Jason Miller - Getty Images
You'll never find a picture of Holmgren where he isn't flashing his ring.
The full-length transcript for the press conference held by Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert has not been released yet, but I still wanted to get some of my thoughts out as soon as possible. Here are several takeaways I had from the season-concluding press conference:
First, let's get to the quarterback situation. You can twist and turn what Holmgren said however you'd like, but the fact of the matter is this: other than the fact that Colt McCoy won't be anointed the starter at this point in time, we don't know what the team's quarterback situation is going to be next year. Holmgren went as far as to say "competition will take place" in training camp at the quarterback position, meaning that even if McCoy and Seneca Wallace remain the two most experienced guys on the roster, reps will be split up near the beginning of camp. Holmgren said that a starter should be in place prior to the third preseason game.
Holmgren said the team will bring in another quarterback, simply because that is something he likes to do every year with a team. Whether that quarterback is a free agent, a draft pick, or an undrafted free agent, we'll have to wait and see. Heckert was asked about the possibility of bringing in a free agent quarterback, to which Heckert responded, "It's probably not the way we're gonna go, but you never know." I don't think you can rule out the possibility of a Matt Flynn (or Peyton Manning, heh) coming here, but it was surprising to hear Heckert lean toward the direction of "no" versus just being vague.
Don't try to fish for any news or nuggets on free agents. Due to league rules, neither Holmgren nor Heckert could really comment on their interest in free agents or the status of their own free agents. When asked about Jackson, Heckert said the following:
"We'd like to have all our good players back. We have numerous free agents, and we like a lot of them. We're gonna try our best to get most of these guys done. But time will tell on that."
Don't overreact to the comments which emphasized that the team plans on continuing to build more through the draft than via free agency. That is the case with almost every team, unless you're the post-Heckert Eagles (and we all saw how that turned out). Still, based on what was said, I feel confident that the team will sign two premiere players. By that, I mean I think they will sign two position players who are anticipated to start. One of those could be a right defensive end. Another one could be a linebacker. I think the team wants to build on offense in the draft, and whatever needs remain defensively, they'll take care of in free agency.
I don't get the feeling that Holmgren has had any second thoughts in his decision to hire Shurmur. Maybe that is because Shurmur is not an experienced coach and can be "molded" the way Holmgren wants him to be. Says Holmgren:
"I know this about the man who's coaching this football team: He is good, he is smart and he will do what he has to do in a very unselfish way to get the team going in the right direction. And if that means hiring a coordinator or giving up the play calling, whatever that means — and I'm not telling you right now how that's all gonna come down — but I'm just saying Pat is very willing to do whatever it takes. Now that in itself is a healthy, good sign to me."
They don't want to narrow the field of candidates by saying Shurmur will exclusively call plays, and that is another good sign. You get to a point where you want a certain philosophy in place. Even though the offense sucked, the players on offense should have a much greater level of familiarity with the style of offense Shurmur intends to run. Now you are at the point where a different playcaller can do that role, freeing up Shurmur for more important in-game decisions and strategy.
Holmgren also stated that the team did not interview Brad Childress last year, but that he would not comment on who the team would be interviewing this offseason.
When asked about trading up or down to acquire draft picks, Heckert seemed to be against that. They made a point to say that their philosophy was to do that last year (which they did), in order to use those picks in 2012. They currently have nine draft picks, and they are content with them. Having the fourth overall pick in the draft, Heckert said, "It's gonna be tough to screw that one up, I think." I think whoever is available at pick No. 4 will be someone they have rated extremely high on their draft board.
Lastly, here is a good one from when Holmgren was asked about the Super Bowl. He also seemed to stress the importance of having a certain year in which you definitively find the quarterback who is "the guy:"
"It’s one of those things like trying to find a ceiling on a player. I can only tell you based on my experience. In Green Bay, it took us five years but we found a quarterback in the first year. In Seattle, it took us 7 years, but we didn’t find a quarterback until year three. Every place is different. What I expect is to be a much improved football team next year, record wise and everything. When we get into the playoffs then you can make a better timetable to get to the Super Bowl. You want to develop a playoff caliber team."
0 recs | 294 comments
Thanks for the great breakdown Chris. I think the key point mentioned is that we have to supplement the draft with key FA pickups. Obviously they need to fit the profile of being a young un – but it is a simple math problem. If the Steelers and Ravens have 7 Pro Bowlers and we have1 – it will take another 4-5 years of solid drafts to match that. We have to take some darn chances on folks. BTW – predicting a big season for Colt if he is here next year.
realmccoy - January 5, 2012
We will have more pro bowlers when we start winning, but I agree we need 1-2 more drafts.
SBP - January 5, 2012
Seriously good write. Nothing out of the norm from them though. Still pumped for this off season.
The New Kardiac Kids - January 5, 2012
Very good article Chris. I liked the part where you said they’ll sign the D FA’s but build on O. Man, I wish these guys did pressers every week.
johnf34 - January 5, 2012
News break….Montee Ball is staying at Wisconsin
dirtyjoe - January 5, 2012
Great news. I heard the tail end of someone saying they were going back to school and though it might have been RG3.
HenryDawg - January 5, 2012
So? Ball is nothing special.
Dat Wis O – line.
SpecialBrownie - January 5, 2012
Should have left. Stock is as high as it will get and RB’s have no shelf life.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
Yep, he will be hard pressed to put up another 39TD season
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
No Russell Wilson, no Nick Toon, key offensive lineman leaving = not a good rebound season.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I think he is thinking with Luck, Richardson, and RG3 leaving he would be a Heisman frotnrunner. That will probably be Barkley anyways
bross09 - January 6, 2012
They will be reloading at OL. Wisco will be able to run the ball no matter what as long as Brett is the HC. That whole “get 330lbers and run I/S, O/S zone all day” scheme has been going on since Ron Dayne.
rufio - January 6, 2012
I am telling you they are going to offer the world for Andrew Luck. They tried to do it for Bradford, and Luck is better than Bradford.
champion64 - January 5, 2012
I’ve been saying for awhile that they made that trade last year knowing they wanted ammo to get a franchise QB if Colt didn’t stand out.
HenryDawg - January 5, 2012
There was no proof they did.
SpecialBrownie - January 5, 2012
Not True
Holmgren mentioned that he talked to the Rams GM after the draft. He said he asked about the top pick and said he was reluctant to give up next years (2011) 1st. Too lazy to find a link but it was the Friday presser after the 1st round if you want to look for it.
Pillowhands - January 6, 2012
So he was being prudent to ask? Doesn’t mean they were going to try anything.
SpecialBrownie - January 6, 2012
Schefter reported for ESPN during the first pick and said pretty definitively that Holmgren called and offered almost our whole draft.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
Here are some links to stories about this from last year… here and here. True or false, it was reported as being accurate and Holmgren is quoted as “going to make the call”.
Brownsyup - January 6, 2012
Someone else, I don’t remember who (Micheal Smith), right before the draft reported that the Browns did try.
Too much smoke, I assume it happened.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I give a vote of NO CONFIDENCE if this should happen. Don’t trade your entire draft stock that we wheeled and dealed for last year to get one guy when you have a million holes to fill. Look at St. Louis…build the team, hopefully get lucky with finding a QB in late 1st or 2nd round. Once a better team is built, then jump on a QBOTF is my opinion. Honestly, I will be quite pissed if we make that trade.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
wrong. wrong wrong. you dont just “hopefully get lucky” with the single most important position in the game. You search until you find him.
-bobby- - January 6, 2012
I agree, however when you have a thousand holes that need talent infused into your team, I don’t see much point in giving up your entire draft for Luck. This all depends on the trade that Indy would want though. If they want the farm, hell no. If they are willing to deal for both 1st rounders and some other misc picks, then maybe. If they are wanting both 1st rounders, next years, and misc picks, then sorry I’m not interested.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
We will always look like we have a thousand holes until we find a QB.
rufio - January 6, 2012
I don’t know ruf. I think some stud WR’s, RB’s, O-line depth, big time TE, or combination of those would greatly help even an average QB get our offense moving. Finding a QB is definitely the #1 priority, but I just think the price is too high for Luck. I would rather have a Baltimore-ish type team with average QB play until we find him vs a St.Louis/Carolina team with a stud QB and nobody around him.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
How can we draft or FA 5-6 studs (your words) all at one time? That seems more unrealistic than just getting one good QB.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I didn’t mean to imply all at once. I thought the
clarified that. Sorry for the confusion. Your talking about giving up 3 1st round picks, 2 this year alone and also probably wrapping those with other picks in this year or next’s draft. As average as our team is in many areas, that could equate to 3+ starters elsewhere.Not a big deal, we just have different draft strategies. I would love to hear the inside conversation with Heckert/Holmgren/Shurmur on this though!
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
I get you now sorry, yeah I don’t mind giving up this entire draft for Luck but when you get into next year we’re talking about mortgaging the future and I’m not sure I like that.
I would just see how it plays out and take Griffin, who I’m starting to like more anyway. I think he would fit great on this team and really charge up the offense.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Yes, I don’t care who we end up with so long as the offense gets sparked, let alone charged. They were just abysmal this year. Defense kept us in games, but the offense and ST couldn’t get it done for us.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Our STs were getting better as the year progressed at least.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
If we don’t get a QB, we are mortgaging our future by further guaranteeing we won’t ever be good.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
If we don’t have a right side of the OLine to protect him our future will spend all his time running for his life and his future will be in question.
Suppa Bob - January 6, 2012
If we wait to have every O-Line position filled before we ever draft a QB, we will never pick a QB.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I think a lot of people are mistaking Colt McCoy for Tim Couch. Our line isn’t epically awful like it was back then, a young QB won’t get sacked out of the league behind the line we have now.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
Our pass protection is probably top half of the league.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
It certainly isn’t terrible, and it certainly isn’t record-setting terrible like it was in 99.
rufio - January 6, 2012
Not to mention they need to learn to get rid of the ball in a couple of seconds. They can’t block guys all day.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
good point
champion64 - January 6, 2012
As much as I hate this argument im about to say, the WRs probably have something to do with this as well. Need quick separation and a go-to guy
-bobby- - January 6, 2012
They get open enough. Having a stud wouldn’t hurt, but Andre Johnson was the best WR in the league for a long time and his QBs and teams were still terrible.
Meanwhile, Brady makes Welker look like the best WR of all time and Peyton Manning could turn a high schooler into a pro bowl TE.
rufio - January 6, 2012
exactly. If anything, Couch look about as good with nothing around him.
Let’s see what he is up to these days.
bross09 - January 6, 2012
Rodgers hasn’t had much of a right side. Hell, Pashos has probably been better (when healthy) than Rodgers’ RT. You gotta get a QB
bross09 - January 6, 2012
Griffin is going to be a great qb. He has poise, he is extremely accurate ,and can run like the wind. He is mike Vick without the bad throws. He will inject into the browns offense an excitement we haven’t seen in a long time. He could also attract some good fa’s as well.
rdy - January 6, 2012 via iPhone app
all this, also class guy, hard worker, very smart
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I mean if we had all that we could look ok on offense.
But by the time we blow 7 first-rounders on can’t miss TEs and WRs and a RB, and a RT Joe Thomas is going to to be getting old and we’ll be in that “we’ll do anything for a QB” mentality that Minnesota has been in for 5 years.
I am dead serious when I say that we are close and we would already have some pieces in place to help a QB win in the near future. If not this year, then next year in the first round we need to get a QB—barring a monumental improvement by Colt.
What do St. Louis or Carolina have on defense? I wouldn’t trade Haden or Sheard or Taylor for any one of their players on D. Carolina’s problem wasn’t offense, and St. Louis easily has worse skill players and a worse line than us.
We could stay put and take RG3, or move up to draft Luck and still pick up a RT somewhere this year, then next year get a WR. I think we’d be much better off.
rufio - January 6, 2012
I agree with all of this, I guess I am more willing to wait till next year. I think I would like us to use all of our draft picks we traded for last year this year. Than, if Colt continues to hold the offense back, trade a 2013 pick and get the best QB we can in 2012. Whatever we do, we definitely need to find “the guy” in the next two seasons, three tops.
Again, I also think Heckert and Holmgren’s draft record makes me more inclined to trust any decision they make.
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
I am willing to roll with most decisions they could make. I would definitely second guess them choosing some of the guys at the top of draft boards.
rufio - January 7, 2012
Why wait? We have the lowest draft position in years and a potentially game changing QB probably just sitting there waiting for us to take him.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
We don’t have a 1000 holes to fill. We have like three holes and some other stuff that will need to be polished up in the future.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
QB, RT (O-line needs depth in general all over), WR, RB (Hillis may leave and we have no depth), LB, DE, S.
Those are quite a few holes to me. Would you say that we don’t need help in any of these areas?
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
QB, I agree. RT you can get in FA or 3rd round. WR – free agency or late 1st or 2nd.
RB – we have depth – BJax, Hardesty and Obi
LB – could use an upgrade but Gocong and Miava are doing well. Wouldn’t reach there if there isn’t a good prospect. Zack Brown and the other good OLB (can’t remember his name) are projected in the 1st but that’s too high for a 4-3 LB
DE – need one of those
S – not that pressing really. Ward comes back. Good rotation with the other guys.
Getting a playmaker S or LB is a luxury you get when you’re a playoff caliber team. You’re not a playoff caliber team unless you have a QB.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I agree that all of those spots can be upgraded, but they don’t all need to be a priority. I think if we draft one playmaker on defense (DE, S, LB, whatever) we’ll be fine, we don’t need to throw a ton of resources into making our defense into the ’85 Bears. We can fill in some holes with Fujita-level free agents and focus on the real impact positions (i.e. QB).
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I agree, all I want in this order is:
impact QB
fast receiver
fast RDE
decent RT
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
This is about right, but we do need a RB, I would add it to the end of the list.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
I was just reading on MTD that this is a pretty deep draft for RBs. I’m all for grabbing one in the later rounds just to keep some fresh legs coming into that position.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
It is pretty deep, especially if you don’t need the bell cow guy but can settle for someone who will be in a rotation.
rufio - January 6, 2012
OL depth is what 5th rounders are for. Pinkston would be great as a backup.
We do need a WR. RB? I wouldn’t be horribly upset with Hardesty, Jackson, OGBanannas, and maybe one cheap FA even if we do let Hillis walk. It’s really not that bad out there right now.
rufio - January 6, 2012
What would be wrong with offering our 2 first round picks this year and our first round next year? Remember we got Atlanta’s 1st round pick this year for basically nothing. We traded down and got what we wanted with Taylor. So the extra 1st rounder this year (which was basically free) and our 1st round this year and next year for a potential franchise quarterback? I think that is a price worth paid and a chance that should be taken.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I guess we just have different views on this because I’m not willing to give up 3 1st round picks for Luck. Sorry, but I’m not. I would love to have the kid, but as shitty as our team is I would prefer to continue picking up several players with my picks before sending everything to Indy for one guy.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Look at the teams that are the best now. Green Bay (Rodgers) Defense is average but the best team in the league. New Orleans (Brees) again no defense, Pittburgh (Rotheisberger) no running attack, New England (Brady) no defense, and dont go any further than the COLTS last two years (2009, 2010) 24 wins to 8 losses with Manning, this year without Manning 14 losses.
Quarterback matters unbeleiveably no matter the talent around them. Name one bad team with a great quarterback?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Clarifying, Pittsburgh has no running attack now that Mendenhall is out
champion64 - January 6, 2012
St. Louis is the first if you want to consider Bradford great already.
Carolina still sucks with Cam breaking records.
San Diego failed to make the playoffs with playmakers and Philip Rivers.
Philly has Michael Vick (Vince Young=not great) failed miserably this year.
Dallas has Tony Romo and missed the playoffs.
I do understand what you are saying above, but lets look at the teams you mention.
GB has a great defense when healthy. Their secondary was banged up a lot this year. Otherwise run D is ranked 14th. NO is ranked 13th in pts allowed and 12th in rushing yds allowed. They also have a ton of weapons around Brees. NE and INDY I will concur.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
But isnt our most glaring need is a QB? Problem is after Luck, I agree I would not mortgage anything, I would look to build the team. I would trade to get Luck, McCoy would be my back up
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Yes, I’m with you (and probably everyone that supports Cleveland) it is the most glaring. I would love to get Luck. Basically for me its like this: Indy is at 3500pts for 1st pick, we are at 1800pts with 4th pick. If we give Indy our 4th(1800pts), our 26th?TBD from ATL, and our 2nd round pick this year or next(~500+pts), then I pull the trigger and make the trade. If Indy wants 3 1st rounders for Luck, I walk away. That’s where I’m at on the whole thing.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
I forgot to include the 26th pick, or whatever it may be in that range from ATL, is worth ~700pts.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
I bet RG3 ends up being better than Luck. Of course a lot of that has to do with the teams they play for, but I wouldn’t be one bit surprised.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
RG3 will be interesting to watch next year for sure. Great college ball player so it will be cool to see how he adjusts to an NFL offense.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
My number 1 favorite thing for a QB to be is smart. Luck is smart, but RG3 is probably just as smart and possible a higher athletic IQ. I’m looking forward to it also.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
What value chart are you looking at? I am seeing 3000 pts as the top pick’s value.
rufio - January 6, 2012
Not sure which site I was on at the time. I’d have to look. You are probably right and I just misquoted it.
Kimble_79 - January 9, 2012
he isn’t “great” already
we have a much better D right now than them
Norv Turner
Vick wasn’t that good when healthy…Plus, Juan Castillo
Tony romo is the only real case where a good QB couldn’t win. That D broke down near the end of the season.
Outside of the Romo situation, none of these are likely to happen here or likely to happen with a good QB.
bross09 - January 6, 2012
Green Bay is ranked dead last in the league in total defense. Don’t know how you get “great” out of that?
RyanBr - January 7, 2012
notthatnoise - January 7, 2012
So a banged up secondary takes them from great to dead last? The Packers are ranked 32nd and the Patriots are ranked 31st. They are the two top seeds in the playoffs. I’m just saying I think our defense is good enough how it is. I wouldn’t mind using basically the entire draft on offense in one way or another.
RyanBr - January 7, 2012
they are rated 19th in pts allowed, 32nd in yds allowed, 32 in passing yds allowed, and 14th in rushing yds allowed. Their secondary was beat up quite a bit this year. I would put them atleast in the mid-league status for that raising the other positions as well.
Kimble_79 - January 9, 2012
They also play more possessions on D than most teams because their offense scores so much. Ranking them by gross yardage is pointless.
Roger Dorn - January 9, 2012
Why? So we can be like, hey we’re a great team, now if we could just find a QB.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
we could give up that and still get a stud RB in the 2nd and a stud Safety in the 3rd…maybe grab another young Tackle in the 4th. Grab a WR in the offseason and a FA RT, and most of those holes are filled.
bross09 - January 6, 2012
Three first round picks are too much for anyone.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
This is where I’m at. If you can get RG3 for this year’s first rounders, fine, but don’t mortgage our future on any one prospect. I don’t care how big the hype is on him.
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
Yep I agree
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Problem is I dont want RG3, I think that is really a crap shoot there. I would much rather give up the picks and take a chance on Luck than selecting RG3
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Just a hunch, but I don’t think there’s a snowball’s chance in hell we’re going to end up with Andrew Luck.
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
With all due respect, that’s only a problem for you. I think most people would take Griffin+all our picks over Luck-3 firsts and at least 1 second.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I have a hunch too, and its based on almost nothing than my gut feeling watching these guys in a couple of games each. When Griffin is on the field, he’s electrifying, and it rubs off on guys and I think they play harder and play with more confidence. He seems like a natural leader. When I see Luck, I see guys also playing football with him. I’m sure he’s a good leader, but not the type that inspires tons of enthusiasm and confidence. I know this is all sorts of stupid, and could very well be completely false, but I’m just throwing it out there to see if anyone else sees it too.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I don’t know. I get what you’re saying, but then I think about a guy like Peyton Manning. Kind of fits your description of Luck – not exactly “electrifying” – all business, works his ass off. But if you possess the all-world greatness of Manning you command respect and admiration and the guys are just going to follow your lead and be excited to be part of something big. Sometimes just leading by example with a calm, even tempered demeanor can be an effective leadership style. For others its more about passion and emotion.
Regardless, I am a Griffin fan like you are and think he’s a great prospect. At this point I’d be hard pressed to predict which of the two has greater potential to be an elite NFL QB though.
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
For sure, if you’re the best at something, people are going to cast their lot with you. Robert Griffin could be the most personable, passionate player on earth but if he doesn’t perform, nobody’s going to care.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
Sounds like you just described Colt.
BrownsFanAlways - January 8, 2012
I don’t know if it is true, but I agree with you.
It’s like playing basketball with a great point guard. When you have a QB that is making huge plays and getting the ball out everyone seems to up their game. I think with Luck it seems more like a work-like feel.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I would give away every first round pick for ten years for Aaron Rogers.
notthatnoise - January 6, 2012
As much as I think this is hyperbole, I don’t think there is a single player in today’s NFL that is worth 3 first round picks. I would have put Manning in that category a few years back.
But injuries happen, players fall apart, etc. Too many risks to give away 3 first rounders.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
This is not hyperbole. The Colts wasted most of their drafts for the past decade and still won tons of games because they had Peyton Manning.
notthatnoise - January 6, 2012
2005 Braylon Edwards
2006 Kameron Wimbley
2007 Brady Quinn
So you would not part with them to have Rodgers? Manning? Brady? Brees?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
You are using draft choices from a prior regime that is no longer making the picks here.
Big difference. So far this FO has made the choices count.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I would give up 5-8 first round picks to have Rodgers right now.
Roger Dorn - January 9, 2012
After that trade happens, Rodgers goes down with a career ending injury in preseason. The life of a Browns fan.
Doc's Kid - January 6, 2012
I have been very negative around here after hearing the players talk but I feel better now. They know this is a mess and are going to take the steps to fix it. I like the consistency theory the whole thing does not need to be blown up just all of the skill players on offense.
GrillGuy - January 5, 2012
The reality of this statement made me laugh, then sob slightly.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
I really don’t want us to take a QB in the first round of the draft, unless somehow we can trade up for Luck without using 3 first rounders (which is at about 0%). I’d definitely prefer we load up on young offensive weapons: a wide receiver or two (if Blackmon’s there, pull the trigger on him without a 2nd thought) maybe a speedy running back in the 2nd round, and a good RT or RG. I’m just not sold that RGIII is the guy, and I’d rather spend a year seeing what Colt can do with a better supporting cast than draft RGIII. Especially because next year’s QB class could be stacked.
tr1betime - January 5, 2012
I am asking with all seriousness, who else beside Barkley and Jones? Barkley isn’t better than Luck or Griffin and Jones isn’t even a 1st rounder.
HenryDawg - January 5, 2012
I think one more year under Stoops and Landry Jones could develop into a top prospect by next year.
I agree that right now he’s not a 1st round worthy prospect though.
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
Tyler Bray and Tyler Wilson. Plus there’s always a guy that comes out of nowhere that everybody likes.
C.b.I - January 6, 2012
RGIII or Blackmon at 4. That I would not have a problem with.
Grockcubs - January 6, 2012
Agreed 100%
Aussie Brown - January 6, 2012
I know Blackmon is gonna go high in the draft because he is the best receiver this year. But, I really don’t think he’s worth a pick that high. I can’t put my finger on it, but I just don’t see him being a really top WR in the league. Good, yes. But great?
RyanBr - January 7, 2012
Boy I can. He is really good. He reminds me of Bolden.
Grockcubs - January 7, 2012
I wonder what will happen with Hillis. I’ll cry if he leaves.
Heavysoviet - January 5, 2012 via mobile
It would sort of suck but I’m not sure his running style is effective over the course of the whole game. He seems to bash some in there early but as the game goes on he seems to lose effectiveness. That very well could be because we’re always behind and they abandon the run.
HenryDawg - January 5, 2012
Probably a mix of both. Whatever they decide to do… I guess it’s for the best.
Heavysoviet - January 5, 2012
I think his effectiveness goes down because of playcalling sometimes
macdowellm03 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
Get some tissues.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I will be the first to say I love Hillis on this team, but he isn’t the idea back you want in this system. A back that is slightly faster, slightly smaller, and with better hands (not saying Hillis doesn’t have good hands) is what you need in this system. An every down Stephen Jackson build if you will.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Wasn’t it reported last year that Hillis had just about the best hands on the team? Anyways, if you have a talented running back, he’ll fit the scheme. He doesn’t have to have orototypical qualities just to be able to be effective in a WCO.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I like the bowling ball type backs like Rice and MJD.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Ray Rice would be perfect for this offense. Dude is a stud for sure.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Like Shurmur said, good players can fit any offense.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I think that was his best statement all year.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I think Matt Forte would be a great pick up for this offense. But that’s not happening.
C.b.I - January 6, 2012
I think you will be crying. Sorry.
Brownsyup - January 6, 2012
This is the year we get a QB. I think last season we gathered the ammo, and decided to see what we had in Colt.
This FO has a plan, and I think we will see it unfold come draft day. This is no coincidence that we have a crap load of trade ammo and a glaring need at QB.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I sincerely hope this is with our late 1st round pick and not due to a trade the farm deal.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
there isn’t going to be a good QB to take in in the 20s in this draft that will be worth the pick. Because Jones and Barkley have gone back to school, this isn’t as strong as a QB draft and there are only imo 2 legitimate first rounders at the position. I don’t want Tannehill in the 1st even though he may end up going around there.
bross09 - January 6, 2012
That’s how they keep me onboard. Drafting Richardson at pick 4 and you can count me off.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
Dorn I agree , maybe if you got Richardson in the late first round with an extra pick or the 2nd round, we could stomach it, but NOT with the number 4 pick of the draft. I think if they dont get the QB they want, they may trade down again. BK19 is right, this is why they made all these trades to acquire draft picks so they could use them as leverage
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Definitely not with #4. Get an RB in the 3rd round. We have many greater needs than RB. Kimble and Dorn I also totally agree. If we get a QB, don’t trade away picks to get him. We need big time WR help.
Aussie Brown - January 6, 2012
We can get WR help anywhere really. If Blackmon is gone, and he will be if we go QB for sure, we can take any number of speedy receivers in the draft or free agency. We really just need one guy who get take the top off and a QB who can deliver it to him. RG3 + Kendall Wright anyone?
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
no thanks not unless they beef up the o line as well
Suppa Bob - January 6, 2012
Right, we know you want 5 top 10 picks at each OL position, sorry bub it’s not going to happen. We need a decent RT which you can get in FA or in the 2nd-3rd round.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
We have tried taking WR’s in the second round before, MoMass, Robo, fail. Little may work out. And getting a good one in Free Agency isn’t going to happen (FO reluctance, player not wanting to go to to Cleveland). But if we do get RGIII with #4, we must take a WR with our second pick, Kendall or someone else. Speedy wide receivers come off the board fairly soon. I didn’t say not to take RGIII if he was there @4, I just said don’t trade away picks to get him.
Aussie Brown - January 6, 2012
Just because the Browns have done it before and it hasn’t worked doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea. You can put Reggie Miller at the FT line to win a game and he will miss from time to time.
Players also wouldn’t be reluctant to come here if we throw good money at them. Phil Savage made it happen, so can Heckert—if he so chooses.
rufio - January 6, 2012
To get really good FA’s to come here we would have to through significantly more money at them than other teams. Remember, HD said somewhere here “What would it take to get Forte to come here without breaking the bank”.
Aussie Brown - January 7, 2012
Pressed Post without finishing.
Savage did sign some Free Agents but how many of them were really good. Most seemed to be players from teams he was previously linked to on the downside of their careers. I don’t think any were coming off their rookie contracts in their prime.
Aussie Brown - January 7, 2012
Savage had horrible luck. If LeCharles Bentley and Gary Baxter hadn’t suffered fluke career ending injuries, his track record would seem much better.
Plus Steinbech was a good signing.
Bernie19Kosar - January 7, 2012
Will Steinbach be back?
champion64 - January 7, 2012
no pun intended
champion64 - January 7, 2012
He will be. His back on the other hand?
SBP - January 7, 2012
Jackson might come here because he may feel some loyalty to Heckert who drafted him in the second. He could also want to play with Griffin. Griffin automatically makes Cleveland more desirable, plus he’s young enough to have lots of gas left in the tank.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
I hope you’re right because DJax would be a great asset, and he is in his prime. I think he would be signed in FA before the draft. If we have to sign him before the draft, we know we wouldn’t need Blackmon. But this would also before we had drafted (hopefully) Griffin.
Aussie Brown - January 7, 2012
I am all about not taking RG3 fourth, as well as not richardson fourth.
But if the Draft Goes
1- IND- Luck
2- STL- Blackmon
3- MIA- Kalil
4-CLE
Who would you pick?
Pretty sure we should trade down if possible, but if we cant i have a hard time seeing anyone worth the 4th pick -RG3
THEbrownsfan - January 6, 2012
RG3 and I run the card up.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I would walk up, but also select RG3.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
I would sprint up there to take RG3, but that’s comparable to most people’s jogging speed.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
What would you trade to get RG3 if Luck is picked first and RG3 does not look like he will make it to the 4th pick?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I don’t think I would give up both firsts because I would be okay with Blackmon at 4 and someone else later in the first. If I could trade up and keep that Falcons pick I would do it.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I would be very much ok with taking Blackmon at #4 regardless of who else is there (aside from Luck who will be taken by the Colts).
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
What if we try to trade with STL to ensure Blackmon? Move up 2 spots by giving up the ATL pick, and maybe a low round pick. The trade last year would essentially be Jones for Taylor, Little, Marecic and Blackmon.
-bobby- - January 6, 2012
You are giving up a first round pick to move up two spots. Way to high a price.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I’m not paying a premium price to move up one or two spots.
Whatever team moves down is probably going to get the player they want anyways.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
Exactly, they could trade with us, pick up a second or third rounder and still get their guy. Or they could trade down to 8 or 9 with Wash and Mia and maybe get a #1 next year at best and then not be able to get their best option in this draft.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
The best thing for us is to have Kalil, Claiborne and Blackmon just blow scouts away during their workouts.
Wouldn’t hurt if someone else made a “Tyson Jackson” rise up the boards either.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I’d throw a third this year and a 4th+ next year to move up those one or two spots. Otherwise I’d just call their bluff.
rufio - January 6, 2012
Bingo.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
I am believing RG3 will not be in Cleveland. Even if he is available at the number 4 slot. I could be wrong, but I dont see them selecting him when you have Barkley, Jones and others coming out next year. I think they will trade down and acquire more picks, or select an area of need. I HAVE BEEN WRONG BEFORE. Whatever they do I hope it works best for us. When is the draft late April?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
RG3 is better than Barkley, way better than Jones. If he’s there they’re taking him.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Would you like to wager?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I will.
RG3 took a school that has been a consistent loser, and took them to a top 10 ranking. Sure winning isn’t the end all be all of QB evaluation, but it plays a role here. He changed a culture at Baylor. Sound familiar?
Barkley walked into a QB factory. Name me the last USC QB that got consistent PT that stunk. It’s gonna take you a minute. Now name me the last USC QB that has been a good consistent QB in the NFL. Carson Palmer before his knee injury? These guys are finished products, I think Barkley is already tapped out.
Landry Jones plays in a similar wide open system as RG3, but with more heralded position players.
Yet RG3 finished with a higher Comp%, higher YPA, and a much better TD-INT ratio. How about when they played common opponents? RG3 had better stats in almost every game.
RG3 has elevated his game, and his team mates game every single time he has been asked to.
RG3 is going to be better than Barkley and Landry. I’m curious to see why you think different.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
It’s funny how everyone here has a tingle running up their leg over RGlll. Phil Steele, among others, are saying RGlll is not as good as the hype and that he should be a 2nd rounder, not first. But, that he will probably go high because of the thin QB crop this year.
OldTimeDawg - January 6, 2012
He would have been a top 5 pick if Barkley and Jones would have declared.
Where has Steele said this?
Bernie19Kosar - January 7, 2012
Just hear him in an interview on STO with Bruce yesterday.
OldTimeDawg - January 7, 2012
heard*
OldTimeDawg - January 7, 2012
What Steele said was that he was being highly over-rated and should be only a 2nd round pick.
OldTimeDawg - January 7, 2012
Interesting. I like Steele, but I think he is way off on that one.
Bernie19Kosar - January 7, 2012
sounds more like a guy trying to make a name for himself than an actual formulated opinion. I heard people say RG3 could slip into the first before this season. And he definitely improved his passing game in a lot of ways
bross09 - January 7, 2012
Phil Steele is a really well known CFB guy. One of the best.
Don’t know about his draft projections though.
Bernie19Kosar - January 7, 2012
I don’t know much about his projections either. I am really high on RG3 and he was on my radar before this year. He was kind of one of those “sleeper 1st round picks”
bross09 - January 7, 2012
People said that of Newton too.
-bobby- - January 7, 2012
Who the heck is this Phil Steele and can we get him to tell other people this more?
I’ld be totally stoked if some douchebag causes Griffin’s value to slide a bit.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
OK cool what are we wagering? This could be fun
champion64 - January 7, 2012
That’s a bet that is going to take years to decide.
Bernie19Kosar - January 7, 2012
What he said.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
Trade down and stock the picks. Colt will improve.
tribe71 - January 6, 2012 via mobile
I could live with that.
OldTimeDawg - January 7, 2012
Why so sure Colt will improve?
notthatnoise - January 7, 2012
There is no question in my mind Colt will improve. The only question is how much.
We all have different opinions on his ceiling, but I believe very few people would disagree that Colt has not hit his ceiling yet.
burntorangeandbrown - January 7, 2012
Dont see it
champion64 - January 7, 2012
Don’t see what?
burntorangeandbrown - January 7, 2012
notthatnoise - January 7, 2012
He started 8 games as a rookie in a trial by fire with no preparation under one coach. Then the next season he started 13 games under a new coach and new system, with no offseason preparation. His experience as an NFL QB is essentially equivalent to a single season (give or take a game or two or three).
NFL quarterbacks don’t typically reach their ceiling after one year of playing time experience. I don’t think I’m out in left field with this statement.
Colt is at the very beginning of his NFL career, playing for a team that has collectively been in a state of disarray across the board. This has undoubtedly slowed his progress up the full learning curve for the typical NFL QB. He is still on that learning curve, and he’s a very hard working kid with a good head on his shoulders. Do the math.
burntorangeandbrown - January 7, 2012
I don’t think he’s anywhere near the ceiling, I’m just not sure if it extends all the way to the Super Bowl. I’m a little disappointed that he seems to not be able to shake off the early season poor protection, even when it got better and he also seems to be carrying some hesitancy from last years steelers and ravens games INTs.
If he is Brees 2.0, then great, someone will give us a crap load for Griffin.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
I want Chris Polk or Lamar miller in the 2nd. Hell, I consider doug martin a better value in the 3rd than Richardson with almost any pick in the 1st round.
bross09 - January 6, 2012
I still don’t think Miller will end up being all that good. Maybe he’ll convince me at the combine.
rufio - January 6, 2012
miller is more of a throw-in guy when compared to the other two. I think he’ll be good, but I really like polk and like martin.
bross09 - January 7, 2012
I will not be happy with Richardson.
He would have to Eric Dickerson rookie season for me to come around on that.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
BK19 is right. This is the year when we have to take a chance. I do think Luck is in their sights. Whether he is attainable is another issue.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I agree with this statement. I don’t doubt that they want Luck, but at what price? I don’t think Holmgren or Heckert will give up all for Luck. If they did, then we would have Bradford right now.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
THey did offer the world for Bradford, St Louis, said they were not trading the pick
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Only difference is we weren’t willing to go into next year’s stockpile for Bradford and I think we will offer it for Luck.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
Do you think there is even the slightest possibility?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I think we definitely make the offer I just don’t know if the Colts will do it.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
THe three picks I suggested, will that do it? woudl you offer it?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I personally would offer the 2 1sts this year and next year’s 1st and even more on top of that outside of a 1st. I have no idea what the Colts would accept.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
I watched Stanford 4 games this year and Luck looked like a NFL QB playing in college. RG3 looked to me as a great college quarterback, but maybe a question mark in the NFL game. Landry Jones looked awful and I did not see Barkley but once, so cant comment on him.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I believe what the experts are saying, that he is the most can’t miss prospect since Manning and Elway before that.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
Good thing we dont have Ditka as a Head Coach.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Agreed.
notthatnoise - January 6, 2012
Right…and I don’t see us doing it here either. Maybe so though, IDK.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
I think they would be just as happy with RG3. He’s very similar to the QBs Holmgren coached, smarter than Favre and faster than Young.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I think you’re dead right on with this. Especially when Luck went back last year I think they saw a golden opportunity, even if it might take 1 more year. If it plays like this its even better because a young QB comes into team with a little more development.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Luck was not going to be picked over Newton last year, so that is why he went back without Harbaugh. It paid off though
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Actually he was projected over Newton last year. He also stayed for his degree.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Luck would be our best choice. Just wish it would happen
champion64 - January 6, 2012
What? Luck was the no doubt number one guy last season.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
Luck was more of a guarantee to go #1 overall last year.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Well we know he is this year. Indy would have to be stupid not to take him
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Draft
we are going to take robert griffin III in the draft and we will fail with him hard. really hard. harder than you have ever seen this team fail. sometimes i start weeping because i dream about the reality of the browns taking him. soo depressing
notRG3please! - January 6, 2012
Relax. I honestly don’t think we’re going to draft him.
Also, welcome to DBN! Don’t be afraid to jump right into any conversation you like. We like new people but don’t like using the subject line, so if you could refrain, that would be fabulous.
The Licensed Optimist - January 6, 2012
Hell, the guy used his NAME as a subject line for christs sake..
jonnyphoenix - January 6, 2012
Subject line and signature :-/
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
LOL!!!
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
You realize that the account you are using is stuck with that name? It’s going to look awfully dumb if we don’t draft him, which we probably won’t.
macdowellm03 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
Look even dumber if we DO take him, and even dumber still if he pans out. Imagine a Carolina poster today with the handle notCAMplease!
TheDriveStillHurts - January 6, 2012
it would be funny though
Suppa Bob - January 6, 2012
Your crystal ball really sucks
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Maybe you are right...
but this team is so bland and mediocre that they MUST TAKE a qb. If they don’t create a buzz within the fanbase they are going to lose them for another season. You, I, and many others could barely watch the product Holgrem and company put out there. Another year of Colt would likely be a disaster.
Juannieboy - January 6, 2012
I guess this is where we disagree then. I would be disappointed with another year of watching Colt play. However, I would be more disappointed watching Luck trying to not get killed from the pass rush on the right side of the O-line all while trying to find the likes of MoMass to get open quickly and without a steady RB to hand off the ball to. You know why Dalton is successful in Cincy right now? If you ask me its because he has a 1000yd back to hand the ball off to and a 1000yd receiver that he can count on. We have neither.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
You do realize that our line is not awful, right? Tim Couch would’ve given his left nut for this line.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I do agree its not awful, but I would not put it as good on the right side either. It could use some help with picks somewhere in this years draft. The right side is serviceable at best IMO and we have zero depth.
If we don’t add weapons on offense, it doesn’t matter who the QB is or if they throw perfect passes every time if the WR’s can’t get open, adjust to the ball, ect.
Basically I’m just saying I would rather see us add some playmakers and add depth than trade it all for Luck that’s all.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
I agree that the price for Luck is probably too high, and our offense definitely needs some upgrades. However, if we upgrade the QB spot (say, with RG3) its not like he’ll be getting thrown into a terrible situation.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I see your point and agree. He wouldn’t be ala Jay Cutler getting hammered every pass. I guess my choice to include that in my comment probably should have been left out.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Fair enough.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
Awful no! Good enough to play against some of the top rated defenses that are in our division no!!
Suppa Bob - January 6, 2012
Well actually, yes, they are.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
So would Aaron Rodgers and Ben Rothlisberger (with all their injuries)
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Tim Couch was a bum!!! Although, I am SURE he would have given his left nut for a good OL. LOL
OldTimeDawg - January 7, 2012
cut the damn estrogen out of your diet, buddy.
bross09 - January 6, 2012
Good link to a Walter Football created table of various websites showing top 5 picks in mock drafts. Lots of RG3, T Richardsons, and J Blackmons listed for the Brownies #4 pick.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Let’s try that again
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
don’t like his picks and we should not trading up for griffin. No o line helpin the first four rounds is the draft deep to find a rg or rt at 5?
Suppa Bob - January 6, 2012
I believe so and I definitely agree on Griffin.
Kimble_79 - January 6, 2012
Do due diligence, and if Luck can’t be had for the right price, move along. I don’t see much outside of Luck that is really worthy of a top-5 pick. ‘Luck out, duck out’, as in trade the hell down.
dabooo - January 6, 2012
I am not that far from this statement. I agree if you can’t get Luck there are 3 quarterbacks coming out next year that were rumored to be 1st round picks this year, so maybe acquire more picks.
I go back to BK19 he is right, this is why we acquired all these picks, to make trades and get a top player.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
That was kinda what I got from the presser. Or what stood out the most to me. You would think the only person to move up from pick 4 to get would be Luck, and that’s who they were insinuating.
redCel - January 6, 2012 via mobile
Running backs. All of you who say it is because we do not have a top running back to take the pressure of McCoy, look at the following:
Brady (NE) top rusher Green 667 yards
Manning (NYG) top rusher Bradshaw 659 yards
Brees (NO) top rusher Sproles 603 yards
Rodgers (GB) top rusher Stark 578 yards
Stafford (Detroit) top rusher Best 378 yards
Colt McCoy (CLE) top rusher Hillis 578 yards and he played less than 2/3 of a season
It is not the running game, IN the WEST COAST OFFENSE, the passing game sets up the running game, unlike traditonal offenses where it is the other way around. SO it is not the lack of a running game that is keeping our passing game from working. In the NFL it all begins with the QB.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I think this is slightly misleading, but overall an interesting point. I think it would be more fair to look at total rushing yards to assess the perfermance of each team’s QB in realtion to the running game because most of those teams use multiple running backs. So total rushing yards:
Green Bay – 1558
New England Patriots – 1764
Giants – 1427
Lions – 1523
Saints – 2127
Browns – 1531
I think it shows the Packers, Patriots, Giants, and Lions have quarterbacks, and I would stress amazing WRs, that allow them to succeed despite their poor running games. I also think the team that looks the most dangerous right now, the Saints, also have the best running game, and I don’t think that is a coincedence. An improved Browns running game would clearly benefit whoever ends up as a QB next year unless they are as elite as Brady or Rodgers. The other teams listed ended up with okay, but not stellar records like the Patriots and Packers. If we don’t keep Hillis, which I think would be a mistake, we better address it during the draft.
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
That or their passing game is helping their running game. Where any of those guys starting a practice squad guy* most of the year?
*Though I actually think he should get way more playing time.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
The total rushing yards still shows that most of these teams do not run it a ton.
bross09 - January 6, 2012
I’ve been over this, there is no “the” west coast offense.
SF is running a west coast offense right now and they set everything up through the power running game.
I get what you are saying—we don’t need a top notch RB to be a winning team—but I don’t think anyone is claiming otherwise. It’s pretty obvious that QBs are the players that help teams win right now.
rufio - January 6, 2012
If we dont get LUCK what direction do we go in?
champion64 - January 6, 2012
WR, WR, LB, Right OL, DL to match up with Sheard. Basically I think you get the best player you can without giving up to much, and if you end up with to much talent in one postion you can always trade the extra player to fill another need.
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
RG3
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I am not sold on RG3. I don’t like his injury history. If we put him behind line with a weak right side a now star WR to throw to he could get hurt really fast.
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
*no
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
He’s had 1 ACL 3 years ago and nothing else. Not a lot of history really.
We don’t have a weak line and if we did, he would be able to move around to avoid the rush. He’s not a statue.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I agree on shoring up the right side, but I don’t understand the stuff about RG3 being “injury prone”. Hell every football player has an “injury history”.
He’s not Michael Vick, who was an innacurate passer early in his career, had to rely on his legs and had a gameplan that incorporated his running abilities. He’s an accurate QB who happens to have great mobility. RG3’s mobility will help him, not hurt him.
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
(help him avoid injury, that is)
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
I think people see a “running QB” and they think he will get hurt. It’s incorrect.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
It is in his scouting reports from some of the team, the knock on RG# is his potential to take big hits when scrambling. Running Quarterbacks are more prone to get hurt. Holmgren said himself all of the other things quarterbacks can do in college are nice, but a quarterback is there to do exactly what quarterbacks do, throw the ball, stay there and throw the ball. That is why I think RG3 is not going to happen here in Cleveland.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Question – what is your definition of a “running quarterback”?
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
I think when he sees an opening he will take off instead of just trying to keep the play alive and let the receivers break free. I do not expect us to have an option type quarterback nor do I think RG3 is an option type, he is not. By running quarterback I mean a scrambler who looks to run when the play breaks down instead of extending it to let the receivers get open.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I think you’re making assumptions about him based on your perceptions because he racked up run yardage in college out of necessity and on designed run plays. He’s a smart kid and in the NFL I expect he’ll go through his reads and keep designed pass plays “alive” as long as most other good QBs do. If the play breaks down he may run it if there’s an opening, but he’ll be coached to slide or get out of bounds just like other mobile QBs are coached to do.
burntorangeandbrown - January 6, 2012
You may be right. I would think they will coach him. We will see. If they do pick him , it is because he is a quarterback they believe will be here as the starter. Wish it were April now
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I always wondered why people look at it like its a bad thing that the guy can take off for 20 yards when the play breaks down. We would take 20 yard plays all day this year.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
This tells me you haven’t seen him play.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I have seen him play
champion64 - January 6, 2012
This tells me you weren’t paying attention when you saw him play.
RyanBr - January 7, 2012
He isn’t a running QB, he’s a QB that can run. His offense is a spread-to-pass, ball-controlled passing offense.
He isn’t playing for Oregon.
rufio - January 6, 2012
Right side has to get better because Pashos also has an actual injury history, but you’re right, no football player totally avoids injury. I can’t think of a single prominent one not named Joe Thomas.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Joe Thomas tore an ACL in college when he was subbed in as a DL.
rufio - January 6, 2012
I think he’s done it twice?
SpecialBrownie - January 6, 2012
Even Vick, who “had to” rely on his mobility was a freak, and impact player, and a ridiculous spark to that team.
rufio - January 6, 2012
Also when you watch his passes they are hitting the wr in stride. His deep passes are dead on. Must get him a speedster.
rdy - January 7, 2012 via iPhone app
RG3, DE, CB, WR, trade down. Any of those.
rufio - January 6, 2012
I’d be ok with any of these
Kimble_79 - January 9, 2012
This is why I have such mixed feeling about trading a bunch of picks to get Luck. I know we really need a great quarterback to succeed, but if we miss it sets us back another three years. I think I’d rather use all of picks this year to fill other needs, and if Colt is terrible next year we can target one of the great QBs who decided to stay and play their Senior year.
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
Nothing about Shurmur’s history though suggests that a RB will be featured. It would be a wasted pick.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
Notice RB was not my wish list unless they don’t resign Hillis. If they don’t resign Hillis do you think were set on RB anyway? Would you look for a free agent?
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
I would look for a free agent or draft one in round 2 or later. Wouldn’t break the bank just because i don’t think the Rb is going to be as important in this offense. I would prefer a receiving back type like Matt Forte (who will be a free agent.)
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
Well if we lose Hillis and gain Forte that will certainly mitigate my sadness.
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
Also, yes I wouldn’t draft a RB very high at all.
BiggieBrown - January 6, 2012
You think there’s any chance Forte comes here without breaking the bank?
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Coming off injury and the RB market tends to be fairly saturated. I don’t know that it would cost as much as we think. The Bears definitely hold the advantage.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
Three years max.
Bernie19Kosar - January 6, 2012
Nope. I think he returns to the bears now that Tice has replaced Martz. If he doesn’t, a team other than the Browns will get him.
Aussie Brown - January 6, 2012
No. We’d need to pay him a lot of money.
rufio - January 6, 2012
We still have B-Jax who we pay 2.5 mil a year. He could potentially be a starter as long as Obi was spelling him on 3rd down.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
We wont be drafting Richardson
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Some of those top rusher stats can be deceptive, as most of those teams use multiple backs. It doesn’t change the fact that Colt needs to improve markedly if he wants to be a starter, however.
dabooo - January 6, 2012
I really think Wallace is a lost cause.
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Wallace is OK but his me first attitude sucks. He should be helping McCoy, or the coaches should be telling him he’s not going to start so help the kid if you want a job.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
I would rather have McCoy as the starter over Wallace
champion64 - January 6, 2012
Agree. Wallace has been in the WC for what, 9 years??? One would think he would have started ahead of McCoy this year, but he didn’t. Hmmmm, makes one wonder when many experts say it takes 3 or 4 years to truly learn the WC @ QB. And yet, McCoy started. I’m for what the FO and coaches decide.
OldTimeDawg - January 7, 2012
BTW, it sounds like people were generally pleased with the presser? Am I overreading that? Some of my coworkers didn’t like it all, thought he sounded pompous.
HenryDawg - January 6, 2012
Pompous maybe, but I like to think confident. At the very least, between this and Shurmur’s presser, they’re at least making a detailed plan. I don’t know if it’s a good plan, but it is at least a detailed plan.
dabooo - January 6, 2012
I think they sounded a bit condescending at times. I was annoyed at different times during the presser for a variety of reasons. The whole we need to have faith in them and trust them is definitely aggravating b/c they have done absolutely nothing to earn our trust so we can have faith in them.
PaduaDSP - January 6, 2012
They call it “faith” because it isn’t a deserved or “already earned” thing.
rufio - January 6, 2012
They had two quality drafts in a row and have a top 10 defense. That’s good enough for me.
HenryDawg - January 7, 2012
I wasn’t a huge fan, but pressers are a lot of hot air in my opinion so he didn’t have much of a chance of making me happy.
Roger Dorn - January 6, 2012
I like that he has confidence in Shurmur. It is more important that he beleives in Shurmur than anything else. Heckert second. Both I believe are going to be good assets
champion64 - January 6, 2012
I was pretty happy with the presser. Their actions have more of an impact than their press conferences on my opinion, but I liked what they had to say.
Legoman0721 - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I think their pomposity was indeed reflected in requiring that we trust them. Also they seemed to take the fanbase for granted, inferring strongly that Browns fans will make the organization money no matter what product they put on the field. I mean it’s true but still….
Aussie Brown - January 6, 2012
Will Murmur be on the hot seat next year?
Kosar19 - January 6, 2012
Roll on one!
macdowellm03 - January 6, 2012
sorry should have done the ‘animated’ Murmur hot seat…
Kosar19 - January 6, 2012
Maybe they’ll all be on the hot seat next year.
Aussie Brown - January 6, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.