isn’t possible for Jake to bounce back. I would love to be wrong and have everyone call me a dumbass. I just think it is a longshot when you look at the numbers.
Even with a modest rebound from last year he will be a bad QB.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
Braylon’s problem isn’t that he lacks confidence, it’s that he has too much of it. According to him, he couldn’t possibly be the one limiting his game, it was our fault. Clearly this is not the case.
I don’t see how him changing locations is supposed to cure him of being delusional.
Delhomme on the other hand, seems to think that he can control his level of play; he seems to think he didn’t do a good job of limiting turnovers and he seems like he was frustrated. Here, he has a chance to forget about that frustrating year and start over in a new offense, with new players around him and new coaches.
I think a modest rebound from last year is all I am arguing we should expect from Delhomme. If that makes him still a bad QB, fine, but it’s still a rebound from last year. All I see is people expecting him to be as atrocious as he was last year, which I think is a little unfair.
rufio - August 18, 2010
well…in that group you have the Jets great D with Revis, Miami’s very good (but maybe not great) D, and Buffalo, whose D wasn’t great, but was a good D against the pass.
bross09 - August 18, 2010
That is my point, the AFC is full of good defenses.
The only reason the Bills were “good” against the pass is because they were 30th against the run. Teams didn’t have to pass.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
I don’t know. I mean, I’m not sold on Delhomme, but I think it could easily go either way. We just don’t know, yet.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - August 18, 2010
I don’t want it to sound like I am not rooting for Jake. It would be awesome for him to find his game again and be great for us.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
It was about money because they escalated the cap hit to the uncapped year by cutting him right away.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
I understand that fact, but the bottom line is that the Panthers wouldn’t have cut him if he could have helped the Panthers win.
If he was paid veterans minimum, I believe that he still would have been cut so Matt Moore would have a chance to “be the man”. I don’t think Moore could have done that with Jake still in that locker room.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
I agree partially. I do not agree that if Delhomme were making the minimum that he would have been cut. I think they simply bench him and let Moore take over.
Roger Dorn - August 18, 2010
Your point here seems to point more to the fact that they released him because Matt Moor was ‘their guy’. I believe this to somewhat be true, and I understand the rationale and believe this was a factor. I am not sure if he can help a team win or contribute, but I don’t think the fact that he was cut to give Moore the chance to be ‘the guy’ is sufficient proof to say he can’t be a factor.
bross09 - August 18, 2010
bernie19kosar
could the same be said for the rams and Kurt Warner?
please don’t think i am saying that JD will do the same for us, just trying to play devils advocate here(and hoping that JD will do the same for us!)
allsides - August 18, 2010
Ha, B19K knows all about being a Modell’s Advotcate. He’s writes an article with the same name ; ]
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
bernie19kosar
good point , i also want to add that delhomme has had some great seasons, and anderson and quinn really haven’t…..so to me, the potential of him performing well for us I think is better.
anderson did have a good 1/2 season, no, a great 1/2 season, i’ll admit that…I am just saying that I feel there’s a much better chance for the browns to get a good QB performance with JD and SW under center.
That’s why I support the decision they’ve made.
allsides - August 18, 2010
I’m not saying that we should have kept DA or Quinn, I just don’t like handing the job to Delhomme. I would be happier if Wallace was the starter.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
I saw you posted that before, I didn’t make that statement, nor do I think there is a national hatred for the Browns, please don’t lump me in with that. Remember the groupthink?
The reason I asked is because it’s not unheard of that while someone is busy criticizing a crappy team they also tend to crap on individual players. With most of the focus on the Browns being about how we aren’t that good, most stories are tending to focus on our changes in the offseason, which would include JD.
Also after we have gone through the QBs we have gone through there is obviously going to be a greater focus on whoever our QB is, Delhomme.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
The Media Forgets
Holmgren knows his QBs, he took big risks in taking part in getting the Wasted, addicted, and apathetic Brett Favre from the falcons and the rest is history and in the same way he traded down in the first round and a 3rd rd. pick away to get Matt Hasslebeck, it seems he knows who to take the risk on and it has payed off so far.
tkiller314 - August 18, 2010
He also drafted David Greene in the third round.
I’m just saying, no one bats 1.000
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
He also drafted Mark Brunell and Ty Detmer. Brunell had some good years with Jacksonville and Detmer made his rounds (as we remember well, unfortunately).
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
Also true.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
Had he gone to a big market as a backup you probably would be hearing much, if anything about him.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
yeah, but that’s because delhomme as a backup is much different than delhomme as a starter, regardless of the city. i know it sounds a little senseless, but there are guys who i’d love as a backup but hate as a starter. personally, i like delhomme and think he’ll have a decent year for us; but he seems like one of those guys.
i think these same media guys who do the power rankings would call the giants, cowboys, jets, etc. getting delhomme as their backup a great move, while cleveland getting him as a starter is a bad move. it isn’t any bias toward the browns, just the difference in the two situations. that’s just one man’s opinion.
Dawg Nuts - August 17, 2010
Exactly right.
TheDriveStillHurts - August 17, 2010
There is the difference.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
I think that was his point.
TheDriveStillHurts - August 17, 2010
Yeah, my bad.
Reading comprehension is my second best skill behind speling and puncuation.!
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
You forgot counting
North Coast Flea - August 17, 2010
REC
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
This made me laugh.
golanbatrac - August 17, 2010
I checked my work and I forgot to carry a two. Damn you long division.
Won’t happen again.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
I dont know either, it’s like they have short term memories or something. Delhomme certainly has his issues but all of a sudden b/c of last year he ‘sucks’ and ‘always’ did. It’s the same short term memory that they have when some college QB has ONE, count ‘em, ONE good season and now they’re a ’can’t miss’ number 1 pick and everybody’s slobbering his knob.
…and of course if if delhomme actually plays well we’ll get the saaaame writers talking about what a ‘valiant’ resurgence he’s had and how it was ‘misguided’ to label him after one season. But again, for right now, “Delhomme sucks and so do the browns, or at least that’s what I heard from someone who say them play once.” " will remain the order of the day.
Im sorry, but I cant imagine by the majority of the articles they even saw the browns play last year…which is a distinct possibility. Otherwise they would know anything, absolutely anything is an improvement over Derek Anderson/Brady Quinn.
johnnyphoenix - August 17, 2010
funny stuff.
Dawg Nuts - August 17, 2010
Wow. Do you actually believe this?
When a quarterback in his late 30’s has a terrible year then the obvious conclusion is that he’s on the downhill of his career and probably finished as a good player. Now, I hope that’s wrong, but you can’t seriously say that all the criticism of Delhomme is misguided or based out of ignorance. You are looking at this as a Browns fan not as an objective observor.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
To disagree with your logic I give you a case of wrongful labeling…….Kurt Warner. He had more then a few bad season and came back. Delhomme has been good most of his career. 1 bad season is not the be all end all of a QB. You want to buy the media crap that he is done, suck it up. I dont buy it yet. If he turns out to be crap then Ill eat my words but adding him to the roster was not a bad move period. If nothing else as a mentor for McCoy and an outlet for Seneca.
LiveandDiefortheDawgPound - August 17, 2010
I have said it before, Kurt Warner is a Hall of Fame QB.
Jake Delhomme is league average at best. Horrible comparison.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
He’s still an example of a QB having a huge dip in his stats and then rebounding at an older age. The point is valid.
No one is arguing for Delhomme as a HOFer. Bross, you have the name of the logical fallacy on that one?
rufio - August 18, 2010
Rufio, I think along the same lines as you on Delhomme but B19K brings up a valid point. The likelihood of a HOF caliber QB bouncing back from a bad year in his mid 30s is greater than avg to above avg QB.
Everything hinges on whether he has overcome that mental/psychological hurdle he faced last season. He knows what caused it. He knows why he was putting pressure on himself. He’s stated that he doesn’t feel the same pressure since coming here. If we are to take him at his word, then we could expect a decent year from him.
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
Kurt Warner is better than Jake Delhomme therefore Kurt Warner has a better chance of re-attaining his former level is still bad logic.
He obviously needs to rebound mentally/psychologically, but it is no less likely that Jake reverts to his pre-07 form than it was that Warner reverted to his 2001 Rams form for Arizona.
It is not very likely that Jake reverts to Kurt’s 2001 Rams form.
rufio - August 18, 2010
HOFers apparently do not face mental adversity. There so awesome they can flip a switch and be better.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
They’re
golanbatrac - August 18, 2010
Damn.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
But they compared Delhomme to Warner who is a Hall of Famer so Bernie’s point is valid. You can’t expect Delhomme to do something just because Warner did.
Warner never had a huge dip in his stats; he was injured at the end of his time in St. Louis (in his early 30’s) and played poorly because of that, and then started occasionally for the next couple years in NY and Arizona but he still played well over those starts. Then he got the starters job back and continued playing well. But he never had a season anything close to what Delhomme did last year, so it’s really not a vail comparison anyways.
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
There was no comparison between the two players, there was no “if Warner can do it, Delhomme can do it” it was evidence of a player doing exactly what you all think is so impossible.
So Warner gets a multi-year pass for being injured at the end of his time in St Louis, but Delhomme doesn’t for the tommy john?
rufio - August 18, 2010
There argument is stupid and obviously not vaild, I don’t see why BB said it was.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
Their
golanbatrac - August 18, 2010
That’s okay. I realize there are many things you don’t understand.
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
Wow, no more arguing about the point now huh? This is the point where you relize you have nothing left to counter with, so you try to change the subject by resorting to making fun of someone.
You are so predictable and juvenile. (Not being a hypocrite btw, because so am I sometimes.)
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
Yup. We pretty much see the exact same thing with THIS comment below.
Just ignore the legitimate comments addressing him directly, than make vague statements he views as clever comebacks.
Simmsinns - August 18, 2010
Because it isn’t really fair.
Jake Delhomme is a mid-level QB, even at his best.
Kurt Warner is Hall of Fame level QB who has done it in two different cities and coaching staffs.
Just because one of the all time greats is able to bounce back, doesn’t mean everyone can. That isn’t even including the fact that Warner’s down year, wasn’t as poor as Delhomme’s.
Just not a very good comparison.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
The HOF line holds no water though, which is what you were trying to argue above. You just changed your subject matter.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
It would be better to compare Jake to guys who have also tried to come back from Tommy John surgery. Compare timetable, and stats immediately after the surgery. There may be reasonable hope for him to be a mediocre QB. I have agreed with you that I have pretty low expectations for Jake, but am really hoping he can just be decent.
Roger Dorn - August 18, 2010
Delhomme is only the second QB to have tommy john surgery. The first was Rob Johnson, who never made it back to the league. Carson Palmer considered having surgery, but his injury was no where near as bad as Delhomme or Johnson’s injuries.
In baseball, it’s generally accepted that it takes 2 years to come back, so, I’m guessing, whatever Delhomme does this year, good or bad, is going to get scrutinized by sports medicine professionals.
golanbatrac - August 18, 2010
I honestly had no idea that Tommy John was so rare in football.
Bernie19Kosar - August 18, 2010
you don’t need a GREAT qb to win……football is the one sport i’d say is more team oriented than any other.
we are not asking JD to be great, just effective, consistent, and a leader.
allsides - August 18, 2010
I don’t remember exactly offhand…but since I always have tabs up and wiki everything (according to SB) I may be able to find out.
bross09 - August 18, 2010
How about the couple bad years Jeff Garcia had? He is not a HOF QB and I would not call him that much better than ‘league average’. I don’t think that because of this, Delhomme will bounce back, but there IS a precedent.
bross09 - August 18, 2010
First off, yes I believe it. I wouldn’t have typed it if I didn’t. Second, thanks ever so much for ‘informing’ me as to how I’M looking at it. .Just because you ‘disagree’ in no way means I’M looking at it like a ‘fan,’ and YOU are some sort of refreshing bastion of unbiased integrity.
I never said that all the criticism of Delhomme is misguided. I’m saying that the writers often swing from one extreme to the other, without keeping a general perspective of the totality of his career.
johnnyphoenix - August 18, 2010
yep, because for many, what matters the most is what have you done for me lately.
bross09 - August 17, 2010
ESPN isn’t against the Browns — that’s ridiculous. Too many fans use the excuse that the media “hates” their team every time they hear something they don’t like. We were a bad team last year and we didn’t make any really big splashes in the draft or free agency so they expect us to be near the bottom of the league again. Sure, we’ve made improvements, but every team makes improvements and thinks they’re going to be better than they were last year.
I think we’ll do better than 5-11 like last season but there is no reason to get all upset because most rankings still have us near the bottom of the league. Please stop acting like there is some great consipracty in the media against the Browns.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying. I remember after our 10-6 season in 07 when Mike Wilbon picked the Browns to go to the SB. The national media says that we’re bad because by and large, over the past 11 seasons, we have been bad.
However, I think there is a perception (at least on the east coast) that Cleveland has inferior professional sports teams, inferior people and is a wadteland that isn’t worth the land it’s built on. After growing up in North Royalton, I lived 10 years in Boston and I’m just finishing my 10th year living in Philly. The attitude towards Cleveland that I described above typifies the average fan in Boston or Philly. I can’t speak for every greater metropolitan area in the country, but in the places i’ve lived there are a lot of people who hate Cleveland just because it’s Cleveland.
Onyx Lightning - August 17, 2010 via mobile
By the way, I mentioned Wilbon but never really completed the thought. The point was, when we have a good season, like in 07, the media likes us (SB predictions and 6 national tv spots), when we’re bad, the media let’s us know it (28 and 29 power ranks and 0 national tv spots). We’re ranked low because we weren’t very good last year, plain and simple.
Onyx Lightning - August 17, 2010 via mobile
This.
Dawg Nuts - August 17, 2010
As above, “hate” is a harsh word; yet you are pretty much on top of it.
Whether rightly earned or not, Cleveland is the butt of many jokes. Unless someone works hard to appreciate the city and its teams, they are unable to be unbiased.
Spidey - August 17, 2010 via mobile
There is a general bias against Cleveland. I lived in NYC for 11 years and consistently was told how inferior our teams are by NYers as well as guys I knew from Philly, Boston, FLA, and Cal. The general sentiment is that Cleveland as a city and its sports teams are irrelevant. In sports, we pride ourselves on our history. Nobody else cares about our history. They only look at what we’ve done lately. None of them view the city as a vacation destination. No mountains, no ocean. All they think of are steel mills, a burning river, and bad sports teams. Most in their ignorance see nothing good.
As far as the low rankings, I agree with BB
I think 6 wins isn’t out of the question and maybe push it to 7. The Browns should surprise people who are paying attention outside of Ohio. Whatever success they have this year won’t be a fluke. But this team needs more depth in talent and elite talent at a couple more positions on both sides of the ball so next offseason is going to be really important. Once the surprise wears off the media the league will pay more attention. The Browns will have to improve enough to keep surprising them.
dawgtribe - August 17, 2010
And people who live in Cleveland look down on people from the east coast and west coast. It’s the same everywhere you go — most people think that people who come from their region are better than people who come from other places. It’s not limited to Cleveland.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
Having lived in both I can tell you there is a lot more looking down on being done here in the East.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
I hear people in the Midwest bash people on boths coasts all the time. It’s done everywhere.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I assume it does, but it’s really not close.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
right. People in cleveland may think people from california or NY are a little crazy, but it doesn’t compare to the reverse.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
That’s been my experience.
golanbatrac - August 17, 2010
bross09 - August 17, 2010
I can’t speak for NY, but Californians think Ohio is filled with white trash inbreeds. Pretty much say you guys are unimportant.
Of course I know better.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
well, tell those same californians, they are pretentious dickweeds with their head so far up their ass, they are vomiting it out to keep their figure.
bross09 - August 17, 2010
Pretentious is the perfect word to use in this case. If only they knew what it means.
They all look, dress, act, talk, and think the same. It’s pathetic.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
Hahaha. Its great to here it from someone from California.
bross09 - August 18, 2010
As someone who just moved back to Columbus after four years in Brooklyn, NY, I can second what RogerDorn is saying. But its not specific ‘hate’ on any place, maybe Beantown and Philly, as much as it is that ‘if you’re not in NYC you’re no where’ attitude. Which I must admit, I enjoyed myself while living there.
L Train - August 17, 2010
Yea, it’s not specific hate on Cleveland, but rather that anywhere in the middle of the country is completely awful and has nothing going on.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
Ain’t that the truth. I live in a suburb of Boston in a 1,400 SF house – not a fancy suburb. In fact, rather blue collar and while it is safe, I don’t want my girls going to the playground alone until they are 15; drug deals and gang fights have happened.
Just the other day I was chatting with a neighbor saying how I could find for the same price a 2,500-3,000 SF house on a large lot in a nice suburb of Cleveland (Hudson, Aurora, Chagrin) where the girls could ride their bikes and go to the playground without much worry. The schools would be better and I would feel more secure knowing the neighbors.
Her response was: “Yea, but why would you want to live there? There isn’t anything to do. No culture or anything…”
I wanted to say that anything Boston has, Cleveland has – except for an old dilapidated baseball stadium. So what! If not for my job being in Boston and my wife’s family living in Boston, I would be making a much stronger effort to move back.
This bias from my neighbor is extremely common: if I were to tell Bostonians I’m moving to Cleveland, most would say I’m nuts. If I were to tell Clevelanders I’m moving to Boston, most would say to enjoy the experience.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
Yeah, there are a lot of things about Beantown and NY that I like. But you’ll almost never hear one of them say the same about Cleveland.
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
i.e. Braylon Edwards.
rufio - August 17, 2010
From an Ohio boy’s point of view, the one great thing about living in NYC is the fact that practically every Saturday I got to watch the Buckeyes because there are no good college teams in NY/NJ to speak of. On the flip side, it’s also the worst place to live if you want to hear news or watch highlights that don’t involve the Yankees, Mets, Jets, Giants, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Islanders, or Devils. There were times when I believed that there were only 2 teams in the NFL, NBA, MLB, and 3 teams in the NHL.
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
Were we bad last year? Yes. Did we make any splashes this year? No. Still to say the entire team lacks depth is a blanket statement by a journalist saying " I don’t want to bother covering your team." The Browns added a ton of depth this year to many positions. Anyone with half a braincell can see we did much more then teams likes Detriot, St. Louis, or Jacksonville. I don’t think we are a ten win team yet but we are certainly capable of going .500. On top of that we look competitive again.
LiveandDiefortheDawgPound - August 17, 2010 via mobile
That is not true at all. Why would you make such a ridiculous assumption?
The point is correct — we don’t have much depth. We might have more depth than a few teams in the league, but we still don’t have much depth compared to the good teams. If you can’t see that then you’re letting your fandom bias your views.
Yes, we are capable of going .500. Every team in the NFL is capable of going .500 if things break the right way, so that doesn’t really mean anything. There is nothing wrong with ranking us near the bottom of the league because that is where we belong right now.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I would say the Browns have depth at RB, TE, CB and we have a ton of LB’s that are average to below average.
That isn’t depth.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
We have some depth on the d-line as well.
golanbatrac - August 17, 2010
I had this debate recently on LGT that a bunch of below adequate players does not make depth, but in this case I would actually argue we are on the verge of depth at LB. I tend to be a bit more pleased with who we have at LB than most though.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
I agree with Dorn. There’s too much hate on our LBs. I personally think we have some good talent
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
I think we’re moving in the right direction with the linebacking corps. Take a pass rushing OLB high in next year’s draft and this group goes from average to very good.
golanbatrac - August 17, 2010
We could really use a dominating pass rusher.
rufio - August 18, 2010
There is some good talent and we are moving in the right direction but I don’t like the bullpen-by-committee mentality that I see with our LBs. No clear cut roles for each player around a dominant pass rusher. Versatility is essential because there isn’t that one guy who’s going to get 10+ sacks per year.
If there isn’t a franchise QB available in the draft, then we go for best pass rusher available between LB and DE.
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
I am all for getting a franchise-type pass rusher, but don’t want to force it. I tend to agree with the rufio approach, BPA no matter what. If it feels a position of need, even better.
Roger Dorn - August 18, 2010
It would be hard for us to take the best DE pass rusher available. We need guys who can two-gap and stay disciplined on some downs, then rush the passer on others. Usually the first round guys we’d be taking at DE are the penetrating guys who don’t like to/are not good at two gapping.
I think overall the best pass rusher for us would be an OLB 8 or 9 out of 10 times.
rufio - August 18, 2010
Yeah, the line we have now is probably as good a line as we’ll ever have as long as we’re a two gap 3-4. Our concern should be getting younger while maintaining the quality of players we have, and not searching high and low for more pass rush from the front three.
golanbatrac - August 18, 2010
I totally agree. In the long term, I would love to have some dominant pass rushers. However right now, versatile guys are best because we don’t have all that great of talent and we can just work the matchups.
bross09 - August 18, 2010
ESPN and the rest of the media is perhaps not against the Browns and Cleveland (although the ABSOLUTELY played a role in getting LeBron out of town) so much as they are focused on a few big markets. Everyone else gets 2nd rate, lazy coverage.
Though you better hope that Jerry Jones does not get his way and get the salary cap removed becuase we WILL end up like the Cavs and Indians and have Nike, ESPN, etc… tamper with our stars like Joe Thomas and Cribbs.
If you want hardcore, accurate anaysis about your team and you don’t live in NYC, Dallas, L.A., Chicago or Boston you come to a site like this.
I’ve been a Tampa Bay fan since the Browns were stolen. Finding decent info about them is even harder than it is to find about the Browns. Outside of the SB season it’s always been tough because they don’t play in NYC.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
Oh come one, ESPN didn’t play a role in LeBron leaving town. I’m so sick of hearing this. They had nothing to do with it. Yes, they covered it to death, but do you really think LeBron cared what anyone on TV said? Of course not. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have acted like he has the past few months.
ESPN didn’t care if LeBron left Cleveland or not — they would covered him no matter where he played. And if you listened to the analysts on the network, most of them said they wanted him to STAY in Cleveland.
Yes, ESPN does cover the big markets more than the small markets because those teams get the better ratings. Like it or not, Yankees-Red Sox gets better ratings across the country so that’s why they’re on all the time. Now I certainly have a lot of problems with things ESPN does, but to say they are biased against Cleveland teams or they wanted LeBron to leave is just ridiculous.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
Did you watch the free agency roundtable?
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
I’m not sure what you mean.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
The free agency roundtable show that ESPN aired with Lebatard, Wilbon, Simmons and Kornheiser. It was disgusting.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
ESPN, Stern, Nike, absolutely wanted LeBron in a bigger market. It wasn’t necessarily an anti Cleveland thing. Had he been drafted by Milwaukee or Portland it would have been the same fiasco.
While I’m not sure if I will go so far to say that payoffs were involved in LeBron’s decision I’m positive that his sponsers, the major networks and David Stern suggested he go to a bigger market. They all stand to make more money and to them it’s all that matters.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
I haven’t this discussion many times before — I don’t see how Nike and LeBron’s other sponsors would make more money with him playing in New York rather than Cleveland. He was already one of the 2 or 3 most popular athletes on the planet, so why would it matter if he’s playing in a bigger market? Is that really going to give him more exposure? He’s going to make gobs of money and ESPN will show his team’s games wherever he plays. I don’t really see why Nike needed LeBron to be in a big TV market.
The way for LeBron to increase is popularity is globally, not in the US, and he only does that by winning titles. China is the place where the NBA and his sponsors want to grow because that’s where the money is, and I saw a report on TV which said that Kobe is more popular in China because he has titles and LeBron doesn’t. So for LeBron to increase his marketability in China he had to go somewhere that he could win championshps (or stay in Cleveland, of course) not a big market. LeBron didn’t need to get out of Cleveland to get more popular and marketable.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
You can’t be serious are you? Miami has a population of 5.4 million people and Cleveland has 2.2 million people. Your a math teacher right? How many jersey, shoes, hats, ect…sales multiplied by 3.2 million more people doesn’t add up to sponsors making more money in your mind.
Kimble_79 - August 17, 2010
Miami has a wider reach into the Hispanic markets as well.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
You have to think globally, not locally. That’s where the money is. LeBron is going to sell millions of jerseys no matter where he plays.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
While that is true, I also think its fair to think that people that live in the city he plays for will be more likely to buy his jerseys. Having that in mind, more people=more sales to me.
Kimble_79 - August 17, 2010
though in cleveland, he was considered to some, a ‘hometown hero’. Cleveland is also a much more passionate city when it comes to sports (miami has its sports passion, but people don’t seem to get behind teams as much as we do). Even though there are more people in Miami, are you saying you think the exact same % of people in Miami will get a Lebron Jersey or hat? That would be ridiculous.
bross09 - August 17, 2010
even if the percentage is half of what it was in cleveland, they’ll still sell more jerseys in miami.
for the sake of argument, let’s say 80% of people in cleveland bought a jersey. that’s about 1.7 or 1.8 million people. if 40% of people in miami buy a jersey, it’s over 2 million people.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
why would it only be based on population of the city he plays in? brett favre played in green bay and has probably sold many, many more times as many jerseys as tony romo.
also, i’m a fan of all of the cleveland teams, and have a few jerseys, and i live in central PA. i’m not sure the city matters that much.
Dawg Nuts - August 17, 2010
True, but the point I was trying to make is that a kid in St. Louis or Detroit or Seattle is more likely to but a LeBron Jersey with Miami or NYC or Chicago on the front than one that says Cleveland.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
But jersey sales are only a very, very small portion of the money he makes from marketing, and it has nothing to do with any of the companies he has sponsorship deals with. Nike doesn’t even make NBA jerseys so they make no money off of that, and neither does State Farm or Powerade or any of his other endorsement deals.
The NBA makes money off his sales, but he’s going to sell millions of jerseys wherever he plays. And, again, the most important money comes from overseas. So a few more hundred thousand jerseys in one city doesn’t matter compared to what he can make in Europe and Asia. You’re talking about a drop in the bucket here compared to all the other money he brings in.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
And, as I said below, LeBron’s reputation has taken a major hit because of the way he handled himself in free agency. I think there are many people who would have bought his jersey had he stayed in Cleveland but don’t want to now that he had the show on ESPN which turned many people off. LeBron went from a guy thought of as a lovable, loyal, team player to a narcissistic egomaniac who stabbed his hometown in the back. That’s not good for the NBA, Nike, or anybody else associated with LeBron. I’m sure they all would have rather he stayed in Cleveland, won a bunch of championships in his hometown, and everyone would have continued to see him as the lovable guy he was before.
All this is much, much, much more important than being in a slightly larger market for a possible small increase in jersey sales.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
LeBron went from a guy thought of as a lovable, loyal, team player to a narcissistic egomaniac who stabbed his hometown in the back.
Here are some great quotes to illustrate this:
emily522 - August 17, 2010
He dropped another 3rd person quote in the new GQ.
Is this something that he just started or did I just black it out because I didn’t want to believe that LePippen was a super douche?
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
Seriously gotta stop with the LePippen, that’s an insult to Scottie. Eventhough Pippen didn’t when a title on his own, he doesn’t come close to approaching LeBron’s ego. Pippen played his game and his game just wasn’t a Jordan, etc. level, but he wasn’t some asshole like LeBron.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
I actually like Pippen.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
The second option.
emily522 - August 17, 2010
Here's the european perspective
As far as merchandising here in Italy, I’ve seen LeBron, Kobe, and KG jerseys. I went into one sporting goods store and they had some unofficial team jerseys for the Lakers, Celtics, and Cavs. I’ll let you know if they’re selling any Cavs jerseys this fall/winter. My guess is the only reason there were Cavs jerseys is because of LeBron. Most likely I’ll start seeing Miami jerseys being sold. Whoever it is that pays attention to basketball here will buy his jersey no matter where he’s playing.
Outside of those basketball jerseys, the only other items pertaining to american sports apparel are the occasional Yankees and Dodgers caps and t-shirts. People buy them because they say NY and LA. They dream of going to those cities and so wearing the caps brings them closer to their dreams. It has nothing to do with sports. They don’t know jack about baseball so why else would they buy them?
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
Also, you must have missed in when David Stern said on national TV that he wanted LeBron to stay in Cleveland during last year’s playoffs.
Really, LeBron staying in Cleveland and winning a bunch of titles in his hometown would have been best for the NBA and his brand. He would be respected (everywhere but New York, Chicago, and Miami) for staying in his hometown and being loyal. His image would have remained pristine like it was last year.
Now, everybody across the country hates him (except Miami fans) for the way he handeled the whole free agency situation and his national TV announcement. His reputation has taken a huge hit. I don’t know how this could have possibly been good for Nike or the NBA or anyone associated with LeBron.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I have to believe that was said because he wasn’t doing crap about all the “free agent summit” bs, whether it was going to happen or not. That’s stuff was shady and Stern didn’t anything to stop it.
Obviously we won’t ever know, but I honestly don’t think that was ever going to happen.
Also I think the hatred for Lebron comes from the stupid show, if he had just left Cleveland no one except Cleveland and the teams he didn’t go to would have cared. Many were already expecting him to leave Cleveland anyway.
It wasn’t LeBron’s choice that screwed him, it was his immaturity, douchiness and massive ego.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
Yes I do, a big part of his decision was based on being “Hip Hop” and being in a “Hip Hop” type market. Miami, NYC, Chicago is considered cool and flashy with a great night life. Cleveland isn’t. Hip Hop cred to these guys is everything. The average moron Ed Hardy wearing Souja Boy listening kid is more likely to buy a LeBron jersey if he’s playing in a place like Miami, NYC or Chicago because those places are “cool”.
For the record I like rap/hip hop, just not much of what’s come out the past several years.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
I think what may be more accurate is to say they have a bias towards big markets, not against small ones. And as you said, it’s understandable because those big markets pull bigger ratings. But just because we understand the reason for the coverage bias doesn’t mean it isn’t still a bias.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
I don’t really agree with this. There are personalities on ESPN that openly bash Cleveland, Colin Cowherd for example. The mocking can be found in the writing of others.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
I don’t listen to Cowherd because he’s an idiot, so maybe he does. But the network as a whole doesn’t have anything against Cleveland or any other city, and they’re not openly rooting against certain teams. That’s just the viewpoint of fans who are upset when they hear something bad about their team.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I dont think they root against ‘cleveland’ per se, just as I dont think the refs are ’biased ’against any particular team like you see in every damn game thread during a loss on every blog.
I just think their attitude depends on what area of sports they are discussing in relation to cleveland. If it is a free agency situation like the LBJ thing involving big names or something, they will tend to discount or be dismissive about cleveland as a viable option because it involves ‘living’ in cleveland, so I guess there is some ‘bias’ there. People who have never even viitied just anturally assume things, so that is bias to a degree. .
However, if the browns do well they will get their fair share of coverage and its not like espn is going to openly root for their ’demis’e or anything simply b/c the don’t ‘like the city’ or think it is a decent place to live.
johnnyphoenix - August 17, 2010
More appropriate. i happen to think he’s entertaining, despite the Cleveland bashing.
Dawg Nuts - August 17, 2010
I never met anyone who likes Cowherd.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
now you have. i like him.
Dawg Nuts - August 17, 2010
Well, technically, I’ve never met you.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
good point. your record stands.
Dawg Nuts - August 18, 2010
Say it ain’t so, DN
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
i think he’s funny and i agree with a lot of what he says. i agree that he can be a dick sometimes, and that he often acts smarter than everyone. i just think he’s entertaining.
i had this debate on another post about a month back. i don’t fault anyone for disliking him, i just don’t. often times his rants on different things (virginia football, soccer, baseball hall of fame voting) are funny and, i think, fairly accurate.
Dawg Nuts - August 18, 2010
I can’t say anything about virginia football or soccer, but his rant on HoF voting was anything but accurate.
notthatnoise - August 18, 2010
/discussion we already had a month ago
notthatnoise - August 18, 2010
We need to have an intervention.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
I agree with you on not sensing an anti-Cleveland vibe from ESPN, granted I don’t live there. If anything I just think it’s easier to play up the faults or what have you of the city because of it’s tragic history in professional sports. It makes for great tv if you’re not a fan of the city or one of its teams. To me it’s just entertainment television, I think ESPN couldn’t care less that it’s Cleveland on the chitend of their poking stick.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
I’ve never sensed an anti-CLE vibe from any network or magazine. Individual journalists, sure. I do think that the criticism of the Browns organization that I’ve heard on ESPN, the NFL network, and other places by commentators has been justified. I think we can all agree that up until the hiring of Holmgren, and possibly Mangini, there had been a gross lack of management on this team. How many positive things can we say about the franchise from 99 to 08?
I didn’t include last season because there were some positive things (newfound team discipline, Harrison, Cribbs, and the win streak) that happened and a few good decisions made (trading Edwards and K2) despite it being a bad year overall.
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
Just two things I can think of, the playoffs in 02 and drafting Go… I mean Joe Thomas.
North Coast Flea - August 18, 2010
I voted yes.
Basically all of those predictions had SOMETHING to do with Jake Delhomme being awful. I looked at what I’m pretty sure was the first front page thread about signing Jake Delhomme, and while I didn’t read all 475 comments, I did read about half of them, and the vast majority of us said that Jake Delhomme was awful and he AT LEAST wasn’t worth the 7 mil we’re paying for him.
So looking back in hindsight it doesn’t look like their analysis would STILL be right, but at the time with what they had to go off of, I think they were accurate. Or at least alot of us agreed with what they were saying anyway…
shep615 - August 17, 2010
Interesting comment. Most of the country is still at that point in time. Heck, many also believe that Josh McDaniels will make Brady Quinn a starting-calibre QB to compete with Orton.
Even looking back at the signing and all the current rankings, I don’t know why Holmgren is praised on one hand while one of his key decisions is trashed. The guy has forgotten more about football that any of us know – shouldn’t we give him the benefit of any doubt that the signing will lead to improvement of the team?
Instead of saying Jake is a bad signing, shouldn’t we ask why Holmgren might want to put the team in this guy’s hands?
Spidey - August 17, 2010 via mobile
I voted yes.
Basically, we haven’t proven that we deserve a better ranking. I think we will do better than drafting 3rd/4th overall next April, but I see power rankings as a reflection of where teams are at the moment, not where they have been in the past or where they are going in the future.
After one series with our first team offense and two series of not being able to stop Aaron Rodgers—both in a preseason game, I don’t think I could justify moving us up to ~20th where I think we will be soon.
rufio - August 17, 2010
Yeah, not being able to stop Rodgers is a big concern. We’re all sold on how much the secondary has been improved but I’m a bit more cautious in my expectations. Ward’s performance was impressive and was noticed by the national media. But Rodgers completed nearly every pass and moved the offense downfield extremely effectively. I’m hoping that getting Wright and Rogers back will improve the pass defense.
One very positive note was that the Packers had no running game to speak of. Gotta give a lot of credit to the front 7 for that.
dawgtribe - August 17, 2010
Definitely agree that we should not assume our secondary is all of a sudden really good, but remember we were facing one of the best passers in the league, we did not play our best CB, and were starting two guys in the secondary who had never played a single snap in the NFL before.
TheDriveStillHurts - August 17, 2010
I don’t think so. I think it makes us like 95% of the rest of the NFL. Dude is scary good.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
He is scary good, but at the same time I don’t think you would have seen the same defensive calls over the course of a game. Obviously it is cat/mouse, but when we got GB in 3rd and 6, we made them throw “hot” and Ward had that sweet tackle on Driver. We were at least able to manipulate them at that point in time.
I think Rob Ryan sees this, tones down the blitzing on 1st and 2nd (or at least mixes things up) in an effort to put them in 3rd and 6+. Then we send the house.
rufio - August 17, 2010
Thanks for the summary; it’s good to get updates on what ESPN writes (I refuse to watch or read their content after The Decision – there are plenty of other options).
These Power Rankings are wrong. They are simply a proxy for a team’s actual/expected record and do not reflect true team strength or power of the team (shouldn’t schedule strength be considered???).
Any rankings that put the Browns behind the Chiefs basically sucks. Besides, these rankings always get about 1/3 too high, 1/3 too low and just 1/3 just right.
Spidey - August 17, 2010 via mobile
Of course, all power rankings are going to be wrong right now. Nobody knows how good these teams will be before the season starts, and ranking all 32 teams is inherently a difficult task. And every team’s fans (except the team in first) are going to be upset at their rankings.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
Man, Bleacher Report needs a copy editor. Between “Caron Palmer” and Jake as our “staring quarterback” it’s hard to take this piece at all seriously.
Seriously, these power rankings are fun to read but ultimately silly and scatter shot.
RelapsingDawgCatcher - August 17, 2010
Cleve.com has had a lot of spelling/grammar errors recently as well. Don’t know if they make it into the PD, but reading some of the stories online I think they make more errors than I do.
rufio - August 17, 2010
It’s obvious that nobody rereads the stories to check for errors before posting.
dawgtribe - August 17, 2010
Nice pride in their work there!
RelapsingDawgCatcher - August 18, 2010
Bleacher Report is full of idiots. I don’t read anything they write.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I can’t believe these guys get paid to write up these rankings. Anyone here can do it.
Has anyone ever predicted 1-32 accurately (as in final season standings)? Seems like a fun game.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
I remember King putting us as 32 in his pre-season rankings this time last year. He was WAY off, much like assumed at the time too.
Simmsinns - August 17, 2010
well, I’m no fan of King, but he was closer than we might like to admit. We did still pick in the top ten after all. it’s not like we went 8-8 or anything.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
They’re were 5 teams that did outright worse than us. Another 2 tied our record. We also tied for the second longest win streak to end the season.
I’m sorry, but that is NOT last.
I’m perfectly fine with admitted we weren’t an 8-8 team, but we were closer to that than a 1-15 team.
Simmsinns - August 17, 2010
I didn’t say he was right, I said he wasn’t too far off.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
That’s reasonable depending on one’s own opinion of what is “too far.”
Personally, I don’t agree with “he was closer than we might like to admit.”
We weren’t close enough to the worst team in the league at the time, and haven’t been since, for me to say King was close.
Simmsinns - August 17, 2010
Seriously? You’re going to argue the difference between being ranked 32 and 27? Who frickin’ cares?
This is why I hate these discussions about power rankings. Every fan whose team isn’t ranked first gets upset that they’re not ranked higher and calls whoever wrote them an idiot and claims they don’t know anything about their team. This is like something I’d listen to on cleveland.com. Aren’t we above these petty discussions?
Ranking teams is hard, especially before the season begins. Anyone who does it is going to be wrong about many teams, and then it’s easy for fans of that team to whine and complain that “nobody respects us” and call the writer an idiot and claim he’s biased against their team (all of what has been done in this thread). I can guarentee that if everyone here had to make power rankings before the season started we also would get many teams wrong — but it’s much easier to criticize someone else than do it ourselves.
So let’s just stop with these stupid arguments. Peter King is a fine football writer, and just because he picked us last last year doesn’t mean he has anything against us or that he doesn’t know football. And, after all, we did play like the worst team in the league for the first 12 games of the season, so he wasn’t too far off. So let’s stop the endless criticisms of everyone who does these rankings like we’re all smarter than them — we’re not. That’s just so juvenile.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
Exactly! Then these writers are idiots for writing these rankings. Peter King is a decent writer, but he has sold himself out by doing his power rankings – it’s the laziest way to get 500 words on paper…
But, if they are going to put something out there, folks will discuss it. It’s the old cliche: “The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy nor Roman… Now discuss”
Spidey - August 17, 2010
Why has he “sold himself out”? Did you every think that maybe he does them because his editors want him to do it because people like to read them (and argue about them)? Why is he selling himself out for doing what his bosses tell him to do? (And he only started doing it after Paul Zimmerman got sick and couldn’t do it any more. I’m sure King would say that Paul was much better at it than him.)
And you really can’t call him lazy since he writes a few thousand words a week for the magazine and website.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
He writes about coffee, half marathons, the Red Sox, and aggravating travel experiences!!! They might be fun to read and people like them, but it doesn’t take a whole lot of effort.
And the guy is freakin’ Peter King – he can tell his editors to take their rankings and stick him where the sun don’t shine. I know he did the Draft Rankings in Dr. Z’s place, but didn’t realize he was doing the Power Rankings in his place, too.
If anyone could come up with a more thoughtful way to prepare these Power Rankings, it’s King. Instead, he writes the same fluff that comes from everyone else.
And YES, Dr. Z was far better.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
Actually yes, I frickin’ am. Given the context of the discussion, I am going to argue the difference between tied for 24th and dead frickin’ last.
Then why the hell are you here. Seriously? If you hate these discussion, how about NOT clicking the post about power rankings, eh?
If King wants to give his opinions via power rankings, that’s perfectly fine with me. If I want to comment on those opinions with opinions of my own, that should be fine as well.
Take a step off your high horse, man. Or, if you really can’t budge, I’d again, urge you to stop reading these specific posts.
King makes this obvious.
I’m not whining and complaining because power rankings don’t matter at all. However, King or anyone for that matter wants to release their rankings (which are all opinion), one would think it’s perfectly reasonable that readers could state their own opinions. You know, without being (for lack of a better term) ridiculed by the Grammar Police.
Obviously. We’re also not paid for our efforts.
Also true.
Again, you repeatedly make me wonder, why the hell are you even in this thread.
And I never stated such, nor do I think that. He chooses to release rankings, I choose to comment on them. Why the double standard?
I certainly don’t think I know more about football than King. However, Brownie’s Year mentioned how it’s surprising that people get paid for ranking them inaccurately. I thought was relevant, on a Browns blog, to mention how King was off about the Browns.
If this thread were a house, this is where point you in the direction of the frickin’ door.
Simmsinns - August 17, 2010
BB is the one who’s been blowing this damn thread up, he called you juvenile but he’s the one who keeps trying to play King of the Hill by denying everything and whining that he is right.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
Has this happened before?? Seems odd.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
Like Deja Vu? I just think it’s an unwritten rule we don’t bother BB about it but sometimes it gets really annoying. Especially when he thread jacks.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
You know who you’re talking to, right? lol
Every time I bring this up I get warnings on my next login. But me throwing F U bombs at his grill doesn’t help either.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
I’ve never seen an SBN warning. Is it cool?
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
Don’t know if it’s cool, but it makes me laugh.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
Disagree. I think BB’s right. It’s a preseason poll and it really doesn’t matter where people think you are in relation to the other teams. It’s a way to sell magazines and ad space on their website. It’s where you finish that counts.
At the beginning of last year, a whole lot of people thought the Browns would be one of the bottom 3 in the league. They were. Until they made some player acquisitions, and bought into Mangini’s system and they pulled out of the bottom 3.
It doesn’t matter where they pick us to start. Just how we finish.
dawgtribe - August 18, 2010
What in the hell are you talking about?
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
This is funny. You have nothing to say, so you go “what are you saying because I have nothing better to say.” It’s been recced 5 times, so don’t act like it doesn’t make sense.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
Chris is pretty damn good at this sort of thing.
rufio - August 17, 2010
(Looks around) Me?
Last year, all SB Nation NFL writers contributed to the power rankings that appeared on sbnation.com/nfl each week. I had a lot of rankings similar to others, but there were a few teams (i.e. Dolphins, Bengals, Panthers, Bears) who I’d rank differently by quite a bit.
Power Rankings are supposed to be a fun piece to read, and truth be told for anyone to pick them accurately would be impossible given the parity in the NFL. The Browns could always be this year’s surprise playoff team, but how can someone justify putting them above No. 16 before the preseason? The rankings come out each week too, which gives writers plenty of time to rectify their mistakes early on and over the course of a season.
(Wasn’t meant specifically as a reply to you rufio, just my comment on rankings in general.)
Chris Pokorny - August 18, 2010
I agree completely with all of this. Power rankings are fun to read, but people shouldn’t take them so seriously and get upset when their team isn’t ranked as high as they think they should be ranked. And it’s impossible for anyone to pick the teams correctly before the season begins so there is no reason to be calling people idiots or biased just because they ranked the Browns low. That’s the kind of stuff I expect on cleveland.com, not here. Let’s keep this site a place for intelligent discussion (like it usually is).
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
With that said, these assholes at ESPN and SI don’t know what they are talking about.
Chris Pokorny - August 18, 2010
Why?
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
OWNED.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
Before BB tried to say something completely false and annoying, I’d like to explain my OWNED.
BB probably thought he had back up in the form of his “employer” and one of the most knowledgeable people on here; Chris. BB was OWNED because when he thought he finally had someone to help and agree with, Chris pulled the fast one and showed his true colors And BB was completely caught off guard.
VIVA LA REVOLUTION DEL BB!
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
To be fair, I didn’t try to own anyone. I was just poking fun at the entire thread.
Chris Pokorny - August 18, 2010
Haha, I know. It was just more fuel to to the fire
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
Rotoworld too.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
it’s interesting, based on this, that you earlier chose to call colin cowherd an idiot. aren’t his thoughts just opinions, like the power rankings?
Dawg Nuts - August 18, 2010
He’s not an idiot because I disagree with his opinions. He’s an idiot for the way he presents them and the illogical ways he forms his opinions.
I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with someone’s opinions if they present a reasonable argument why they think that way. And just because you disagree with someone doesn’t make them an idiot.
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
but that’s exactly what you’re doing, only in a roundabout way. you don’t like the way he forms his arguments, so you call him an idiot. just because you don’t like his presentation of his opinions and find him to be unreasonable, that doesn’t make him wrong for presenting them that way.
Dawg Nuts - August 18, 2010
I’m most certainly not doing that at all. There are many, many times where reasonable people can have a different opinion something, because there often isn’t one "right" answer. For example, ranking the quality of NFL teams (since that’s what this thread is about). One person can make a logical, intelligent argument that the Colts are the best team right now while another person can make a logical, intelligent argument that the Saints or Vikings or some other team is the best team right now. That doesn’t make any one opinion more correct than the other or anyone who disagrees an idiot.
But if someone makes ridiculous arguments that are not based on facts or logic – and makes them in a loud, obnoxious manner – then it’s acceptable to call that peson an idiot. Cowherd is an example of that kind of person (and so are many other sports radio hosts). That is why I called him an idiot. (As an aside, he probably acts like that on purpose because he knows his idiotic rants get people fired up and talking about his show, which is more publicity for him. Many TV and radio hosts do the same thing – Glenn Beck, for example.)
It’s nothing personal against you if you enjoy listening to him, so I hope you’re not taking it that way. I just don’t care to listen to his opinions on anything.
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
no, it’s cool. i don’t want to sound like a cowherd apologist either, because i really have no personal interest in it.
Dawg Nuts - August 18, 2010
He’s not an idiot because I disagree with his opinions. He’s an idiot for the way he presents them and the illogical ways he forms his opinions.
I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with someone’s opinions if they present a reasonable argument why they think that way. And just because you disagree with someone doesn’t make them an idiot.
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
Why are you still going on about this?
Who is taking power rankings seriously? Who is upset?
There are 10 uses of the word “idiot” on this page. Frickin’ 8 of them are either by you or are quoting you.
Here’s one (of the 2) other uses:
Why is this not a reasonable position to hold? Why is it fine for the writers to have their opinions, but we can’t state our own when regarding the team we follow?
Are you really just making this up to have something to whine about?
It seems to me like a typical straw man. Pretend that our comments are irrational or overboard, that way you can justify your own overreaction.
Simmsinns - August 18, 2010
Well, I really don’t want to continue this because it’s already been gone on long enough. But I just want to point out that there are many, many ways for a person to call someone an idiot – or imply that they’re an idiot – without actually using the word “idiot.” I thought that was rather obvious but I guess not.
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
…and you are well versed in them.
johnnyphoenix - August 18, 2010
I don’t get upset about the low rankings so much as the lazy reporting…. idiots that bash us and give reasons like Braylon Edwards and Winslow are gone or make just completely inaccurate statements like our offensive line is bad or we have no pass rush… I mean those guys left over a year ago and while our team still has plenty of holes the O-line and (hopefully) pass rush aren’t two of them.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
I think the right side of the O-line is still a big question mark.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I agree but the line as a whole is at worst, middle of the pack when compared to the other 31 teams.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
I can understand those things, because historically they’ve been true and honestly, I’m not expecting someone on a national site to pay much attention to the bottom feeding teams.
The one I don’t get is all the love for Wimbley. Since his rookie year, Wimbley has been average at best, what makes everybody think his loss hurts the team so badly?
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
My only guess would be is that he was our top pass rusher. We didn’t “replace” him. Looking from the outside, our pass rush takes a hit.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
And we don’t have any “big name” pass rushers, so it looks as though we don’t have a good pass rush. And plenty of people on this site have expressed concern for our pass rush, so it’s not a completely unfounded concern. We were able to get a good pass rush last year from Ryan’s scheming, but if that doesn’t work as well this year then we might be in trouble.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
It will work, it always works. Whether we will get more than a pass rush is the question. If nothing else, Ryan will hit the QB in the mouth.
rufio - August 17, 2010
The Browns specialize in controlling their own destiny even if that means losing.
mooncamping - August 17, 2010
Where are the cheques!
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
Honestly is our secondary matures, we use the Cyclone package effectively, and the right side of the Oline maintains we could shock alot of people in our schedule.
I see us beating Tamapa Bay, Carolina, KC, Buffalo, Jacksonville, and Miami outright. I think we might be able to get a game in on the Bengals, Pittsburgh (game 6 when Big Ben is still rusty) and maybe steal the Atlanta game.
The Pats, Jets, Saints, and Ravens should take thier games along with a 1-1 spilt with the Bengals and Steelers.
I think we could realistically got 9-7 this year. I am not wishfully thinking here either. I mean come on, does any true Browns fan want to admit the Ravens will beat them twice and Steelers will actually win. Atlanta is doing decent right now but I wouldnt call them a top teir, which makes them a good canidate to get shocked. Miami is hit or miss so I cant hel but think we can get them as well.
We cant get cocky though either or teams like the Bucs could get us.
LiveandDiefortheDawgPound - August 17, 2010
I think 9-7 is pretty rosy, but not impossible. That really highlights one important thing though: there are no games where we don’t have a chance. We can at least put up a fight against anybody, and while we might still end up with six wins, the season won’t be unbearable.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
I’ll be very happy if we win more than 6 games so long as we are competitive each week and the young players show improvement.
We are probably going to lack offensive punch which will keep us from winning many shootouts or scoring that quick late TD with little time left. I see us playing a lot of 17-14 type games this year and ending up 7-9. Hopefully our draft piks and free agents mostly pan out and we add some offensive firepower in the 2011 draft and make a run at the playoffs.
This year, a few bounces either way and who knows…. 3-13 or 10-6 could happen.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
that last sentence is always important to remember in the NFL. very rarely is a team as bad or as good as their record.
What’s more important for the browns is how they play, not what the record is.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
rec
rufio - August 17, 2010
I hope that is so. I would like to see Mangini get a chance to make our team competitive, but I’m afraid that improvement and playing well won’t mean much without the victories.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
Reminder: the Saints almost lost to Washington last year.
rufio - August 17, 2010
The best thing that I’m reading/hearing about (missed the game) is TJ Ward. I was watching some highlights and reading some articles. This is great news for his first NFL game. I LOVE having a safety over the middle that will not only knock your block off, but can defend the pass effectively. The touchdown pass over him was just a perfect throw and catch by Rodgers and the WR. I am encouraged by this.
Kimble_79 - August 17, 2010
I’m not down on Ward for that play either. Ryan took a gamble on that call and it didn’t work. Haden telegraphed the blitz and the line picked it up. Had the defense executed that call properly Rodgers never has time to make the throw. Josh Freeman probably isn’t gonna make that read or be able to make that throw.
mgtbfb - August 17, 2010
I saw this play and watched before the snap and told my wife if was a CB blitz. If I can pick it up as an armchair quarterback then you knew that the line and Rodgers knew it was coming. Ward didnt do a bad job on the defense of the pass but it was perfectly placed to a very good receiver. If we wouldnt have had his head turned away from the QB he might have made a play. I just chalk it up to inexperience but was surprised that he was pretty good in pass coverage for all the bashing he took in the draft.
LiveandDiefortheDawgPound - August 17, 2010
I have to admit ESPNs coverage of our preseason game was only about how bad Colt McCoy sucked. Not a word about anything positive.
Of course we need to win more consistently season to season. Networks don’t like having to show dogs on MNF just because they won 10 games last year.
HenryDawg - August 17, 2010 via mobile
Yeah, McCoy’s INT was the only offensive highlight they showed for us, which I found funny. Better we’re under the radar anyway.
L Train - August 17, 2010
All I read on ESPN was that Aaron Rodgers completed his first ten passes and looked amazing.
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
They’re preseason games. How much do you really expect them to cover?
And they showed Colt McCoy because he’s a big-name rookie who fans are interested in hearing about. Most fans across the country don’t care how Seneca Wallace did.
You really can’t expect in-depth Browns coverage on ESPN and you can’t fault them for not giving it. I hate defending ESPN on here so much because they do a lot of things wrong, but they aren’t nearly as bad as some people make them out to be. It seems like some people just want to look for things to complain about.
Buckeye Brad - August 17, 2010
I’m not sure HenryDawg was expressing any other expectations – just pointing out a fact that the replays only addressed McCoy and nothing positive for the Browns (when the game actually had a lot of positive things). In fact, he pretty much says that he did not expect anything else.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
Really? The ONLY thing that they could have pulled from the Browns was that Colt McCoy got hurt playing in the third stringers? That’s it? Where as for the Packers they drooled over Rodgers and their pass defense on McCoy. I find this wrong.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
I can absolutely fault ESPN for not giving in-depth Brown coverage.
That’s why I come here and I don’t go there.
rufio - August 17, 2010
Pot, you have a call holding on line 2…a Mr. Kettle I think?
johnnyphoenix - August 18, 2010
Excuse me?
Buckeye Brad - August 18, 2010
I believe he’s saying that you are complaining about people complaining.
rufio - August 18, 2010
Exthcuthe me???
Nah. I don’t think I will.
I don’t need to excuse you. It should be perfectly obvious what that meant. If not, you’re about as in denial about what you’re all about as I thought you were…
See, here’s the thing. You are the ‘negative nancy’ around these parts. Is that a bit more clear to you?
It’s not unusual (but it is tiresome), surprising, or in the least bit ‘novel’ or ‘intellectual,’ to have someone on a board fill the role of ‘that guy.’ You know, the guy who simply likes to hear himself talk, and more specifically, likes to disagree with the general consensus just to disagree because he’s got a bug up his ass from god knows what about always having to be right. I’m suuure you’ve justified it to yourself with some sort of “I will piss you off at some point” or "I am an a$$hole’ disclaimer on your sig …like being a ‘jackass’ is some sort of ‘badge’ of honor or something. Guess what—it’s not.
Of course there is, and should be dissent—hell, if there wasn’t what point would there be in discussing anything? But the thing is you argue and disagree simply for arguments sake…and even on the internet—which is the king of ‘time wasting,’ it wastes people’s time. I know it does mine, because when I want to read peoples discussions about the BROWNS I have to scroll down past all of your verbal diarrhea about what the process of formulating opinions ‘should’ consist of.
No one needs or wants to continue hear you go on and on ‘t*tty-bumping’ with other posters about "I’M RIGHT and YOU’RE WRONG YOUare an idiot BAAAAW’.’ It seems like you always want to turn what should essentially be a sports discussion into some sort of intellectual debate about debating, for christs sake.
I don’t know, maybe IRL people got sick of it so you fled to the internet to jump up on your sandbox to proclaim that YOU make the most rational arguments, and YOU know what opinions are worthy of consideration and which are not. All that says to ME, (and from the looks of it—everybosy else), is that YOU are so wrapped up getting involved the the argument that you fail to notice every post you make is prefeced with an ASSUMPTION.
Let’s see, you say ‘there are rational ways of formulating an opinion and there are irrrational ways.’ Well, perhaps, but who made YOU KingSh*t of F*ck Mountain to be the one who decides whats ‘rational?’. The very definiton of rational is open to individual interpretation, and it sure as hell doesn’t say ‘See Buckeye Brad’ next to the dictionary listing.
johnnyphoenix - August 18, 2010
I’ve had my fair share of run-ins with BB. Been saying this stuff to him for awhile, but no one EVER backed me up. After reading this whole thread, it’s good to know that I’m not the only person fed up with the "My opinion only matters and your’s crap. I’m right, therefor you have no argument" mentality. I really do hate to see a gang form to get the point across, but hey, whatever works.
Brownie's Year - August 18, 2010
fatal four-way ladder match:
BB v. SB v. BY v. johnnyphoenix
Friday night, Cleveland Browns Stadium
Dawg Nuts - August 18, 2010
with special guest referee Colin Cowherd
Dawg Nuts - August 18, 2010
This made me laugh.
golanbatrac - August 18, 2010
Give Johnny a cool two letter initial too! – JP. And my tag team teammate is SS (Simms) against BB and B19K
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
3 on 1 isn’t cool. I’ll have to hit SB from behind with a chair to even things out. But the goal still stands.
Brownie's Year - August 18, 2010
Ah, yes, from times way back when, I’d probably accept it during the match, then take a sledge to your face when you hoist the trophy.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
You won’t feel a thing, bro. Wrestling is fake. And yes, I would totally win and receive a month ban from the site.
Brownie's Year - August 18, 2010
Winner takes Grammar Police and overall Jackass roll.
I’d let you win for that prize. And don’t worry. When I’d hit you with the sledge, you would just bite down on a blood packet in your mouth, duh.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
No way Chris lets me be moderator (even though I’d be the best one on SBN). The Jackass role has been a lock for some time now.
And no thank you on the blood packet. Strange liquids in my mouth are a no-go.
Brownie's Year - August 18, 2010
Well, Ketchup packet then.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
Will it be sponsored by DBN? I mean, I don’t want to take my ‘talents’ down to the stadium unless I get some sort of free free personalized sherwin williams ‘painters’ cap or something for my trouble.
johnnyphoenix - August 18, 2010
I’m taking my talents down to South Beach, personally.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
McCoy had no shot behind those blockers.
He needs to revamp his footwork to start to have a shot behind anything less than a stellar line, and that game should serve as a wake up call for him.
rufio - August 17, 2010
Wow.
Common denominator= BB.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
I love it when Brad and Bernie are both on the rag at the same time.
golanbatrac - August 17, 2010
Looks like SB decided he wanted to take over my role as the DBN denmother.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
No, not even close but nice try, I’m surprised your panties aren’t in a wad. With BB and Bernie on the rag, I’m sure the Dorm effect will soon be making you cry like a little schoolgirl who needs a Dora bandaid.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
jeeze, this is a little overboard.
notthatnoise - August 17, 2010
Eh, a little. That line pissed me off though.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
There’s no need for me to comment you’re doing a perfectly good job saying the same stuff i’ve been saying. Of course you’re doing it in the coarse manner of an asshole, but hey that’s just you, and I’d never expect anyone to be someone other than themselves.
Don’t worry that your precious thread got jacked by a silly argument, when the popular girls kick their bad mood I’m sure they’ll go back to pretending they like you.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
There’s the Dorm Effect, in all it’s beauty.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
Seems to work on you as well and yes, you’re still whining just like you accused me of doing before. So go back to hiding behind your tough guy asshole persona and we’ll wait for your apology for getting out of line.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
You called him a “den mother”. That’s not really being nice either. You started it and are playing victim. Big man.
Brownie's Year - August 17, 2010
I’m not playing victim, the “den mother” comment was in reference to him calling me everyone’s mother in another thread.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
I just don’t see how I was though. It was a dumb comment based on weak evidence. When you made that statement, I maybe had two comments that pertained to your weak accusation.
Obviously, you just wanted to get back at me because you’re a whining baby who doesn’t like to be name called. You tried to make a weak argument out of stupid evidence.
Go bake some cookies for the baseball team ok, Momma?
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
Uh wut?
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
I’m done with it.
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
I can’t speak for Brad, but this is offensive.
Mine is next week.
Bernie19Kosar - August 17, 2010
Queue the drums
North Coast Flea - August 17, 2010
This thread is a perfect Training Camp thread – like one of those practices when the offensive and defensive linemen get punchy and let off a little steam because they are tired of beating up on each other. These things will happen up until the roster is thinned and we gear up for regular season.
Actually, Mangini is probably looking on with some degree of satisfaction at the fact that this team is getting into the regular season mood.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
Ha! Does that mean he gets to stay?
Villeslgr - August 17, 2010
It’s the results on the field on the field that count. And it sure looks like Simmsinns is in mid-season form.
Spidey - August 17, 2010
Along with yourself and a few others…
Spidey - August 17, 2010
I am warmed up and ready for winning.
LET’S DO THIS!.
SpecialBrownie - August 17, 2010
Hearty laugh
Roger Dorn - August 17, 2010
Damn. And here I was thinking I was going to get torn a new one for going off on SB. Spidey is right, the season needs to start soon or DBN might implode the internet.
Villeslgr - August 18, 2010
Ha. You’re good bro.
Brownie's Year - August 18, 2010
Were cool. I just like rattling people up. My stuff with BB though, is all real.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
I thought I was going to a football message board but I stumbled onto the purse message board.
Roger Dorn - August 18, 2010
Hey look… here comes Bross and his 50+ comments that are all two days late, all at once because he’s never in the loop. Knew it was coming.
SpecialBrownie - August 18, 2010
I’m closing comments on this thread; and I’d like for everyone to cool it. If you want to continue the back-and-forth banter, do so via email. If the matters discussed in this thread get carried over to other threads in the near future, I will not think twice about handing temporary bans out.
Chris Pokorny - August 18, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.