Cleveland has 3 of the top 35 picks. If they had kept their coaching staff I would agree that they could be good really fast. But not with this new system they are installing, and they are just stupid. Brian Hoyer was balling last year and I would venture to guess that they will draft a QB and throw him into the fire. They are fing hopeless.
Hoyer threw the ball a LOT but he only played in three games and had 5 TDs to 3 Ints. I don't think "balling" is an accurate description. He is also 29 years old. I think if the Browns passed on a QB and rolled with Hoyer....they would be f'ing hopeless. Also, it is embarrassing how often they change HC and GMs but once you get past that, thier staff actually got much better this off season. They weren't going anywhere with Michael Lombardi running the show and Chud was a **CENSORED** that nobody liked working with or playing for.
Did u actually watch see hoyer play at all? He was legit for them. Obviously I think they're looking for a young franchise QB this draft but hoyer was balling and if it wasn't a fluke the way he was throwing the ball, then they wouldn't be hopeless by sticking with him.
I did watch him and he looked great compared to Weeden. Jason Campbell looked great compared to Weeden also. With their O-line, Josh Gordon, Cameron Jordan, and Greg Little.....it's really not a bad situation for a QB to thrive in. I just think rolling with a 29 year old guy who has had 2 solid games in his entire career would be a pretty huge gamble.
Cleveland has 3 of the top 35 picks. If they had kept their coaching staff I would agree that they could be good really fast. But not with this new system they are installing, and they are just stupid. Brian Hoyer was balling last year and I would venture to guess that they will draft a QB and throw him into the fire. They are fing hopeless.
The coaching staff was the reason they were a trainwreck. Its not talent, they had 10-12 Pro Bowl players on their roster last season. Everything points to bad coaching, I don't know how anyone could say it was something other than coaching.
Hoyer played in 3 games, but he only threw 4 passes in one, the other 2 he did kind of ball. 321 3tds 3ints and 269 and 2tds, I think he deserves a chance
Coaching was a major issue last season. We had a oc who thought running the wideouts deep every down was a good idea, a dc who thought revis should be in zone and was overly zealous with the line stunts, and a hc who thought halftime was for lunch. So, yeah, they deserve blame.However, glennon didn't show anything amazing in any game he played in. We could point to the Seattle game, but what's your excuse for the second half? Point is, giving this guy another season is just asking for trouble. He's not great, not good, but average. He won't win high scoring games, and he will not be a playmaker.And if he can't do anything other than be average, we're wasting time hoping. I hope I'm wrong about glennon, but he really hasn't shown us the player people currently are thinking he is. He's a four win rookie. Doctor it up however you want, that's what he is.
Coaching was a major issue last season. We had a oc who thought running the wideouts deep every down was a good idea, a dc who thought revis should be in zone and was overly zealous with the line stunts, and a hc who thought halftime was for lunch. So, yeah, they deserve blame.However, glennon didn't show anything amazing in any game he played in. We could point to the Seattle game, but what's your excuse for the second half? Point is, giving this guy another season is just asking for trouble. He's not great, not good, but average. He won't win high scoring games, and he will not be a playmaker.And if he can't do anything other than be average, we're wasting time hoping. I hope I'm wrong about glennon, but he really hasn't shown us the player people currently are thinking he is. He's a four win rookie. Doctor it up however you want, that's what he is.
"but what's your excuse for the second half?""a hc who thought halftime was for lunch."
Lmfao.. I don't care what side of the fence your on, that was funny.
Coaching was a major issue last season. We had a oc who thought running the wideouts deep every down was a good idea, a dc who thought revis should be in zone and was overly zealous with the line stunts, and a hc who thought halftime was for lunch. So, yeah, they deserve blame.However, glennon didn't show anything amazing in any game he played in. We could point to the Seattle game, but what's your excuse for the second half? Point is, giving this guy another season is just asking for trouble. He's not great, not good, but average. He won't win high scoring games, and he will not be a playmaker.And if he can't do anything other than be average, we're wasting time hoping. I hope I'm wrong about glennon, but he really hasn't shown us the player people currently are thinking he is. He's a four win rookie. Doctor it up however you want, that's what he is.
I don't think ANYONE knows who Glennon is at this point in time. Neither fans or coaching staff. We will find out this season, if he is the real deal, or a career backup. But they need to be 100% sure he is, or is not, the guy. Lets see how he looks with a season under his belt, and a good coaching staff in place. I am not pro Glennon, or anti Glennon. But I think they need a little more of a sample size than just those games he played last season.
Lmfao.. I don't care what side of the fence your on, that was funny.
The halftime for lunch? Duh lol
Anti, that's basically enough of a sample size to know, with experience (one/two wins) + better coaching (assuming two extra wins) isn't enough.He won four games in what could be considered an average season for us. Four more wins and all we have done is made it tougher to draft a qb next season, go 500, and yet again miss playoffs.Letting him play this season might be more "risky" than just drafting manziel.
Anti, that's basically enough of a sample size to know, with experience (one/two wins) + better coaching (assuming two extra wins) isn't enough.He won four games in what could be considered an average season for us. Four more wins and all we have done is made it tougher to draft a qb next season, go 500, and yet again miss playoffs.Letting him play this season might be more "risky" than just drafting manziel.
Well with Glennon if he does bad his second year people will be fine with writing him off. It was really only two years wasted at most. If he does good then we have a QB and whoever it is we took with our 1st round pick. If we draft Manziel and he is a bust we will probably spend 2-4 years trying to break that label. If he doesn't well that is 2-4 years wasted instead of 2 and we aren't getting that pick for him back. On top of the other picks we might have to spend to trade up for him.
To me the "risk" is glennon.You have a qb who "potentially" be a good qb, but the downside is drastic.We waste a lot of time (again), remain maybe mediocre(again), and we waste all of our older talent. At least drafting a qb in the first suggests to everyone that we mean business. Keeping glennon, especially with this team's fanbase and history, would suggest to some that we are once again in some type of cheap mode.And all that trouble over a third round qb with four wins, and isn't even lovie's guy?I could site more reasons, but I'm not really trying to pick on glennon too much, but rather do what's best for the team.Drafting manziel and creating him an offense would be the best imo, but bort and bridgewater are improvements too. If we have a shot at one of them, and don't take it, I would be disappointed in this staff and shocked with lovie.
Get ready for this Cleveland:
Will spend more sundays on ice than he will on the field.
Yep...He is RGIII without the arm...
I just took the Cleveland Browns to the Super Bowl a few minutes ago.
Browns to the Super Bowl?So he's going to shit in a toilet?
